• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jesus and John....... what were their real missions?

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Jesus and John..... what were their real missions?
This thread proposes that the missions of both John the Baptist and Jesus differed from those as presented by Christianity.
1. Most Jews of Traconitus, Iturea, Decapolis, Galilee, Perea, Idumea, Judea and beyond felt bound to trek to Jerusalem as often as possible to make sacrifice and gain spiritual/physical/placebo cleansing.
2. During the three great feasts all the suburbs around Jerusalem would have been crammed full of visitors, and I expect that every inn was packed full, every bed taken, and that the locals were charging premium prices to fleece the arrivals as much as possible.
3. Every meal and service would have cost top-shekel.
4. On arrival at the Temple sacrificial lambs were purchased, and I would guess that these cost heavily loaded prices.
5. Sacrificial services were charged at large fees (no doubt). This was a huge money-go-round and about 2000 priests were all required to be present to provide expensive services to hard working and mostly poor visitors.
6. If all that was not enough, no province's money was any good in the temple and so all currency had to be exchanged for Temple coinage and the exchange rate would have been huge. I have read that Rome ordered a lamb-kidney count at one great feast and that can only mean that a % of the exchange fees went back to Rome. I have often wondered whether the coin that was shown to Jesus stamped with Caesar's head was Temple currency...?
7. I reckon that the whole redemption package was one huge corrupt money spinning wickedness, carried out by greedy, careless, hypocritical, quislings.... and worse.
8. I wonder whether Judas-the-Galilean's movement was against all of the above, especially the exchange-rate taxation accounting process?
Now, that's my proposal, but let's look at what John thought about it all, a wilderness dweller surviving as close to self-subsistence as a human can, he came out of the wilds to the Jordan, where thousands of families trekked past Samaria to reach Judea, and he offered them remission from their sins for little or nothing, by immersion in the jordan. By offering such a spiritual and physical service was he simply saying, 'Don't go to the Temple!'.... ?
MATTHEW: {1:4} John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. {1:5} And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.
MATTHEW {3:7} But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
I propose that the people flocked to him in their thousands. Temple takings would have fallen. Exchange fees would have fallen. The Jerusalem and suburb locals would have reduced takings. Pilate could not act against John because John was working from the East bank of the Jordan and out of his jurisdiction, and so Herod Antipas was required to send a force to arrest John. Also, other Jews may have been avoiding Temple cleansing elsewhere, and some of these must also have been doing so within Pilate's jurisdiction.
LUKE {13:1} There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
I believe that Jesus supported John's mission, and was also baptising with his own disciples as well. Look what he said as he quoted Hosea. ({6:6} For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.)
MATTHEW {9:13} But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Matthew {12:6} But I say unto you, That in this place is [one] greater than the temple. {12:7} But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice................
I wonder whether he was performing cleansings in the Sea of Galilee as well as in the Jordan, but, ok, this is not recorded. ....?
MARK {3:7} But Jesus withdrew himself with his disciples to the sea: and a great multitude
from Galilee followed him, and from Judaea, {3:8} And from Jerusalem, and from Idumaea, and [from] beyond Jordan; and they about Tyre and Sidon, a great multitude, when they had heard what great things he did, came unto him.
............and the reactions...
MARK {1:27} And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine [is] this? for with authority commandeth he even the unclean spirits, and they do obey him.
MARK {2:6} But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, {2:7}
Why doth this [man] thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?
But G-Mark suggests that he failed to gather as much support in Galilee as he needed, and so in a last huge attempt to win support he went to the Great Temple, demonstrated against the sacificial sellers and money exchangers and picketed the Temple Courts two days running.

Mark {11:15} And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; {11:16} And would not suffer that any man should carry [any] vessel through the temple. {11:17} And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.
MARK {11:27} And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders, {11:28} And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things? {11:29} And Jesus
answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. {11:30} The baptism of John, was [it] from heaven, or of men? answer me.
And so I propose that if the Gospel of Mark is read with the above in mind that it can show that jesus's mission was simply for his own people, the working Jews, against the corrupt and greedy priesthood and the crushing costs of redemption at the Temple and for visitors around Jerusalem.
 

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Jesus and John..... what were their real missions?

To protect the world from devastation,
To unite all peoples within our nation,
To denounce the denounce the evils of truth and love,
To extend our reach to the stars above.
Jesus! John!
Team Christos blast off at the speed of light!

Surrender now or prepare to fight!
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
And so I propose that if the Gospel of Mark is read with the above in mind that it can show that jesus's mission was simply for his own people, the working Jews, against the corrupt and greedy priesthood and the crushing costs of redemption at the Temple and for visitors around Jerusalem.
I somewhat agree, I think Jesus did not concern himself with creating a world embracing religion but was primarily focused on the people of his time and cultural group. However, the deep spiritual aspect to this is indeed universal and many people came to embrace this aspect and the rest, as they say, is history.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
I somewhat agree, I think Jesus did not concern himself with creating a world embracing religion but was primarily focused on the people of his time and cultural group. However, the deep spiritual aspect to this is indeed universal and many people came to embrace this aspect and the rest, as they say, is history.
Fair enough..... :)

I reckon that John was definitely offering cleansing and redemption of sins as an inexpensive alternative to the Temple money-go-round. And that attracted thousands, which reduced Temple (and other) takings, which initiated his arrest.

A service supplied free of charge would attract thousands today..... there's nothing new under the sun, is there? ! :)

But, obviously, if this is correct then claims that John was making the way for Jesus could be seen as 'spin'. If anything Jesus just picked up the baton and ran on with it after John's arrest.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
To protect the world from devastation,
To unite all peoples within our nation,
To denounce the denounce the evils of truth and love,
To extend our reach to the stars above.
Jesus! John!
Team Christos blast off at the speed of light!

Surrender now or prepare to fight!

You're thinking of Superman there. Or Batman?
:D
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Now, that's my proposal, but let's look at what John thought about it all, a wilderness dweller surviving as close to self-subsistence as a human can, he came out of the wilds to the Jordan, where thousands of families trekked past Samaria to reach Judea, and he offered them remission from their sins for little or nothing, by immersion in the jordan. By offering such a spiritual and physical service was he simply saying, 'Don't go to the Temple!'.... ?
Ignoring the conjecture in your 8 points, none of the festival sacrifices were sin offerings, they were festival offerings. It was also a time when people brought any oath offerings, animal tithes and spent their second-tithes.

So your novel idea doesn't really relate to the reason people were going to the Temple at this time of the year.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Its complicated by the fact that the Pharisees already were in some ways already in competition with the Temple, or so I think I heard somewhere. Also in Mark Jesus tells his disciples the temple will be torn down (Mark 13:1-2), so he may be anti-temple politically speaking. There is also Beelzebub mentioned in Mark, and Jesus is accused of being possessed by Beelzebub by the teachers of the Law. (Mark 3:2) Something I read suggested a tie-in with Qumran literature on this item. The Qumran texts discussed light vs dark, angel vs belial. All of this you are hearing from a fly on the wall, but some people think that these demonic possessions and exorcisms in Mark have to do with Rome and political corruption. Just thought I would mention it in case it seemed like something interesting that might help you excavate. Good luck!
 

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
Perhaps better questions would be, "Did John and Jesus actually exist? If they didn't really exist, who created the stories, and why? If they did exist, were their missions even remotely like those presented in the NT? If their missions weren't like those presented in the NT, who created the stories and why?"

It takes considerable faith to accept the NT as true, because there is a dearth of independent evidence for the persons and events described...and considerable evidence that in the first three centuries of Christianity's existence, there were many other views about the nature and mission Jesus (whether or not he did actually exist), views that were actively suppressed starting in the 380s CE
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Ignoring the conjecture in your 8 points, none of the festival sacrifices were sin offerings, they were festival offerings. It was also a time when people brought any oath offerings, animal tithes and spent their second-tithes.

So your novel idea doesn't really relate to the reason people were going to the Temple at this time of the year.

Thanks for the info.
OK, I get your point about the three main festivals. I understand that Jews were expected to attend at least one per year? Did they believe that there were any consequences if they did not attend?
Do you have any ideas about why John was offering immersion in the Jordan for the remission of sins?
But for his baptism remission, where would Jews go to 'cleanse' themselves ?
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Its complicated by the fact that the Pharisees already were in some ways already in competition with the Temple, or so I think I heard somewhere. Also in Mark Jesus tells his disciples the temple will be torn down (Mark 13:1-2), so he may be anti-temple politically speaking. There is also Beelzebub mentioned in Mark, and Jesus is accused of being possessed by Beelzebub by the teachers of the Law. (Mark 3:2) Something I read suggested a tie-in with Qumran literature on this item. The Qumran texts discussed light vs dark, angel vs belial. All of this you are hearing from a fly on the wall, but some people think that these demonic possessions and exorcisms in Mark have to do with Rome and political corruption. Just thought I would mention it in case it seemed like something interesting that might help you excavate. Good luck!

Thankyou for this.
Demonic possession...... I've got this theory that 'male hysteria' was/is more common in Mediterranean people than in European people. The manifestation of hysteria can mimic or even physically imitate physical conditions, and I know that the right person can charismatically stun people out of apparent illnesses. My first wife was an extreme case (she died in 91') so I have experienced hysteria more closely than most pyschiatrists.

I reckon that Jesus could caste 'demons', no problem.
 

roger1440

I do stuff
Of all the people mentioned by name in the New Testament, only one person’s age is mentioned relative to Jesus’s age. That person is John the Baptist. He was six months older then Jesus. Coincidence? Maybe not.

“…the older will serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23)
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Thankyou for this.
Demonic possession...... I've got this theory that 'male hysteria' was/is more common in Mediterranean people than in European people. The manifestation of hysteria can mimic or even physically imitate physical conditions, and I know that the right person can charismatically stun people out of apparent illnesses. My first wife was an extreme case (she died in 91') so I have experienced hysteria more closely than most pyschiatrists.

I reckon that Jesus could caste 'demons', no problem.
Maybe, but demons were a more flexible topic than just something that caused individual problems and weird behaviors. They could also be something that affected more than one person, like a mass hysteria. It wasn't necessarily limited to one demon per person. If you think about a cold virus, for example, it can exist in multiple people at once. So why couldn't there be a demon which causes a group of people (or a bunch of pigs either) to believe something or to do something together. People in these times didn't have germ theories or psychoanalysis. They just knew that something hidden could cause something visible to happen.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Thanks for the info.
OK, I get your point about the three main festivals. I understand that Jews were expected to attend at least one per year?
Three times per year. Passover, Tabernacles and Weeks (Ex. 23:17, 34:23 and Deut. Deut. 16:16)
Did they believe that there were any consequences if they did not attend?

Do you have any ideas about why John was offering immersion in the Jordan for the remission of sins?
But for his baptism remission, where would Jews go to 'cleanse' themselves ?[/QUOTE]
To cleanse themselves of sins they would repent to G-d.
For a select number of sins, one of two sacrificial atonements was necessary in addition to repentance.
To cleanse themselves from impurity, there were ritual baths (mikvah) throughout the country most especially in Jerusalem (many have been unearthed by archaeologists).

There were three types of impurity that needed flowing water(as opposed to a ritual bath) one of which was a zav. According to the Rabbis, the illiterate folk were assumed to be in a constant state of 'zav' out of suspicion that if one was, he had not properly immersed himself (this type of impurity spreads more easily than others hence the suspicion). However, this suspicion was suspended during the Three Festivals as everyone was assumed to have properly immersed himself for the pilgrimage.
There is also impurity from touching a dead person that has a completely different ritual of being sprinkled by a priest with a concoction of water and red heifer ashes on the third and seventh day after contact and then a ritual immersion in water.

The only type of ritual immersion requiring the assistance of another is this last one of touching a dead person. So there's never any need to 'offer' ritual immersion.

I really only see three possibilities for such an offer:
1. The river was running pretty fast and people needed help to make sure they didn't float away. John provided that help.
2. Whoever wrote the original gospels was unaware of the finer nuance of the ritual. This would be consistent with some other passages, such as Jesus healing on the Sabbath.
3. The author wasn't striving for accuracy, he was just trying to make a statement to the illiterate that he would be the one to purify them as opposed to abiding by Pharisee rule.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Perhaps better questions would be, "Did John and Jesus actually exist? If they didn't really exist, who created the stories, and why? If they did exist, were their missions even remotely like those presented in the NT? If their missions weren't like those presented in the NT, who created the stories and why?"
Hi....
Many years of study have shown me that both John and Yeshua were genuine people. If you would like to debate their rexistence then i would be pleased to paricipate. This thread addresses their missions and most probably interests members who accept that they did exist.

It takes considerable faith to accept the NT as true, because there is a dearth of independent evidence for the persons and events described...and considerable evidence that in the first three centuries of Christianity's existence, there were many other views about the nature and mission Jesus (whether or not he did actually exist), views that were actively suppressed starting in the 380s CE
It takes study to separate the spin from the history, that is true, but I won't throw out everything because I perceive that there is a lot of spin and fib ion the NT.

If you have chucked out the lot then this probably won't interest you very much.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
Of all the people mentioned by name in the New Testament, only one person’s age is mentioned relative to Jesus’s age. That person is John the Baptist. He was six months older then Jesus. Coincidence? Maybe not.

“…the older will serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23)
Are you suggesting that John was a reincarnation of Esau? Otherwise I don't see any reason to connect this statement about Esau and Jacob to John and Jesus.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Of all the people mentioned by name in the New Testament, only one person’s age is mentioned relative to Jesus’s age. That person is John the Baptist. He was six months older then Jesus. Coincidence? Maybe not.

“…the older will serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23)

Yes....... Elizabeth was said to be 6 months pregnant just as Mary went walkabout into other provinces to meet with her.

I find that G-Lukes nativity is mostly very strange when compared with the other synoptics, and this story stretches my credibility beyong snapping point.

But John most certainly did come to the Jordan offering immersion in water for the remission of sins. And he certainly thought that the pruiesthood was a corrupt bunch of vipers. He said both, did both, and attractedflocks of people. It says so.

And so that may well have been his main mission?
 
Last edited:

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Maybe, but demons were a more flexible topic than just something that caused individual problems and weird behaviors. They could also be something that affected more than one person, like a mass hysteria. It wasn't necessarily limited to one demon per person.
Mass hysteria is most commonly attributed to various forms of excitement such as extreme greed (gold rushes?), extreme fear, sexual excitement (oh yes!) but hysteria was caused by exactly the same initriators back then as ity is today.

If you think about a cold virus, for example, it can exist in multiple people at once. So why couldn't there be a demon which causes a group of people (or a bunch of pigs either) to believe something or to do something together. People in these times didn't have germ theories or psychoanalysis. They just knew that something hidden could cause something visible to happen.
Ah, but today we have learned more about medical science then back then. :)
In 2014 my wife appeared to go into massive bursts of frantic activity even when watching a pleasant quiet trv program. 2000 years ago that could have been a demon, but in 2014 a clever young doctor saved her life because he had just been on a course about phaeo chromo cytoma, a tumour on an adrenal gland that would send it into adrenal climax at any time.

And those pigs are worth their own thread. Have yiou figured why so many pigs were kept in herds down in the Gasarenes beside the lake, and why jews would go there at night across the lake? :)
 
Top