Question about Jesus and John

[didymus]

Gospels of Matthew and Luke state that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist. Upon emerging from the river Jordan Jesus saw a dove appear above him and God spoke from the heaven that he was proud and that Jesus was his son.

Later in both gospels John the Baptist(while in prison) sent out disciples to ask Jesus if he was the one to come or was it another.

My question is why would John even ask this question if he baptized Jesus and was there for the dove and the voice from heaven?

[Bandit]

Didymus,
I think part of that answer is because he was in jail when he asked the question. He was not there in person to see the miracles that God performed through Jesus or even to hear the teachings like the others. I think he was looking for some kind of other sign, maybe to be sure the people were following the right person, thus he asks the question.

IOW- the voice and the 'like a' dove was enough to let him know what he had done at that time was in order. But the fact that he was put into jail is what made him question.

Another thing to consider is the spirit of God (Holy Spirit) had not been given yet, not even to the apostles, it had only been given to Jesus. For the others, it did not happen until after the resurrestion and Jesus departed the physical, on the day of pentecost.

God had a big mission for John the baptist. He was the forerunner of Jesus. John prepared the way through teaching and baptising unto repentance. It took both Jesus and John together to fulfill all righteousness.

He was put into jail and had done nothing wrong. I think there is a spiritual lesson in this. Sometimes when we lose track of what God really wants of us, we go looking for signs, and the signs we look for are right in front of us, but we don't see them because we are too busy looking for fish to rain out of heaven.
Could also be that we fulfill our mission and then wonder if we did what we were supposed to do and if we did it right.
The gift of the Holy Ghost and the bible is sign enough for me, but John the baptist did not have this like we do today.

God called John home, I believe because he did what he was supposed to do. And his duty to the Lord was fulfilled.

What do you think?
and what was the message that Jesus sent back to John the baptist?

[didymus]

I think that John, being Jesus' cousin probably would have heard through the family that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and that Mary and John's mother elizabeth had that profound experience together where she felt the jumping in the womb. This combined with the experience Jesus had at the river Jordan would have been enough that John would have no need to question anything about jesus' messiahship. So this strikes me as very strange and even suspicious that John would ask.

Jesus' response was that people were being healed . He did not say he was the one to come.

[Bandit]

1)ok. upon the reply of Jesus is there any further questioning of John the baptist?

there are many things that I have learned about family members years afterward, even after they have died that were not made known to everyone.
John and Jesus were cousins, but they did not live together.

do you see any spiritual lesson, at all, in John the baptist being put into jail after doing what he was supposed to do? I see that as more suspicious than wondering if everyone was concerned about God creating a man in the womb.
Elizabeth herself was barren and they did not want everyone to know she had conceived. In fact God caused Zacharias tongue to be dumb and he could not speak until Johns birth.


2)Is that strange and suspicious to you too?

3)and why do you feel it is suspicious and Johns question is suspicious? could that just be a type of thought you have about it?

the bible does not say Jesus was conceived 'BY' the Holy Ghost.

You have implied something that is not necessarily true by suggesting people talked about the birth of Jesus and the birth of John. From what I see it was all kept very quiet in the family.

[Basstian]

From what I see it was all kept very quiet in the family.

I have got to agree with this first of all because saying a child was concieved by anyone other than your husband would have been a death sentence in the time second of all Herods decree would have endangered Both of the Children. You notice Joseph wasnt running around saying My wife is going to Have the Christ Child but rather was told not to treat her badly because she was pure in everyway and had done no wrong. But I am sure there was much kept secret.

Johns reaction I believe has maybe to do more with the quote a prophet is without honor in his own family.
John sitting in jail no rescue atempt made surely if Jesus is the Christ He will rescue me. I know what I saw and heard why doesnt he do something. Surely he wont let it end like this maybe I should send a message that I am in trouble urge Him to do something etc. etc. etc.
Remember John was a mere man and faced with that situation would have been very hard not to doubt God. I am not saying this happened but could have been possible.

[didymus]

I think this was an oversight on the part of the authors of Luke and Matthew. It is possible that John didn't know of Jesus' virgin birth( personally I don't believe in the virgin birth but for the sake of argument I'm using it)and therefore didn't know. But John did say things that would allude to him knowing of jesus' divinity beforehand.

John stated that he should be baptized by Jesus instead of vice versa, that he wasn't worthy to carry his sandals. He was preparing the way.

The heavens opened up and a dove came forth and God spoke from above. It was stated that other people were there so they would have seen it. Therefore either; it didn't really happen that way or only Jesus saw the dove and heard God's voice. If John and the others witnessed this they surely wouldn't have questioned Jesus' purpose and mission. Something as supernatural as the heaven opening and God calling down from above is not to be overlooked or discounted.

As some may know there are many similarities between gospel events and events in the Greek Magical Papyri; heaven opening up, the dove , initiates becoming divine etc.

My personal opinion is that things didn't transpire this way.

[Bandit]

there are thousands of writings out there that have similarities. I do not see the bible or Jesus as a magic, witchy poo, mystical alice and wonderland.

In my interpretation of the scripture, I do not see Jesus as divine at all. People make people divine in there heads. The word was used less than 10 times in the NT.
I see, He was a mere man in complete oneness with God, fulfilling the will of God through obedience.
Jesus had no power except for that which God worked through him. Even Jesus made this exclamation.
His entire ministry started at Jordan and God did not declare him as His son until Jordan. This was the first declaration.
Everything else as son, was prophecy or written about him later.

Later it says, Jesus being FULL OF THE HOLY GHOST. I believe the baptism was where Jesus was filled with the holy ghost and when he became son of God. The virgin birth has nothing to do with what happened at Jordan.

John 4:1 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness.
this was right after his baptism.

Jesus 'became' the author of salvation. Jesus learned and was obedient. If he became the author, then he was not always the author until a certain point in time.

Though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience by the things which He suffered; And being made perfect, He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him" Hebrews 5:7-9 KJV

It does not say it was a dove. It says it was the spirit of God descending like a dove. What makes you so sure that other people would have seen the "like a dove"?

I think it all transpired exactly the way it was written.

[didymus]

Bandit, I agree with almost everything you say. I think our interpretation of who Jesus was is very similar. I went back and looked at Luke and Matthew again. In Matthew it says like a dove and in Luke it says; in bodily form like a dove. This may be splitting hairs but many do interpret the spirit descending as an actual dove.

My point of tying the dove analogy into Greek Magical Papyri was only to point out the similarity. The dove concept was used before. It is also interesting that all new testament texts were written in Greek therefore some familiarity to the dove concept may have existed. At any rate maybe a dove did descend, maybe only Jesus saw it and maybe he only heard the voice. If only he saw it that puts the narrative in a different light don't you agree? Because it does suggest that the voice from heaven was heard aloud.

I think your view of Jesus is a little out of line with mainstream christianity. You do know that most Christians believe he was and is God right? If so, how do justify your own interpretation of scripture and seem to be harsh on others?

I jumped the gun by throwing in my feelings of the virgin birth. That is a seperate issue. My point was that if certain things were true as told in the gospels I don't think people would have reacted to Jesus as they did.

For example Mark 3:20 his own family thought he was mad. If his own mother gave birth to the savior without sin and was told by an angel that he would rule kingdoms and do God's work why would she possibly think he was mad or question what he was doing? Also when they found him after 3 days in the temple when he was a kid. Why were his parents distraught? They would have known he was doing God's work . There are several other examples of this.

[didymus]

I thought last post got lost

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by didymus

Bandit, I agree with almost everything you say. I think our interpretation of who Jesus was is very similar. I went back and looked at Luke and Matthew again. In Matthew it says like a dove and in Luke it says; in bodily form like a dove. This may be splitting hairs but many do interpret the spirit descending as an actual dove.

My point of tying the dove analogy into Greek Magical Papyri was only to point out the similarity. The dove concept was used before. It is also interesting that all new testament texts were written in Greek therefore some familiarity to the dove concept may have existed. At any rate maybe a dove did descend, maybe only Jesus saw it and maybe he only heard the voice. If only he saw it that puts the narrative in a different light don't you agree? Because it does suggest that the voice from heaven was heard aloud.

I think your view of Jesus is a little out of line with mainstream christianity. You do know that most Christians believe he was and is God right? If so, how do justify your own interpretation of scripture and seem to be harsh on others?

I jumped the gun by throwing in my feelings of the virgin birth. That is a seperate issue. My point was that if certain things were true as told in the gospels I don't think people would have reacted to Jesus as they did.

For example Mark 3:20 his own family thought he was mad. If his own mother gave birth to the savior without sin and was told by an angel that he would rule kingdoms and do God's work why would she possibly think he was mad or question what he was doing? Also when they found him after 3 days in the temple when he was a kid. Why were his parents distraught? They would have known he was doing God's work . There are several other examples of this.

I dont know who heard and saw it. Maybe only a few. Maybe only John. I dont think it was a literal dove because God is A spirit.
I dont see Mary as an absolute mother, while she certainly did mother him. I dont remember anyone in the family thinking he was mad. Where was this?

Then there in the temple, is a sense he was a bit disobedient as far as I am concerned, because he was still under the authority of his parents. Nevertheless, there is a reason for why Jesus did what he did by staying behind. Any parent would be concerned about having to go back a days journey and look for there child.

I think your view of Jesus is a little out of line with mainstream christianity. You do know that most Christians believe he was and is God right? If so, how do justify your own interpretation of scripture and seem to be harsh on others?

because I follow the order of events of the bible and not what religion and myth say.
I do not believe he was God, however the scripture declares him as savior, Lord, the author of salvation, the mediator between God and man, son of God, just like we all are, only Jesus was the first that in all things he may have the preeminence and that through him we have the forgiveness AND remission of sins and eternal life. To make him anything less than Lord and Savior would be against what the bible teaches. God gave Jesus all authority and power and this did not happen until after Calvary.
No I am not a mainstream Christian, but I love them just as much as I love those who believe other things. But I do have lines of crossing as everyone does.
The bible says God hath highly exalted Jesus and gave him a name above every name. Jesus did not exalt himself.

Interpretation of scripture is one thing, but we have to be careful not to disreguard what the rest of the bible says too, when we interpret. I believe it is all true.

So what exactly was John the baptist baptizing for? what was his baptism for?

[didymus]

The passage which states his family questioned his sanity is Mark 3:20 - 21.

By what you say it sounds that you perceive Jesus to be God.

Do you believe in the virgin birth?

According to the gospels John baptized for those repenting of sin and for forgiveness. If we take this at face value then Jesus was baptized to repent and ask for forgiveness for sin.

John the Baptist had a large following of people. In fact many revered him instead of Jesus. This is found in Acts chapter 19. Paul was in Ephesus and asked some disciples if they had reeived the holy spirit to which they replied no. They had only heard of the baptism by John. Now if you look at a map, the river Jordan where we first hear of John is a log way from Ephasus. This suggests his fame was widespread and that he had a significant following.

I don't know if you are familiar with the Mandaeans. They are a sect that still exists today in southern Iraq. There was a group called the nasoreans who were afiliated with the Mandaeans in Jesus' time. John the Baptist was their leader( or as they called him, Yahia Yuhuna). They referred to themselves as natzoraje. They believed that Jesus(Yshu Mshiha) was a nasorean also.

Nazorean comes from the word for fish. In arabic nasrani means lots of little fish. Some arabs referred to the christians as nasrani. This is possibly related to the christians early custom of baptizing or being in the water. Epiphanius referred to a pre christian group called Nasoraioi. Could this be the nasorean they refer to when Jesus is called Jesus the Nasorean?

[Bandit]

Could this be the nasorean they refer to when Jesus is called Jesus the Nasorean?

I dont know. It could be. I know the Mandaeans are under terrible persucution from the arabs and they do not hesitate to kill them. I think they have some different beliefs that are different from the bible, but I really have not researched what all there beliefs are or where they originated but it sounds like some form of Christianity.

The passage which states his family questioned his sanity is Mark 3:20 - 21.

Jesus cast out devils. I dont think his friends thought he was mad, they just did not understand how he had the power to do it. I see them as more concerned and shook up than mad. I dont see the word MAD used in the scripture there.
If you have ever seen a devil cast out then you will understand what that is like. It was the scribes that came down and called him Beezlbub, which was the name they used for Satan (the leader of devils). Then Jesus explained How can Satan cast out Satan and divide his own house.

By what you say it sounds that you perceive Jesus to be God.

That teaching came out of Rome in about 390 AD. Everyone here knows I do not believe he is God or the traditional way it has been passed down, but they also know I do not make him anything less than that which the scriptures claim him to be. LORD SAVIOR MESSIAH. REDEEMER FIRSTBORN KING OF KINGS. SON OF THE LIVING GOD. Jesus is the express IMAGE of the invisible God.
It all started right there at Jordan. When someone does not understand what I am trying to say, I stop talking about it. It is deeper than most can understand what I am trying to say, so I stop.

Do you believe in the virgin birth?

Yes I do. God can make a man from dirt and a woman from flesh, he is certainly capable of making a man from the flesh (womb) of a woman. I do not see it the same traditional teaching that has been passed down. I see a different purpose in it than needing that to claim he was without sin or an incarnation of God.

How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the LORD hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man.

John the Baptist had a large following of people. In fact many revered him instead of Jesus. This is found in Acts chapter 19. Paul was in Ephesus and asked some disciples if they had reeived the holy spirit to which they replied no. They had only heard of the baptism by John. Now if you look at a map, the river Jordan where we first hear of John is a log way from Ephasus. This suggests his fame was widespread and that he had a significant following.

John the baptist never rose from the grave. Yes this was almost 4 years after John prepared the way of Jesus. There in Acts Those that were baptised unto Johns baptism were baptised in water AGAIN, in the name of Jesus. So I think this takes priority over Johns baptism.

According to the gospels John baptized for those repenting of sin and for forgiveness. If we take this at face value then Jesus was baptized to repent and ask for forgiveness for sin.

John baptised unto repentance for the remission of sin. Jesus said that baptism was to fulfill all righteousness but John did not understand that and did not want to do it . The way I see it, that baptism was to fulfill all righteousness or Jesus would not have done it. How as Jesus without sin... it was his obedience and life, His love for God and man, and righteousness and hating inqiuity, is what made him the man he was.

Who do you say that Jesus is, Didymus?
Who do you say that Jesus is, Didymus?

[didymus]

Bandit, in response to your r eply to Mark , I looked back and it doesn't say mad. It says they thought he was out of his mind. His mom, Mary was one of the family members who said this.


I respect your belief in who Jesus was . I believe that he came to pave a way for us also and I remain mystified as to the man he was. I do not believe in the virgin birth though. The earliest writing we have are the letters from Paul. Paul specifically says that Jesus was the greatest man ever born of woman. I don't know what letter it is in but it is there. The next writing we have is that of Mark. Mark makes no mention of a virgin birth. Why would Mark leave this detail out? It doesn't add up. What I believe happened was that Jesus' story grew and grew from a man who healed and did great things to a god born of a virgin. I'm sure you know this but there are numerous stories in folklore of men being half god half human.

Jesus was a man. This is not to say that when he was baptized he didn't become divine. I believe he had a channel and connection to God greater than many people ever had and he died for his beliefs. His legacy and power have transcended generations upon generations and leave all who question or revere him in a state of awe or without answers as to who he was. This is truly amazing to me.

To answer your question I can not say who he was or what he continues to be. To me he was a great teacher and prophet. He is a spirit guide in the present. Or as Thomas said, " Master, my mouth is wholly incapable of saying whom you are like."

[Bandit]

hmmm. this is what i got. and just prior to this he was casting out demons and healing people. I think they got used to Jesus after awhile.
i think they were more or less in shock. but if you interpret it as out of his mind...okee dokee, i wont argure

3:20 And the multitude cometh together again, so that they could not so much as eat bread.


3:21 And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.

and this is in part who i think Jesus is. We have about 40 scritpures that declare his exaltation, after calvary

Mark 16:19
So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

Acts 5:31
Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

Eph 1:20
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places

1 Pet 3:22
Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

i respect your belief in Jesus and thankyou for respecting mine.

[Bandit]

Why would Mark leave this detail out? It doesn't add up. What I believe happened was that Jesus' story grew and grew from a man who healed and did great things to a god born of a virgin. I'm sure you know this but there are numerous stories in folklore of men being half god half human.

i dont know why. not every gospel gives the same account of everything the same way. but God making a man from a womb of a woman is just another act of creation to me. simply a means of arrival. everything is made.
how can we explain a barren womb? if it is barren, it barren.
yes i am familiar with the godman myths from way back egypt and rome and even before Abraham and i think that is kind of what happened too, at least from the religious aspect of it, but not from the bible aspect of it.

I dont believe those myths either.