JW:
Introduction to the Thread:
This Thread will contain the following parts, just summarized here, which will subsequently be expanded:
Background
The purpose of this Thread will be to evaluate the strength of the evidence for the historical conclusion
that Jesus was baptized by John The Baptist.
Current Opinion
We will look at the opinion of a few Bible scholars and the related Wikipedia entry.
Criteria
We will look at the Wikipedia entry for Principles for evaluating Historical evidence.
Conclusions
In general the emphasis here will be on evidence and not related conclusions but
specifically this Thread will look at the relationship of the two for select Bible scholars.
Joseph
BAPTISM, n. A sacred rite of such efficacy that he who finds himself in heaven without having undergone it will be unhappy forever. It is performed with water in two ways—by immersion, or plunging, and by aspersion, or sprinkling.
Skeptical Textual Criticism
Evaluating Evidence For Jesus' Supposed Baptism
-
JoeWallack
- Posts: 1608
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
- Contact:
-
JoeWallack
- Posts: 1608
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: Evaluating Evidence For Jesus' Supposed Baptism
JW:
Background
The Gospel of Mark is generally thought of as the earliest Gospel. GMark describes Jesus' baptism by John the Baptist
as follows:
1
Joseph
BAPTISM, n. A sacred rite of such efficacy that he who finds himself in heaven without having undergone it will be unhappy forever. It is performed with water in two ways—by immersion, or plunging, and by aspersion, or sprinkling.
Skeptical Textual Criticism
Background
The Gospel of Mark is generally thought of as the earliest Gospel. GMark describes Jesus' baptism by John the Baptist
as follows:
1
4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins.
5 And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.
6 And John was clothed with camel`s hair, and [had] a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey.
7 And he preached, saying, There cometh after me he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.
8 I baptized you in water; But he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit.
9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.
10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens rent asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending upon him:
11 And a voice came out of the heavens, Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I am well pleased.
Joseph
BAPTISM, n. A sacred rite of such efficacy that he who finds himself in heaven without having undergone it will be unhappy forever. It is performed with water in two ways—by immersion, or plunging, and by aspersion, or sprinkling.
Skeptical Textual Criticism
-
JoeWallack
- Posts: 1608
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: Evaluating Evidence For Jesus' Supposed Baptism
JW:
Current Opinion
We will look at the opinion of a few Bible scholars and the related Wikipedia entry.
A post associated with Bart Ehrman's website:
HISTORICITY OF JESUS: 5 UNDENIABLE FACTS THAT PROVE JESUS WAS A REAL PERSON
Bold mine. Note that the emphasis here is on Conclusion:
"Must include"
"very likely"
"highly likely"
The article starts with "undeniable facts that prove" and ends with "proof that Jesus existed". As far as evidence for the baptism, the only evidence presented is a Criterion of Embarrassment argument. Just from a grammatical standpoint "adjective likely" and "fact" are two things that do not go together, like "gopher" and "mascot" or "President" and "Trump".
As far as criteria, Source criticism evidence (witness) in quality and quantity is normally needed to support a definite conclusion. The Criterion of Embarrassment is a Literary criteria and Literary criteria evidence is much weaker evidence in general than Source criteria evidence. Here the Criterion of Embarrassment argument has logic in general and specifically here but by itself would not have much weight to support a definite conclusion. Ehrman has written expanded arguments regarding the above elsewhere.
Joseph
BAPTISM, n. A sacred rite of such efficacy that he who finds himself in heaven without having undergone it will be unhappy forever. It is performed with water in two ways—by immersion, or plunging, and by aspersion, or sprinkling.
Skeptical Textual Criticism
Current Opinion
We will look at the opinion of a few Bible scholars and the related Wikipedia entry.
A post associated with Bart Ehrman's website:
HISTORICITY OF JESUS: 5 UNDENIABLE FACTS THAT PROVE JESUS WAS A REAL PERSON
JW:Examples of the Criterion of Embarrassment
The first is Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptist. Why would this event be an embarrassment? Jesus was supposed to be superior to John the Baptist, yet John baptized him. The baptized one is in an inferior position, the baptizer being understood as the leader.
The Gospels explain this away in several ways. However, the story is so well-known they must include it despite its implications for Jesus’ status. This makes it very likely that it actually happened.
The other event all the Gospels include is the crucifixion. When the Gospels were written decades after Jesus’ death, Christians had long interpreted the crucifixion as necessary. However, crucifixion was also the most humiliating punishment possible. The whole idea was to put offenders on display, in all their agony, to deter future offenders.
For followers of Jesus, his crucifixion, the ultimate form of capital punishment, would initially have been shameful. This is the reason the crucifixion meets the criterion of embarrassment. No followers of Jesus would invent this type of death for their leader.
These two facts make Jesus’ historicity highly likely.
Bold mine. Note that the emphasis here is on Conclusion:
"Must include"
"very likely"
"highly likely"
The article starts with "undeniable facts that prove" and ends with "proof that Jesus existed". As far as evidence for the baptism, the only evidence presented is a Criterion of Embarrassment argument. Just from a grammatical standpoint "adjective likely" and "fact" are two things that do not go together, like "gopher" and "mascot" or "President" and "Trump".
As far as criteria, Source criticism evidence (witness) in quality and quantity is normally needed to support a definite conclusion. The Criterion of Embarrassment is a Literary criteria and Literary criteria evidence is much weaker evidence in general than Source criteria evidence. Here the Criterion of Embarrassment argument has logic in general and specifically here but by itself would not have much weight to support a definite conclusion. Ehrman has written expanded arguments regarding the above elsewhere.
Joseph
BAPTISM, n. A sacred rite of such efficacy that he who finds himself in heaven without having undergone it will be unhappy forever. It is performed with water in two ways—by immersion, or plunging, and by aspersion, or sprinkling.
Skeptical Textual Criticism