Who was John the Baptist?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-08-2015, 01:04 PM
Who was John the Baptist?
So all I really learned was that he was an Essene which were of Buddhist persuasion and baptized Jesus in the order of the Essenes and then got beheaded because he wouldn't fuck some nasty bitch named Salome. What am I missing?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
16-08-2015, 01:30 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 01:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  So all I really learned was that he was an Essene which were of Buddhist persuasion and baptized Jesus in the order of the Essenes and then got beheaded because he wouldn't fuck some nasty bitch named Salome. What am I missing?

I don't think they were Buddhists. I think they followed Oprah.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
16-08-2015, 01:34 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 01:30 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(16-08-2015 01:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  So all I really learned was that he was an Essene which were of Buddhist persuasion and baptized Jesus in the order of the Essenes and then got beheaded because he wouldn't fuck some nasty bitch named Salome. What am I missing?

I don't think they were Buddhists. I think they followed Oprah.

Same thing. Drinking Beverage

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2015, 02:01 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 01:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  So all I really learned was that he was an Essene which were of Buddhist persuasion and baptized Jesus in the order of the Essenes and then got beheaded because he wouldn't fuck some nasty bitch named Salome. What am I missing?

Pretty much, yep.

Jesus was also primarily an Essene. In the gospel records, you see him criticizing the Sadducee and the Pharisee, but never the Essene. Why? Because he was one of them.

The Nazarene were also a sub-sect of the Essene, living by principle as Essene. The town of Nazareth was named after the Nazarene sect, just like most towns are named after whoever lives there.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free's post
16-08-2015, 02:48 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 02:01 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-08-2015 01:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  So all I really learned was that he was an Essene which were of Buddhist persuasion and baptized Jesus in the order of the Essenes and then got beheaded because he wouldn't fuck some nasty bitch named Salome. What am I missing?

Pretty much, yep.

Jesus was also primarily an Essene. In the gospel records, you see him criticizing the Sadducee and the Pharisee, but never the Essene. Why? Because he was one of them.

The Nazarene were also a sub-sect of the Essene, living by principle as Essene. The town of Nazareth was named after the Nazarene sect, just like most towns are named after whoever lives there.


ThumbsupThumbsup

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2015, 03:08 PM (This post was last modified: 16-08-2015 08:22 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 02:01 PM)Free Wrote:  
(16-08-2015 01:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  So all I really learned was that he was an Essene which were of Buddhist persuasion and baptized Jesus in the order of the Essenes and then got beheaded because he wouldn't fuck some nasty bitch named Salome. What am I missing?

Pretty much, yep.

Jesus was also primarily an Essene. In the gospel records, you see him criticizing the Sadducee and the Pharisee, but never the Essene. Why? Because he was one of them.

The Nazarene were also a sub-sect of the Essene, living by principle as Essene. The town of Nazareth was named after the Nazarene sect, just like most towns are named after whoever lives there.

The Nazorites FAR preceded the Essenes. By hundreds of years, at least. They were not a "subsect" of the Essenes. The Hebrew root word for Nazir just meant "consecrated". Nazareth was probably a cemetery, and was "consecrated ground". It was not named for the Nazorites.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
16-08-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 03:08 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(16-08-2015 02:01 PM)Free Wrote:  Pretty much, yep.

Jesus was also primarily an Essene. In the gospel records, you see him criticizing the Sadducee and the Pharisee, but never the Essene. Why? Because he was one of them.

The Nazarene were also a sub-sect of the Essene, living by principle as Essene. The town of Nazareth was named after the Nazarene sect, just like most towns are named after whoever lives there.

The Nazorites FAR preceded the Essenes. By hundreds of years, at least. They were not a "subsect" of the Essenes.

Was John the Baptist an Essene?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2015, 04:06 PM (This post was last modified: 16-08-2015 08:49 PM by Aliza.)
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
There’s something about the story of John the Baptist that really sounds fishy to me. In Luke, the writer talks about how on his 8th day of life, the baby John was getting circumcised. This is quite normal in Jewish culture, but what is abnormal is the idea of naming a child after one’s father or any other close relatives, as is depicted in Luke.

While this practice was common in Roman culture, it was never practiced by Jews. Yet, the writer(s) of Luke seemed to assume the Roman practice as a default. All of the Jewish people who attended the baby’s circumcision seemed stunned that the baby was named John and not Zachariah. They even give pause and attempt to point out the perceived social misstep being taken by the parents of John the Baptist.

If, by the way, the child had been named Zachariah instead of John, this would mean that his name was Zachariah Ben Zachariah. His father’s name would also have been Zachariah Ben Zachariah, and his grandfather, and so on. In fact, in the entire Jewish Bible, we see no instances where the son is named for the father. Throughout all genealogies provided, no son is named for the father.

My question is this: Are Christian people aware of this seeming discrepancy? People of Christian heritage routinely name their sons after their fathers, so do they even notice that this practice sticks out like a sore thumb to a Jewish audience? Is this something that Christianity has some explanation for, or is it really not even noticed?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Aliza's post
16-08-2015, 05:35 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
I'll throw in my 2c worth re John...

Brothers in Arms...John and Yeshua

According to James Tabor, in The Jesus Dynasty, John the Baptist started a Messianic movement well before Yeshua became a public figure. John was probably a charismatic Essene teacher, a man who created excitement. The people considered him a prophet; someone qualified to tell them what their God expected of them. John had the credentials to be a legitimate priest, as he was said to be a descendant of Aaron (see Luke 1; 5.) John may have refused to respect the temple hierarchy in Jerusalem, as there is no evidence he ever associated with them. Instead, John went into the wilderness to proclaim to the people that the coming of the Messiah was close at hand, which meant only one thing to poor Jews: a war was on the horizon. John baptized believers and told his brethren to repent and get ready for the beginning of a new world order in which they would not be poor and oppressed. His message may have been well received, as the Bible boasts that he attracted many followers.

( http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/j...trial.html )

The site on the River Jordan where John baptized people is only three miles from Qumran, the home of a large Essene community. This is the same community that may have hidden the Dead Sea Scrolls a few decades later. No one knows if John the Baptist associated with the Qumran community, but it is probable, given the close proximity of their activities.

The Gospels claim that John and Jesus held each other in high regard, and that they were cousins. John had already preached for a number of years, and already had a contingent of followers, before Yeshua became a public figure.

The Gospel writers could not imply that Yeshua played a subordinate role to John, so each strove to make Jesus seem more senior than John. Yet the Gospel writers could not conceal the fact that John baptized Jesus the novitiate. In reality John was the more established and authoritative instructor, and Yeshua was his protégé.

Yeshua’s stature grew as time went by. The two of them might have planned that once they had established political power in Palestine, John, the heir of Aaron, was to be the new high priest and Yeshua, the descendent of David, the new King of Israel.

It seems likely the two cousins parted ways to double the capacity of their campaign, which probably involved telling carefully selected, disgruntled groups of Jews about their plan to wage a war. The two young men probably used religion to excite and galvanize large numbers of poor patriotic Jews. Baptizing people with water was a symbolic re-enactment of the ancient Jews’ (fictitious) crossing of the Red Sea to freedom. The two friends may have been offering peasant Jews a new freedom, a freedom from Rome.

By the end of 27 CE, the messianic movement started by John may have only recognized two types of Jews in Palestine, those who had responded by being baptized, and those who had not. The dichotomy was between baptized militant and non-baptized non-militant Jews. If this was so, this was no small-scale backyard scheme; it was a serious shift in the people’s attitude towards war with the Romans.
Herod Antipas, the Romans’ puppet king, must have been watching John like a hawk. Any Galilean prophet preaching to the public was presumed to be a zealot. Herod had John arrested and killed. This is how Josephus, a secular historian, described John’s murder:

“...what he did against John, that was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exer- cise virtue, both as to righteousness toward one another, and piety toward God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins, but for the purification of the body: supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now, when many others came in crowds about him, for they were greatly moved by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly, he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.” (Antiquities 18.5.2 116-119.)

Herod, the pro Roman puppet king, was wary of a coup commanded by John, so had him killed. The Gospel authors deliberately did not detail the real reason for John’s threat to Herod, because that reason did not fit with their invented image of John and Jesus as pacifist evangelists.

As a side issue, Josephus also points out that John had criticized Herod for marrying his brother’s wife, which would not have endeared John to Herod, and may have partly been responsible for Herod’s treatment of John.

John’s death in early 28 CE must have been a serious setback for the Nazarene’s struggle against Rome.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpWNL1vyQz0 )
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
16-08-2015, 09:34 PM
RE: Who was John the Baptist?
(16-08-2015 03:08 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(16-08-2015 02:01 PM)Free Wrote:  Pretty much, yep.

Jesus was also primarily an Essene. In the gospel records, you see him criticizing the Sadducee and the Pharisee, but never the Essene. Why? Because he was one of them.

The Nazarene were also a sub-sect of the Essene, living by principle as Essene. The town of Nazareth was named after the Nazarene sect, just like most towns are named after whoever lives there.

The Nazorites FAR preceded the Essenes. By hundreds of years, at least. They were not a "subsect" of the Essenes. The Hebrew root word for Nazir just meant "consecrated". Nazareth was probably a cemetery, and was "consecrated ground". It was not named for the Nazorites.

Nazarenes are not Nazorites.

Just thought i would clear that up.

Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: