What to Do With an Errant John the Baptist?

168101112

Comments


  • Much longer answer to follow.

    Are you serious ?

    Bill's stropping as we speak.
  • We have to live with the attributions on the existing MS. Unless somebody makes an exciting new discovery of C1st originals. Which is always possible.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Yes, I am serious, Bishop's Finger. There are some things that are too complicated to explain in a few simplistic words. Please cease with the banter.

    It was a question, which you have answered, not banter.



  • The Trolls are always with us (Matt 26: 11).

    Love your fellow Troll (Mark 12: 31).

    (With apologies to whomever wrote the gospels according to Mark and Matthew).
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    @Rublev, are you accusing ME of trolling? Or someone else?

    Please be specific!

    Thank you.
  • @Rublev
    There were already many in the early church who questioned the Petrine authorship of 2nd Peter. And even the Catholic Bible commentaries today acknowledge that it is probably pseudonymous.

    The "delay" was not a problem in Peter's lifetime (he was executed around 62-64 CE) because, among other things, the Temple had not yet been destroyed and many of his generation were still alive. Much later the questions asked in 2 Peter 3:4-5 began to arise and an unknown author attempted an answer in Peter's name.
  • @Bishops Finger
    @Martin54
    We can do without the banter.
  • I asked a genuine question, as I find it hard to believe that you intend - after your time away - to continue to publish long posts.

    Try keeping it simpler, and shorter, and you'll have a more receptive audience.

    Yes, these are weighty matters, but we don't all have the benefit of your obvious scholarship, and learning.
  • @Bishops Finger

    Never let it be said. But the Gospel According to Troll is now playing in my mind.

    @JamesBoswellII

    The authorship of the NT documents is an intriguing question. But not one that anyone can run with very far. There was a different attitude to authorship at that time and they liked to attach it to a recognised authority. I think the delayed Parousia was the trigger for writing the gospels. This must have caused a significant theological shift among the believers. As must the Fall of Jerusalem, but we only get indirect echoes about it.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    Rublev wrote: »
    The Trolls are always with us (Matt 26: 11).

    Love your fellow Troll (Mark 12: 31).

    (With apologies to whomever wrote the gospels according to Mark and Matthew).

    Host hat on
    You may not accuse people of trolling or being trolls in Purgatory. If you really want to do that, then Hell is the place.

    A gentle reminder that long screeds of text don’t make for good discussion, thus missing the point of Purgatory; and that if you find a poster’s style doesn’t work for you, there’s always the scroll by option.

    Host hat off
    BroJames Purgatory Host
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Rublev wrote: »
    @Bishops Finger

    Never let it be said. But the Gospel According to Troll is now playing in my mind.

    Noted. Thank you for the clarification.

  • @Bishops Finger
    Look, Bishop, I saw a very, very long post posted by Martin recently, with no objection from anybody. Either contribute to the actual content of the discussion here or cease to comment.

    Heidegger once said something like: "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should not speak."

  • @Bishops Finger
    Look, Bishop, I saw a very, very long post posted by Martin recently, with no objection from anybody. Either contribute to the actual content of the discussion here or cease to comment.

    Heidegger once said something like: "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should not speak."

    That’s Wittgenstein. Tractatus-Logico Philosophicus.
  • My apologies @BroJames.
    Here endeth the Gospel of Troll.
  • Ah, Wittgenstein. Thanks for the clarification. My age is showing.
  • Thank you, @ECraigR - I thought it might be Wittgenstein.
    (signed)
    Bishops Finger
  • @Bishops Finger
    @Martin54
    We can do without the banter.

    Sorry Your Majesty.
  • JBII: Heidegger, Wittgenstein, sorry, once said something like: "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should not speak."
    A lesson to us all, is it not, JBII?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Back to the OP - I rather thought there was little more to say on the subject, and the truth of the matter is uncertain, to say the least, as @Rublev has pointed out on more than one occasion.

    IOW, why keep harping on it?



  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    The discussion of the Parousia is Immanent. It mattered to the early church. And it's still a theologically open question. Every time we say the Lord's Prayer and pray 'Thy kingdom come,' it may be answered...
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    OK, fair enough. Point taken, and you are, I think, right.

    End of 'discussion', for the time being, anyway?
    :wink:
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Let the discussion begin. JB2, shall we peruse the Parousia?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    I'll take that as a 'No', then.

    Serious suggestion, though - why not start another thread specifically to discuss the Parousia? Perhaps in Kerygmania? John the Baptist would come into it, of course, but so would others...
  • @Bishops Finger
    Look, Bishop, I saw a very, very long post posted by Martin recently, with no objection from anybody. Either contribute to the actual content of the discussion here or cease to comment.

    Heidegger once said something like: "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should not speak."

    How long?
  • Martin54 wrote: »
    @Bishops Finger
    Look, Bishop, I saw a very, very long post posted by Martin recently, with no objection from anybody. Either contribute to the actual content of the discussion here or cease to comment.

    Heidegger once said something like: "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should not speak."

    How long?

    Longer than that, obviously!
    (signed)
    Bishops Finger
    (to help peeps get my name right)

  • https://www.amazon.com/Last-Days-according-Jesus-Return/dp/0801018587

    You may want to do a little research.

    If so, go to R. C. Sproul's book] The Last Days According to Jesus: When did Jesus Say He Would Return? and scroll down to his Introduction. There you will see that in Sproul strongly states that anyone who is of the opinion that Jesus not only expected but said that the coming of the Kingdom and the return of the Son of Man would take place in that generation is calling Jesus a false prophet and is destined for hell.*

    This on the basis of Deuteronomy 18:20-22.**
    _______________
    *I guess that would have to be true concerning anyone who points out that John the Baptizer and the Apostle Paul also expected and said that the end of the age would come in their time.

    **Actually, the prophet Micah predicted the imminent fall of Jerusalem which did not then happen due to the city's repentance, and in the story of Jonah he predicts the imminent destruction of Nineveh ("in forty days") which also did not happen then for the same reason.
    ---And yet they were not considered to be false prophets by making those predictions, for both were held to have been told by God to say what they said, even though it did not happen when they said it would.
  • I don't use, or support, Amazon, so please don't advertise it to me.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    Host Hat On

    There will be no more direct or indirect discussion about the rights and wrongs of a Hostly ruling here. Take any such issues to the Styx or drop them.

    And no more personal sniping or provocation. If you are pissed off, take that to Hell.

    Shipmates who ignore this warning will get referred to Admin for consideration of disciplinary action.

    Barnabas62
    Purgatory Host

    Host Hat Off

  • Sproul, who is a preterist, believes that Mark 9:1/Matthew 16:28 was/were fulfilled, not six days later in the Transfiguration, but in the year 70 CE in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and (supposedly) at that time with the return of Jesus in judgment on Jerusalem.

  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    He was not even wrong. Bizarrely so. Why mention it?
  • Bertrand Russell charged that Jesus failed to return during the time frame that He had predicted (Matt 10: 23; 16: 28; 24: 34). St Paul would have agreed with him. The author of 2 Peter offered a theological explanation for the Parousia delay. And there we theologically remain to the present day.
  • It is part of the discussion.

    Another theory is on the way.
  • https://www.amazon.com/Last-Days-according-Jesus-Return/dp/0801018587

    You may want to do a little research.

    If so, go to R. C. Sproul's book] The Last Days According to Jesus: When did Jesus Say He Would Return? and scroll down to his Introduction. There you will see that in Sproul strongly states that anyone who is of the opinion that Jesus not only expected but said that the coming of the Kingdom and the return of the Son of Man would take place in that generation is calling Jesus a false prophet and is destined for hell.*

    This on the basis of Deuteronomy 18:20-22.**
    _______________
    *I guess that would have to be true concerning anyone who points out that John the Baptizer and the Apostle Paul also expected and said that the end of the age would come in their time.

    **Actually, the prophet Micah predicted the imminent fall of Jerusalem which did not then happen due to the city's repentance, and in the story of Jonah he predicts the imminent destruction of Nineveh ("in forty days") which also did not happen then for the same reason.
    ---And yet they were not considered to be false prophets by making those predictions, for both were held to have been told by God to say what they said, even though it did not happen when they said it would.

    Well, Sproul does indeed make a pretty emphatic point, but do you, yourself, agree with him?

    It all looks rather literalist to me, IYSWIM, and, as has been said many times on this thread, other interpretations are possible.

    BTW, was 'Jonah' a real person, or is his story possibly allegorical?

  • I think the OT author of Jonah was a precursor of Monty Python. It's a satire.
  • https://jbburnett.com/resources/mark/bird_The-crucifixion-of-Jesus.pdf

    Here is a pdf you can open. It is long, but the author presents a good bit about the complexity of the possible answers.

    He agrees that Mark 9:1 was not fulfilled by the Transfiguration, or by the destruction of Jerusalem. Instead, he argues that it was fulfilled precisely at the moment Jesus died on the cross.

    There are many good things in his long article, but I have to say that he never mentions one little problem, and that is that the author of Matthew 16:28 certainly does not see it in that way.
  • He's wrong too.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Rublev wrote: »
    I think the OT author of Jonah was a precursor of Monty Python. It's a satire.

    :lol:

    It certainly has its wryly funny moments - one can almost imagine John Cleese as 'Jonah', ranting away at God in Basil Fawlty style... :grin:

  • Who is being converted in this story - the people of Ninevah or the self righteous prophet?
  • Hopefully, both - though the story does seem to end rather abruptly, and it would be nice to know what happened subsequently, no?

    Sorry - we seem to have strayed away from John the Baptist again! My bad.
  • Jonah is the comic strip book of the OT, and yet Jesus seems to have taken it pretty seriously, for according to a Q (Matthew-Luke) saying, Jesus warned HIS generation:

    "The people of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and now something greater than Jonah is here."

    Which brings us back to the topic. Did Jesus expect the judgment to be imminent? There is evidence upon evidence that he did.

    (He also said in another Q saying that the punishment for the sins of all the generations would fall on this generation -- which is hard to imagine him saying if he did not believe his was the last generation.)
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Yes, Jesus did take Jonah seriously, as perhaps did the people of Nineveh (if the story is actually true).

    But don't Jesus' words depend on what he actually meant by 'generation'?

    IOW, was he talking about a finite period of years e.g. 25-30, or was he referring to a more mystical sort of period, rather like the various 40s that occur in the Bible, but which may not be literal?

    Perhaps I'm not making myself particularly clear, but I hope you see what I'm getting at.
  • That's not the point is it. Was He right about the resurrected Ninevehites too?
  • I suppose we don't know, as the Judgment hasn't happened yet.

    Or has it?
    :confused:
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Have we missed it?! Bin left behind? What next? So if it happened already (when?), did the Ninevehites condemn Jesus' generation? Or was He wrong about that too!?
  • Yes, I sometimes wonder if The Rapture has been, and gone...
  • Occam's razor:
    The simplest explanation for something is probably the correct one.

    The Jesus who said that the Kingdom of God "is near," and that there were some standing in his presence who would "not experience death before they see the Kingdom of God come with power," and that the stars would fall from the sky and the Son of Man would come with the clouds of heaven "before this generation has passed away," and who told the Jerusalem Council who were about to condemn him to death that they would see him "sitting at the right hand of God and coming with the clouds of heaven," and that all the punishment for all the sins committed during all the generations would "fall on this generation"--the Jesus who said all that was expecting it to happen in his generation.

    So was John the Baptizer also convinced of the imminence of the fiery wrath he was announcing--John the Baptizer whom Jesus called "a prophet and more than a prophet" and of whom Jesus said "no one ever born was greater than" he was--the Baptizer was expecting it too, and very soon.

    So was the apostle Paul who advised the Corinthian believers to give up remarrying and even marrying and devote themselves to spiritual preparation because "the time is short" and "the present world is passing away."

    So were all the authors of the writings in the New Testament that were written within the first century or perhaps even the earlier part of the second century.*
    __________
    *Probably not including: The author of the added-on 21st chapter of the Gospel of John who obviously knew that even the Beloved Disciple had died, and the pseudonymous author of 2nd Peter who knew that that entire generation ("our fathers") had died by the time in which he was writing.
  • I have made a mistake, and would like to request anyone who wants to discuss this last subject to please go to the What to do with an Errant Jesus? thread where I will repeat that last statement, and carry on from there.

    I will explain why in my next post here.
  • Okay. Here is what I want to do. Please go to page seven on this thread above and review the discussion that was going on between @Rublev, @BroJames, @Doublethink, @Robert Armin and others and myself regarding John the Baptizer.

    As several of you pointed out, with your questions, requests for clarification, etc.
    an important part of the discussion is this:

    "What did John the Baptizer know and when did he know it?"

    I want to try to address that question next, and I would hope the discussion could continue as well as it was going there for a while.
  • BJII: "What did John the Baptizer know and when did he know it?"

    Dunno.
  • There is a debate about whether the references to the Fall of Jerusalem in the gospels date them post AD 70. But it has been pointed out that many would have recognised the danger of that happening sooner or later. Perhaps J the B did too. Or perhaps he was part of the apocalyptic tradition.
Sign In or Register to comment.