more John = Jesus

by peacefulpete 10 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    It has been discussed here before the attractive idea that the birth narratives of Matt and Luke may have been drawing upon earlier birth legends of John the bapt. I was wondering if the Gospel of Peter may betray some transitional stage of this adaptation. note below:

    Chapter 22

    (1) When Herod saw that he had been tricked by the astrologers, he flew into a rage (2) and sent his executioners, telling them to destroy all the infants that were two years old or younger.

    (3) And when Mary heard that all the children were being destroyed, she was afraid and took the child and wrapped him up and put him in a stall of cows.

    (5) And when Elizabeth heard that John was being sought, she took him and headed for the hills. And she looked around to find where she could hide him, but there was not any good place. (7) Then, as Elizabeth sighed, she said with a loud voice, "Mountain of God, take me, a mother with her child." For Elizabeth was too afraid to go up higher. (8) And at once, the mountain split open and received her. And there was light shining through the mountain to her. (9) For an angel of the Lord was with them, guarding them.

    Chapter 23

    (1) But Herod continued seeking John. (2) And he sent his servants to Zachariah at the altar, saying to him, "Where did you hide your son?"

    (3) But he replied, saying to them, "I am here as a servant of God and am serving in his temple. How should I know where my son is?"

    (4) And his servants departed and reported to him all these things. Outraged, Herod said, "Is his son destined to rule Israel?"

    (5) And he sent his servants again, saying to him, "Tell me the truth? Where is your son? Do you know that your blood is under my hand?"

    (6) And the servants departed and reported these things to him.

    (7) And replying, Zachariah said, "I am a witness of God. Have my blood. (8) The Lord will receive my spirit because you are shedding innocent blood at the entrance of the temple of the Lord."

    (9) And around daybreak, Zachariah was murdered, even though the children of Israel did not know that he had been murdered.

    Chapter 24

    (1) Then, at the hour of greeting, the priests departed and the blessing of Zachariah did not greet them as usual. (2) Expecting Zachariah, the priests waited to welcome him with prayer and to praise the most high God.

    (3) When he failed to come, they were all afraid. (4) One of them courageously went into the sanctuary and saw hardened blood next to the altar of the Lord (5) and heard a loud voice saying, "Zachariah has been murdered and his blood will not be wiped away until vengeance comes."

    (6) When he heard these words, he was afraid and went out and told the priest what he had seen and heard. (7) And gathering up their courage, they went in and saw what had happened. (8) And as the panels of the temple cried out, they ripped their robes from the top down. (9) And they did not find the corpse, but they found his blood which had turned to stone. (10) And fearing, they went out and reported to the people that Zachariah had been murdered. (11) And all the tribes of the people heard and they mourned and wept for three days and three nights.

    (12) Then, after three days, the priests deliberated about who they should appoint to take the place of Zachariah. (13) And the lot went to Simeon. (14) For he was the one to whom it had been revealed by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death until he saw the messiah in the flesh.

    .....................................................................................................................................................................

    Also it may be notable that according to the Clementine recognitions disciples of J the B hailed John as the Christ.

    1:54 :

    "Yea, some even of the disciples of John, who seemed to be great ones, have separated themselves from the people, and proclaimed their own master as the Christ. But all these schisms have been prepared, that by means of them the faith of Christ and baptism might be hindered."

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    While the relationship between Jesus and the Baptist in general is quite problematic (cf. the Mandaeans who hold Jesus as a false prophet, the conspicuous insistence of the Christian Gospels, and especially GJohn, that the Baptist is not the Christ, strongly suggesting that John's disciples considered him as such), GPeter seems to be dependent on both Matthew's and Luke's nativity stories (not necessarily in the extant form though), and through them on the OT parallels (hiding the child = Moses, Exodus 1). In Luke the nativity stories are developed in a parallel way (with some occasional flip-flopping, e.g. the variant in 1:46 where either Mary or Elizabeth can be the speaker of the Magnificat; and Zechariah's poem is quite Messianic too), but can any of them be traced back to Baptist tradition?

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    I was aware of the dependance upon matt and questioned just the point you did. Was G pete based upon an early recension of Matt that had the legend surround the birth of John? The G.Pete in its present form seems hard to account for otherwise. In Moses his death was sought both as an infant as as an adult by a Pharoah. Herod (King or Tetrarch) plays a paralel role if we give the attempt on the life of the infant John. Jeuss also of course fits but we have to admit that Herod's involvement in Jesus death is a later addition to the Jesus story as well. Might the two changes have been made at the same time? ie. the switch to Jesus as the target in the infanticide and the involvement of "Herod" in Jesus trial and death?

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    PP,

    I just realised that what you quoted is from the Infancy Gospel of James ((I should have checked before). GPeter on the other hand is noteworthy for charging Herod and the Jews, instead of Pilate, for the death of Jesus.

    Now the pattern of having a "Herod" attacking the protagonist twice is interesting... but it is not actually found about Jesus in the extant canonical Gospels, since the Herod villain appears in the infancy story of Matthew and in the Passion story of Luke (and Acts)...

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Oh man, oops. I was rushing to post before watching a movie. Yes I meant I G of James not G Peter. Oh well thanks for catching that.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Would that make any more sense of the dating discrepancy of Roman census and Herod the Great?

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    Would that make any more sense of the dating discrepancy of Roman census and Herod the Great?

    How so? This problem is internal to Luke who provides both (mutually exclusive) chronological references (1:5; 2:1f).

    In the Infancy Gospel (aka Protevangelium) of James there is a mention of the census (although not of Quirinius) but it serves a different narrative function than in Luke: instead of causing the journey from Galilee to Bethlehem (in the Protevangelium Joseph and Mary appear to live in Bethlehem, just as in Matthew), it makes Joseph attempt to leave Bethlehem (17):

    And there was an order from the Emperor Augustus, that all in Bethlehem of Judaea should be enrolled. And Joseph said: I shall enrol my sons, but what shall I do with this maiden? How shall I enrol her? As my wife? I am ashamed. As my daughter then? But all the sons of Israel know that she is not my daughter. The day of the Lord shall itself bring it to pass as the Lord will. And he saddled the ass, and set her upon it; and his son led it, and Joseph followed. And when they had come within three miles, Joseph turned and saw her sorrowful; and he said to himself: Likely that which is in her distresses her. And again Joseph turned and saw her laughing. And he said to her: Mary, how is it that I see in thy face at one time laughter, at another sorrow? And Mary said to Joseph: Because I see two peoples with my eyes; the one weeping and lamenting, and the other rejoicing and exulting. And they came into the middle of the road, and Mary said to him: Take me down from off the ass, for that which is in me presses to come forth. And he took her down from off the ass, and said to her: Whither shall I lead thee, and cover thy disgrace? for the place is desert.
    The Protevangelium is a comparatively late work (mid 2nd century) and is dependent on the stories in both Matthew and Luke, and other traditions (the "cave" where Jesus is born, for instance, is also attested in Justin Martyr).
  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    But luke was clearly dependant on previous works.

    Besides, my post was a question, not a statement

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Among the many treasures of the Pseudo-Clementines is this passage:

    "There was one John, a day-baptist (one who baptizes every day), who was also, according to the method of combination, the forerunner of our Lord Jesus; and as the Lord had twelve apostles, bearing the number of the twelve months of the sun, so also he, John, had thirty chief men, fulfilling the monthly reckoning of the moon, in which number was a certain woman called Helena, that not even this might be without a dispensational significance. For a woman, being half a man, made up the imperfect number of the triacontad; as also in the case of the moon, whose revolution does not make the complete course of the month. But of these thirty, the first and the most esteemed by John was Simon". (Hom. 2.13)

    This is of course the infamous Simon Magus & Helena pair. So not only is the John = Jesus something to consider, but also Jesus = Simon, and of course Simon = Paul in the Pseudo-Clementines already (which might be a secondary development). So it can be a quite messy problem trying to sort all this out! There is also some amazing stuff in John 4 and Acts that adds to the suspicion that the Simon and Jesus traditions both flow from a common source.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete



    I just found an online posting referencing Hugh Schonfield's "The Lost Book of the nativity of John" (1929) as suggesting that The Protoevangelium is the parent source for both Matt's and Luke's Jesus nativity and escape to Egypt. The differences in the two are due to the authors' different adaptations of their source. Luke, in his estimate, preserves more of the JTB nativity. Also interestingly the matt 23:35 reference to a Zechariah killed near the temple was apparently understood by some as referring to the killing of JTB's father as described in the Protoevangelium. Jerome, according to Schonfield, said that "others" understood the verse that way. That doesn't tell us much but is interesting in that this would seem improbable if the "son of Berechiah" identifier was in the version in circulation. Could it be that this is another small piece of the puzzle? I'm trying to get a hold of Schonfield's book but it is not proving easy.



Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit