The Jesus Itinerary

[Captain Colostomy]

Furthermore, the very notion of the intercessor with the divine is wholly blasphemous to Jewish theology. One pursued a relationship with Yahweh, a god who was hardly out of reach to the heroes of the OT and a god who was insanely jealous and ceded the center stage to no one (the whole need for the nonsense of the Trinity was to weasel out of the intercessor-deity-in-a-monotheistic-religion conundrum).

Jews today would like you to believe this, and that the messiah is just a normal man who would liberate Israel through military might, but that's not the whole story. One example:
Isaiah 9
For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

A child born who is mighty god and everlasting father? Fits pretty well with the trinity.

This is a deliberate mistranslation, as I recall. The Tanakh gives it a present tense(no messianic future tense express or implied), and further, the 'counselor, Mighty god...' bit are actually adjectives describing yahweh who then 'called him prince of peace'. (Reversal of word order.)

Co-opting lunacy is even loonier, but why am I not surprised? Later books need the back story.

[DeistPaladin]

No, one has to assume that DeistPaladin knows something more about John the Baptist than the Mandeans or Jesus or the early Christians. Do you?

What are you talking about? You're not making any sense at all.

Are you seriously trying to claim that it makes perfect sense that the followers of John the Baptist would continue to revere him as the messiah even though he kept telling them not to?

Here are the things the Bible claims JtB had to say about himself:

Mark 1:7-8 There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.
I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Matt 3:11-14 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

Luke 3:15-17 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not;
John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.

John 1:15-27 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
[...]
And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.
And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
[...]
He said,I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.
[...]
John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

Now, having read these verses, explain to me why there would be any Mandeans at all, never mind a large religious movement following this man that would be rivals to the early Christians and would continue to this day?

To put this in perspective, the Koran claims that Jesus said to Allah that he never told anyone he was the Son of God, that he was the forerunner of Muhammad and preached a proto-Islamic message. I don't believe the Koran. I don't even believe such a scenario is possible. Do you know why? Because Christianity wouldn't exist if that were true.

People don't follow a religious leader who tells them not to follow him, except in the Life of Brian (which is part of what made that movie so funny). If the religious leader really does point to someone else, his followers would have joined with the followers of that other person.





You and I, I'm guessing, would apply the same skepticism to the Koran. The difference is you suspend that kind of skepticism when it comes to the Bible.

Asking me "whats your point" instead of answering the point itself sounds like a stalling tactic.

Or maybe it's because your arguments are pointless.

[Minimalist]

Are you seriously trying to claim that it makes perfect sense that the followers of John the Baptist would continue to revere him as the messiah even though he kept telling them not to?

Being a jesus freak means totally divorcing oneself from reality, D-P.

[Lion IRC]

Are you seriously trying to claim that it makes perfect sense that the followers of John the Baptist would continue to revere him as the messiah even though he kept telling them not to? ...

The existence of modern day Mandaeans, (about whom we know relatively little and whose historical documentation is very sparse,) does not support your contention about alleged
internal contradictions in the Gospel.

I am having a hard time understanding why you need to appeal to a tiny, gnostic sect, miniscule in popularity compared to early Christianity, in order to support your theory that John the Baptist did not identify Jesus as The Lamb of God. What was John preaching? For whom was he preparing the way and making straight paths? Why bother repenting and being baptised?

If John the Baptist - a Jew - had told every single one of his followers NOT to follow Jesus, then where did Jesus’ followers come from and why did they grow in number so rapidly?

Your theory would depend on the (false) assumption that every single one of John’s early followers was told NOT to follow anyone else (but John the Baptist) and that the faithful Mandaeans
were the only ones who obeyed what John told them NOT to do. Isnt it much more likely that the Mandaeans were a small group of folk who only got part of Johns (pre-Jesus) sermons or who, like many other Old Testament Jews, agreed with “the voice crying in the wilderness” but didn’t think Jesus fit their idea of Messiah and so were left with no one else but John the Baptist to revere
as a messenger of God. (The same God worshipped by Jesus’ followers in case you had forgotten.)

[DeistPaladin]

I am having a hard time understanding why you need to appeal to a tiny, gnostic sect, miniscule in popularity compared to early Christianity,

It wasn't. If anything, the evidence indicates Christianity was the small, unnoticed sect at that time.

If John the Baptist - a Jew - had told every single one of his followers NOT to follow Jesus, [...]

I never said he did.

Isnt it much more likely that the Mandaeans were a small group of folk who only got part of Johns (pre-Jesus) sermons or who, like many other Old Testament Jews, agreed with “the voice crying in the wilderness” but didn’t think Jesus fit their idea of Messiah and so were left with no one else but John the Baptist to revere as a messenger of God. (The same God worshipped by Jesus’ followers in case you had forgotten.)

No.

[Lion IRC]

I am having a hard time understanding why you need to appeal to a tiny, gnostic sect, miniscule in popularity compared to early Christianity,

It wasn't. If anything, the evidence indicates Christianity was the small, unnoticed sect at that time.

If John the Baptist - a Jew - had told every single one of his followers NOT to follow Jesus, [...]

I never said he did.

Well what is this then?

...During the first few centuries CE, the early Christians were rivals of the followers of John the Baptist, known today as the Mandaens. The Mandeans believe that John the Baptist was the messiah. All four Gospel accounts include passages where JtB puts himself down, declaring that he is merely a forerunner for Jesus. One has to either assume that the Mandaens stubbornly refused to listen to their religious leader even as he, on no uncertain terms, told them he wasn't the messiah...

Surely the Mandaeans were mistaken in their beliefs about John the Baptist precisely because they WERENT hearing his message fully/properly. They didnt need to ''refuse'' to listen to John in order to reach a mistaken conclusion about Jesus. Tons of Jews didnt initially understand what was going on.

Isnt it much more likely that the Mandaeans were a small group of folk who only got part of Johns (pre-Jesus) sermons or who, like many other Old Testament Jews, agreed with “the voice crying in the wilderness” but didn’t think Jesus fit their idea of Messiah and so were left with no one else but John the Baptist to revere as a messenger of God. (The same God worshipped by Jesus’ followers in case you had forgotten.)

No.

Thats it? Gainsaying?
A one word response?
Sheesh!

[Minimalist]

If John the Baptist - a Jew - had told every single one of his followers NOT to follow Jesus, then where did Jesus’ followers come from and why did they grow in number so rapidly

JtheB apparently had followers....or at least a following according to Josephus.

The jury is still out about your godboy who seems to be a much later addition to the story.

Can hardly blame the Mandaeans for rejecting a faker.

[DeistPaladin]

Well what is this then?

Oh dear.

OK, nice and really slow, then.

A. The Bible says John the Baptist groveled before Jesus, told everyone to follow Jesus, told everyone how inferior he was to Jesus, told everyone he wasn't fit to unloose Jesus' sandals, etc.
B. The followers of John the Baptist were rivals of the early Christians.

So, if "A" above is an accurate account of the ministry of John the Baptist, how could "B" also be true? There are two possibilities:

1. The followers of John the Baptist stubbornly refused to listen to the very man they revered.
2. The Gospel accounts are a bit of religious propaganda used to incorporate the icons of a rival religion in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY the Muslims would later do to Jesus. Also, exactly the same way Christianity incorporated the icons and practices of rival religions throughout its history (see Christmas and Easter).

To underscore this point: do you believe the Koran when it says that Jesus said to Allah (paraphrasing slightly because I don't remember the exact quote): "I never told them I was your son. I don't know where they got that crazy idea. I told them I was a forerunner of your greatest prophet, Muhammad. I don't know why they're worshiping me now."

I'm guessing you'll answer "no".

Me neither.

Because Christianity wouldn't exist if that were true.

I apply the EXACT SAME SKEPTICISM to the Koran as I do to the Bible. The difference between us is that you suspend critical thinking with your favorite religion. I do not.

Surely the Mandaeans were mistaken in their beliefs about John the Baptist precisely because they WERENT hearing his message fully/properly. They didnt need to ''refuse'' to listen to John in order to reach a mistaken conclusion about Jesus. Tons of Jews didnt initially understand what was going on.

*Facepalm*

OK, I think we may be at the point of needing to agree to disagree. You believe that the followers of John the Baptist somehow missed the CORE MESSAGE of his ministry and got confused and revered him instead of Jesus.

I would maintain this is about as likely as the followers of Jesus, assuming he had a ministry teaching anything like what is described in the Gospels, deciding to worship Jupiter and Mars because they didn't quite hear his message properly and didn't understand what was going on.

Thats it? Gainsaying?
A one word response?
Sheesh!

I don't think your wildly unlikely scenario requires anything more. See above if you really need to.

[Lion IRC]

A. The Bible says John the Baptist groveled before Jesus, told everyone to follow Jesus, told everyone how inferior he was to Jesus, told everyone he wasn't fit to unloose Jesus' sandals, etc.
B. The followers of John the Baptist were rivals of the early Christians.

So, if "A" above is an accurate account of the ministry of John the Baptist, how could "B" also be true? There are two possibilities:

1. The followers of John the Baptist stubbornly refused to listen to the very man they revered.
2. The Gospel accounts are a bit of religious propaganda used to incorporate the icons of a rival religion in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY the Muslims would later do to Jesus. Also, exactly the same way Christianity incorporated the icons and practices of rival religions throughout its history (see Christmas and Easter).

You didnt even attempt to answer my point that;

A. The Bible says John the Baptist deferred to Jesus. Your theory is an argument from silence. Where are your Mandaean historical texts to the contrary?

B. Only some of the early followers of John the Baptist didnt follow Jesus. Your theory assumes that John the Baptist told them Jesus was not the Messiah and they were obeying him.

C. Huge numbers of Johns' early followers DID then become followers of Jesus. WHY??? Your theory doesnt explain this.

D. John the Baptist, (the Old Testament Jew) was preaching repentance and baptism for a very specific reason.
Prepare ye the way of the Lord. Make straight paths. If not Jesus then WHO???? Your theory doesnt explain this.

[Minimalist]

1. The followers of John the Baptist stubbornly refused to listen to the very man they revered.
2. The Gospel accounts are a bit of religious propaganda used to incorporate the icons of a rival religion in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY the Muslims would later do to Jesus. Also, exactly the same way Christianity incorporated the icons and practices of rival religions throughout its history (see Christmas and Easter).

I propose Option #3, D-P. "Jesus" was a much later interpolation into the story.