THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS If we are to talk about the existence of Jesus looking at it from the spiritual and contemporary angle, then, it would be pointless and futile to argue that Jesus Christ existed or not. The Christians believe (blindly) that Jesus Christ existed and still exists in that he was crucified for the sins of the world but rose on the third day and went to heaven to live with his father, God, who is believed to have sent him. Thus, there is no argument that can hold against the fact that Jesus Christ existed and exists and to some reasonable extent, will continue to exist, although not physically but in the minds and worlds of those that believe in him. Archeologically, there is nothing like the trace of Jesus Christ according to archaeological facts and figures. In this sense, we mean that there is no physical evidence that one Jesus existed somewhere. There are no bones or any sign of him unlike the ark of Noah which was found years back somewhere around where the men of the olden days got wiped away. There is nothing of such pertaining to Jesus Christ. Although there were rumours that the white garment that was used to bury him is still there in his tomb and that the curtain that cut into two when he died is still died, they are not verifiable though. So, going by the knowledge of the archaeologists, it may be arguable that Jesus Christ never existed. One thing that is clear here is that it is widely known by all humans and even animals, that if someone hates another person, it is quite unheard of to hear them speak about each other. This is common sense. Josephus and Tacitus were two great enemies and opponents of Jesus Christ in his ministry; there was no slight possibility that they liked each other looking at their writings. But contrary to common sense and the expectation of everyone, they both wrote and confirmed that there was truly a Jesus Christ. There is much believability in this. Those enemies of Jesus Christ in his lifetime now wrote about him and we would not believe it? It is not done! Jesus truly existed, exists and will continue to exist. Jesus Christ (c. 6/4 BCE - c. 30 CE), also called Jesus son of Joseph, Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus of Galilee or simply Christ, was a Jewish religious leader who became a central figure in Christianity, regarded by most Christian branches as God himself. He is also considered an important prophet in Muslim tradition and the precursor of Prophet Muhammad.
Christ was not originally Jesus name. It was customary among ancient Jews to have only one name and add either the fathers name or the name of their place of origin. This is why during his life, Jesus was called sometimes Jesus of Nazareth and other times Jesus son of Joseph, which is supported by Christian sources (Luke 4.22; John 1.45; 6.42; Acts 10.38). The word Christ is not a name but a title derived for the Greek word christos, a term analogous to the Hebrew expression meshiah, The anointed one. Many Jews hoped that the former glory of Israel would be restored by a newly anointed son of King David, and they used the Messiah title to refer to this restorer. Early Christian literature sometimes combined the name of Jesus and his title using them together as Jesus name: Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus. The reason for this is that the early followers of Jesus teachings believed he was the Messiah
John the Baptist His name was divinely given. It was to be John (Lk. 1:13), which derives from a Hebrew term signifying Jehovah is gracious. He was known familiarly as the Baptist (bearing no relation to the modern sect), which simply means an immerser, one who administers the rite of immersion (see Mt. 3:1; 11:11; etc.). The Jewish historian Josephus even refers to John by this designation (Antiquities 18.5.2). The importance of John in the divine scheme of things probably is summed up best in the testimony of Jesus himself. Among them that are born of women there has not arisen a greater than John the Baptist (Mt. 11:11).
Johns Background and Birth John was born to aged Jewish parents, Zacharias and Elizabeth, who were of a priestly family (Lk. 1:5). Interestingly, Johns mother, Elizabeth, was related to Mary, the mother of Jesus (Lk. 1:36). This devout couple lived in the hill country of Judea (Lk. 1:39), perhaps Hebron, a priestly city of the region. Luke has a wonderful summary statement of the character of this Hebrew couple. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless (Lk. 1:6). On the occasion of Zacharias exercise of his duty of burning incense in the temple at Jerusalem (a once-in-a-lifetime event for a priest), the angel Gabriel appeared to the elderly gentleman, informing him that his prayers had been heard, and that his wife would bear a son (Lk. 1:13). One must necessarily infer that Zecharias had prayed for a son in earlier times, though Elizabeth was barren, and both of them now were advanced in age (Lk. 1:7). Clearly, Johns conception was miraculous. Incidentally, he was about six months older than Jesus (Lk. 1:26). It was foretold that this child would be filled with the Spirit of God, even from his mothers womb, and that he would be reared under the strict code of the Nazirite (cf. Num. 6:1-21), an indication of the solemnity of his role in preparing the way for the worlds Redeemer. The Scriptures are silent as to the deaths of Johns parents though legend has it that Zacharias was slain by Herod the Great, forcing Elizabeth to flee with her babe into the wilderness area of Judea. Luke does say of John: And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel (Lk. 1:80). This desert (or deserted) area stretches from Jerusalem and Bethlehem eastward some 20 miles down to the Jordan River and the Dead Sea. It is a barren region of rugged hills and valleys Isaiahs Prophecy of John the Baptist Seven centuries before the birth of Jesus, the prophet Isaiah spoke of the voice of one that crieth, indeed, of him who would prepare in the wilderness the way of Jehovah, and make level in the desert a highway for our God (Isa. 40:3). While many commentators find in this prediction an immediate application to Judahs return from the Babylonian captivity, the New Testament writers see in it an ultimate fulfillment in the preparatory work of John the Baptist (cf. Mt. 3:3; Mk. 1:2-3; Lk. 3:4-6; Jn. 1:23). As professor Webb has observed, with the coming of Jesus, these words sprang to life again with deeper and fuller meaning. He comments further: Although there was a partial return from exile in the years following 539 B.C., spiritually the exile continued until the Messiah came. Only he could solve the deep, underlying problem (164). John, therefore, was a key figure in the preparation of the Messiahs work.
Malachis Prophecy of John the Baptist In the concluding book of the Old Testament, Malachi, on behalf of God, declared: Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, who ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the Messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he comes, saith Jehovah (Mal. 3:1). First, note the distinction between the messenger who prepares the way, and the Messenger of the Covenant, for whom the way is prepared. The former is a reference to John, the latter is an allusion to Christ. Second, Malachis prophecy regarding the messenger is clearly parallel in principle to that of Isaiah (cited above), which, as we have shown, focused in the ministry of John. Third, the prophet later refers to this messenger as Elijah the prophet (Mal. 4:4-5). In the New Testament we have the testimony of the angel Gabriel (Lk. 1:16), and that of Christ himself (Mt. 11:12-15), that this Elijah to come was none other than John. Truly: There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John (Jn. 1:6).
John the Baptists Death Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great (who slaughtered the infants in attempting to eliminate baby Jesus) was a wicked and egotistical ruler. Known as the tetrarch (Lk. 3:19), he had inherited certain portions of his fathers kingdom in Galilee and in Peraea (west of the Jordan). The major mention of him in the New Testament is with reference to his imprisonment and execution of John the Baptist. That is a tragic way to make history. Herod was married to the daughter of Aretas IV, a Nabatean king (SE of the Jordan), but on a certain trip to Rome he stopped to visit his half-brother, Philip, and was smitten with Philips wife, Herodias. He influenced her to leave his brother, and then he himself divorced his own wife. The two, Antipas and Herodias, thus entered an unlawful live-together relationship (though it was accommodatively called marriage). It was inevitable, therefore, that John (who denounced sin), and Herod, (who reveled in it), would clash. Actually, Herod had some interest in Johns message. The ruler knew that the prophet was a righteous and holy man. He feared John. Josephus says that Antipas was afraid that Johns popularity might generate a revolt (Antiquities 18.5.2). But the ruler listened to him preach on more than one occasion. The record even indicates that he heard him gladly (Mk. 6:20). That kindly disposition was not entertained, however, by Mrs. Herod. She set herself against [John], and desired to kill him (Mk. 6:19), but she was impeded for a while by the restraint of the king. Herod did, however, at her behest, imprison John in his fortress at Machaerus, in that region east of the Dead Sea (Josephus, Antiquities 18.5.2). Herodias would have to wait for the ideal opportunity to effect the prophets murder. There is a curious passage in Matthews record that warrants some comment at this point. While John was in prison, he heard of the activity of Jesus. He sent some of his own disciples to the Lord, asking this question: Are you he that comes, or should we look for another? (Mt. 11:2-3). Jesus sent a return message. Go and tell John what you see and hear, i.e., my message and miracles. But why would John ask such a question? There are a couple of possibilities. First, John may have had some difficulty in harmonizing the kind and gracious ministry of Jesus with the earlier message that the prophet himself had preached regarding the role of the Coming One, namely that he would inflict a day of wrath (whose fan is in his hand ...). On the other hand, as with most other Hebrews, John may have entertained the notion that the Messiah would establish a political regime, rather similar to Davids kingdom of Old Testament fame. The Lords disciples certainly held to this erroneous view (cf. Acts 1:6). So when John heard more about the passive nature of Jesus ministry, i.e., its non-political, benevolent thrust, he may have felt compelled to voice his confusion. And so, would there be another Messiah who would function in a different capacity? The Lord assured the harbinger that his works authenticated his ministry as divine. Incidentally, this honest revelation of Johns doubt is powerful testimony to the integrity of the biblical record. No forger would have included such a detail. Nonetheless, the balance of Matthews narrative reinforces the integrity of John in spite of the prophets momentary confusion.
And so John remained in prison, and Herodias waited for her chance to get him. The queen had a daughter, Salome, by her previous husband (Josephus, Antiquities, 18.5.4). Accordingly, on a convenient day, Herods birthday, a party was arranged, and the wicked queen sacrificed the virtue of her daughter, who may have been as vile as her mother. At any rate, the temptress danced. Scholars suggest that there is some historical evidence to indicate that the dance likely was punctuated with dramatic and sensual movements and postures (Johnston, I.858). Herod was so pleased that he offered the damsel whatever she wanted up to the half of his kingdom. Pleased indeed! She immediately consulted with her corrupt mother, and the request was made: Give me the head of John the Baptizer on a platter (Mk. 6:25). Though the king was exceeding sorry at this vicious petition, his sorrow was not great enough to overcome his pathetic weakness. Immediately Herod dispatched John into eternity, having his head brought into the festivities as a bloody souvenir. John thus ended his relatively brief life upon this earth. But what an impact he made. It may be reverently said that the cause of Jesus would not have enjoyed the immediate success it did but for the role of John the Baptist in the divine plan of redemption. And while John was truly a great ingredient in the heavenly plan, let us remember this: He that is but little in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John (Mt. 11:11). What a tribute this is to the value of our citizenship in Christs kingdom.
THE LINK AMONG JOHN THE BAPTIST, JESUS AND HEROD ANTIPAS According to almost everyone, one of the most certain things that we can know about the historical Jesus is that he was a disciple of John the Baptist. This is bedrock stuff and anyone familiar with Jesus research will know all about why. As it happens, I am inclined to agree with this; I suspect that Jesus did indeed have an association with John the Baptist and that it was important, in some way, in his development. But how important was John the Baptist, as an influence on Jesus, in comparison to other people? We know about the link between the two men because John the Baptist was himself famous Josephus devotes more time to him than he does to Jesus. So the tradition remembers and underlines the association between the two men. But our influences are seldom solely other famous people. Perhaps the major influence on Jesus was his grandfather, whose fascination with Daniel 7 informed Jesus apocalyptic mindset. Or perhaps it was Rabbi Matia in Capernaum who used to enjoy telling parables drawn from local agriculture. Or perhaps it was that crazy wandering Galilean exorcist Lebbaeus who used to talk about casting out demons by the Spirit of God. The fact is that we just dont know. We cant know. Our knowledge about the historical Jesus is always and inevitably partial. If we take the quest of the historical Jesus seriously as an aspect of ancient history, we have to admit that many of the key pieces must be missing. The problem is that we are in denial. We simply do not want to admit that we do not have all the data we need to paint a complete picture of the historical Jesus Both [John and Jesus] are depicted as preaching similar eschatological messages of judgment and repentance and as demanding similarly high standards of righteousness ; in the last days of his life, Jesus is shown as justifying his dramatic action in the temple by reference of Johns authority to initiate his baptism (Mark 11.27-33 and parallels). (Justin Meggitt Cambridge) The evangelists would hardly have invented the idea that Jesus was himself baptised by John the Baptists, since it is clear from Matthews account that Christians were disturbed by the idea that a sinless Christ underwent a baptism of repentance. So the story itself is probably authentic. Antipas relative absence from the account of Jesus public ministry in Galilee is noteworthy. The fact that Jesus mentor, John the Baptist, was murdered by him because of the threat of social unrest, might have applied to Jesus also, one would have imagined. Yet it is only Luke who suggests a direct threat from Antipas in Galilee and he subsequently involves him, if only perfunctorily, in the trial in Jerusalem. (Sean Freyne Professor Trinity College Dublin, visiting Professor Harvard) [re John the Baptist] Herod had him put to death, though he was a good man, and had exhorted the Jews to lead righteous lives, to practice justice toward their fellow and piety toward God, and so doing to join in baptism. When others too joined the crowd around him, because they were aroused to the highest degree by his words, Herod became alarmed. Eloquence that had so great an effect on people might lead to some form of sedition, for they looked as if they would be guided by John in everything they did. Herod decided that it would be much better to strike first and be rid of him before his work led to an uprising. (Josephus AJ 18.116-119)
Jesus may well have emerged from the circle of Johns followers. In several respects Jesus and John were similar: they were both perceived to be prophets; they both proclaimed Gods coming kingly rule; they both attracted large crowds Both John and Jesus were seen as prophets. Both called for radical repentance. Both attracted crowed. Both had an inner group of disciples. Both taught their disciples to pray in a distinctive fashion. Jesus links himself closely with John: John and Jess are both sent by God Gods wisdom is proved right by both her children (the original Q wording of Matt.11:19 = Luke 7:35). Both Jesus and John opposed the temple establishment.the comments of Josephus suggest that John and his followers were seen as a possible threat to political stability Jesus may have been put to death for similar reasons, at least as far as the Romans were concerned. Unlike John Jesus was not an ascetic Unlike John Jesus stopped baptising. Unlike John, who remained in the wilderness, Jesus travelled from village to village Unlike John, who performed no miracle (John 10:41), Jesus performed numerous healings and exorcism. Unlike John Jesus shared table fellowship with tax collector sand sinners. Unlike John, whose prophetic preaching focussed on the future, Jesus announced that Gods kingly rule was breaking into the present now, through his own actions and words Finally it should be noted that despite John the Baptists importance in the Gospels and Acts, he is not significant for all New Testament authors. Paul, for example makes no reference to him.
INTRODUCTION. Many scholars have made the assertions that Jesus Christ was baptized by John the Baptist, and John the Baptist was executed by Antipas, while Antipas was also involved in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Indeed, some have stated that the above assertions are one of the most sure facts we can know about Jesus, John the Baptist and Antipas. It is surprising, however, that few establishment has been made to link the three characters (Jesus, John and Antipas) together. The purpose of this essay is in twofold: First, is to unfold the relationship among John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and Antipas by revealing the significant events that brought them together. Second, is to establish the prominent link binding all three characters together.
HEROD ANTIPAS Herod Antipas: Jewish leader, ruler of Galilee and Peraea between 4 BCE and 39 CE. Herod Antipas - a nickname derived from Antipatros - was the son of the Jewish king Herod the Great and his wife Malthace; he was full brother of Archelaus and a half brother of Philip. With his brothers Archelaus and Philip, he was educated in Rome, a kind of honorable detention to guarantee his father's loyalty. In his father's testament, Herod Antipas was appointed tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea (the east bank of the Jordan). The Roman emperor Augustus confirmed this decision and Antipas' reign could begin (4 BCE). In 17 CE, he founded a new capital, which he called Tiberias, to honor the Roman emperor, Tiberius. Unfortunately, it was discovered that he was building this city on top of an old Jewish graveyard. This caused great unrest among his subjects. For a long time, no pious Jew would enter Tiberias, which was populated by Greeks and Romans. However, Herod Antipas was a Jewish leader, or liked to pose as a Jewish leader. For example, he is known to have celebrated Passover and Sukkoth in Jerusalem. Unfortunately, his subjects were not convinced by their leader's piety. Jesus of Nazareth compared him to a fox, an animal that was ritually unclean. He was first married to Phasaelis, a daughter of Aretas IV, an Arabian leader. Later, he divorced her in order to marry Herodias. She had been the wife of Herod Antipas' half-brother (who was also called Herod). Marriage to the ex-wife of one's brother was not uncommon, but Herodias was also the daughter of another half-brother, Aristobulus. Marriage to one's niece was also permitted, but marriage to a woman who was both one's sister-in-law and one's niece was unusual.
According to the Gospel of Mark, John the Baptist criticized the king and was consequently killed. Flavius Josephus writes that Herod Antipas' subjects were convinced that the war with Aretas that broke out in 36, and the Arabian successes during this war, were a divine punishment (text). The author of the Gospel, however, offers a different explanation: Antipas' daughter Salome had been dancing in public, much to the delight of her father, who asked her to ask a present, and was shocked to learn that she demanded the head of the Baptist. The readers of this story must have understood that Antipas a terribly wicked man, because no loving father would ask his daughter to dance in front of strangers.
In 37, Herodias' brother Agrippa became king of the realms of Philip. She thought that the royal title ought to be given to her husband and made a plan to make Herod Antipas king. The emperor did not agree and exiled the tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea to Lyon in Gaul.
THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS
ReplyDeleteIf we are to talk about the existence of Jesus looking at it from the spiritual and contemporary angle, then, it would be pointless and futile to argue that Jesus Christ existed or not. The Christians believe (blindly) that Jesus Christ existed and still exists in that he was crucified for the sins of the world but rose on the third day and went to heaven to live with his father, God, who is believed to have sent him. Thus, there is no argument that can hold against the fact that Jesus Christ existed and exists and to some reasonable extent, will continue to exist, although not physically but in the minds and worlds of those that believe in him.
Archeologically, there is nothing like the trace of Jesus Christ according to archaeological facts and figures. In this sense, we mean that there is no physical evidence that one Jesus existed somewhere. There are no bones or any sign of him unlike the ark of Noah which was found years back somewhere around where the men of the olden days got wiped away. There is nothing of such pertaining to Jesus Christ. Although there were rumours that the white garment that was used to bury him is still there in his tomb and that the curtain that cut into two when he died is still died, they are not verifiable though. So, going by the knowledge of the archaeologists, it may be arguable that Jesus Christ never existed.
One thing that is clear here is that it is widely known by all humans and even animals, that if someone hates another person, it is quite unheard of to hear them speak about each other. This is common sense. Josephus and Tacitus were two great enemies and opponents of Jesus Christ in his ministry; there was no slight possibility that they liked each other looking at their writings. But contrary to common sense and the expectation of everyone, they both wrote and confirmed that there was truly a Jesus Christ. There is much believability in this. Those enemies of Jesus Christ in his lifetime now wrote about him and we would not believe it? It is not done! Jesus truly existed, exists and will continue to exist.
Jesus Christ (c. 6/4 BCE - c. 30 CE), also called Jesus son of Joseph, Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus of Galilee or simply Christ, was a Jewish religious leader who became a central figure in Christianity, regarded by most Christian branches as God himself. He is also considered an important prophet in Muslim tradition and the precursor of Prophet Muhammad.
Christ was not originally Jesus name. It was customary among ancient Jews to have only one name and add either the fathers name or the name of their place of origin. This is why during his life, Jesus was called sometimes Jesus of Nazareth and other times Jesus son of Joseph, which is supported by Christian sources (Luke 4.22; John 1.45; 6.42; Acts 10.38). The word Christ is not a name but a title derived for the Greek word christos, a term analogous to the Hebrew expression meshiah, The anointed one. Many Jews hoped that the former glory of Israel would be restored by a newly anointed son of King David, and they used the Messiah title to refer to this restorer. Early Christian literature sometimes combined the name of Jesus and his title using them together as Jesus name: Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus. The reason for this is that the early followers of Jesus teachings believed he was the Messiah
John the Baptist
His name was divinely given. It was to be John (Lk. 1:13), which derives from a Hebrew term signifying Jehovah is gracious.
He was known familiarly as the Baptist (bearing no relation to the modern sect), which simply means an immerser, one who administers the rite of immersion (see Mt. 3:1; 11:11; etc.). The Jewish historian Josephus even refers to John by this designation (Antiquities 18.5.2).
The importance of John in the divine scheme of things probably is summed up best in the testimony of Jesus himself. Among them that are born of women there has not arisen a greater than John the Baptist (Mt. 11:11).
Johns Background and Birth
ReplyDeleteJohn was born to aged Jewish parents, Zacharias and Elizabeth, who were of a priestly family (Lk. 1:5). Interestingly, Johns mother, Elizabeth, was related to Mary, the mother of Jesus (Lk. 1:36). This devout couple lived in the hill country of Judea (Lk. 1:39), perhaps Hebron, a priestly city of the region.
Luke has a wonderful summary statement of the character of this Hebrew couple.
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless (Lk. 1:6).
On the occasion of Zacharias exercise of his duty of burning incense in the temple at Jerusalem (a once-in-a-lifetime event for a priest), the angel Gabriel appeared to the elderly gentleman, informing him that his prayers had been heard, and that his wife would bear a son (Lk. 1:13).
One must necessarily infer that Zecharias had prayed for a son in earlier times, though Elizabeth was barren, and both of them now were advanced in age (Lk. 1:7). Clearly, Johns conception was miraculous. Incidentally, he was about six months older than Jesus (Lk. 1:26).
It was foretold that this child would be filled with the Spirit of God, even from his mothers womb, and that he would be reared under the strict code of the Nazirite (cf. Num. 6:1-21), an indication of the solemnity of his role in preparing the way for the worlds Redeemer.
The Scriptures are silent as to the deaths of Johns parents though legend has it that Zacharias was slain by Herod the Great, forcing Elizabeth to flee with her babe into the wilderness area of Judea.
Luke does say of John:
And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel (Lk. 1:80).
This desert (or deserted) area stretches from Jerusalem and Bethlehem eastward some 20 miles down to the Jordan River and the Dead Sea. It is a barren region of rugged hills and valleys
Isaiahs Prophecy of John the Baptist
Seven centuries before the birth of Jesus, the prophet Isaiah spoke of the voice of one that crieth, indeed, of him who would prepare in the wilderness the way of Jehovah, and make level in the desert a highway for our God (Isa. 40:3).
While many commentators find in this prediction an immediate application to Judahs return from the Babylonian captivity, the New Testament writers see in it an ultimate fulfillment in the preparatory work of John the Baptist (cf. Mt. 3:3; Mk. 1:2-3; Lk. 3:4-6; Jn. 1:23).
As professor Webb has observed, with the coming of Jesus, these words sprang to life again with deeper and fuller meaning. He comments further:
Although there was a partial return from exile in the years following 539 B.C., spiritually the exile continued until the Messiah came. Only he could solve the deep, underlying problem (164).
John, therefore, was a key figure in the preparation of the Messiahs work.
Malachis Prophecy of John the Baptist
In the concluding book of the Old Testament, Malachi, on behalf of God, declared:
Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, who ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the Messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he comes, saith Jehovah (Mal. 3:1).
First, note the distinction between the messenger who prepares the way, and the Messenger of the Covenant, for whom the way is prepared. The former is a reference to John, the latter is an allusion to Christ.
Second, Malachis prophecy regarding the messenger is clearly parallel in principle to that of Isaiah (cited above), which, as we have shown, focused in the ministry of John.
Third, the prophet later refers to this messenger as Elijah the prophet (Mal. 4:4-5). In the New Testament we have the testimony of the angel Gabriel (Lk. 1:16), and that of Christ himself (Mt. 11:12-15), that this Elijah to come was none other than John.
Truly: There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John (Jn. 1:6).
John the Baptists Death
ReplyDeleteHerod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great (who slaughtered the infants in attempting to eliminate baby Jesus) was a wicked and egotistical ruler.
Known as the tetrarch (Lk. 3:19), he had inherited certain portions of his fathers kingdom in Galilee and in Peraea (west of the Jordan). The major mention of him in the New Testament is with reference to his imprisonment and execution of John the Baptist. That is a tragic way to make history.
Herod was married to the daughter of Aretas IV, a Nabatean king (SE of the Jordan), but on a certain trip to Rome he stopped to visit his half-brother, Philip, and was smitten with Philips wife, Herodias. He influenced her to leave his brother, and then he himself divorced his own wife.
The two, Antipas and Herodias, thus entered an unlawful live-together relationship (though it was accommodatively called marriage). It was inevitable, therefore, that John (who denounced sin), and Herod, (who reveled in it), would clash.
Actually, Herod had some interest in Johns message. The ruler knew that the prophet was a righteous and holy man. He feared John. Josephus says that Antipas was afraid that Johns popularity might generate a revolt (Antiquities 18.5.2). But the ruler listened to him preach on more than one occasion. The record even indicates that he heard him gladly (Mk. 6:20). That kindly disposition was not entertained, however, by Mrs. Herod. She set herself against [John], and desired to kill him (Mk. 6:19), but she was impeded for a while by the restraint of the king.
Herod did, however, at her behest, imprison John in his fortress at Machaerus, in that region east of the Dead Sea (Josephus, Antiquities 18.5.2). Herodias would have to wait for the ideal opportunity to effect the prophets murder.
There is a curious passage in Matthews record that warrants some comment at this point. While John was in prison, he heard of the activity of Jesus. He sent some of his own disciples to the Lord, asking this question: Are you he that comes, or should we look for another? (Mt. 11:2-3).
Jesus sent a return message. Go and tell John what you see and hear, i.e., my message and miracles.
But why would John ask such a question? There are a couple of possibilities.
First, John may have had some difficulty in harmonizing the kind and gracious ministry of Jesus with the earlier message that the prophet himself had preached regarding the role of the Coming One, namely that he would inflict a day of wrath (whose fan is in his hand ...).
On the other hand, as with most other Hebrews, John may have entertained the notion that the Messiah would establish a political regime, rather similar to Davids kingdom of Old Testament fame. The Lords disciples certainly held to this erroneous view (cf. Acts 1:6).
So when John heard more about the passive nature of Jesus ministry, i.e., its non-political, benevolent thrust, he may have felt compelled to voice his confusion. And so, would there be another Messiah who would function in a different capacity? The Lord assured the harbinger that his works authenticated his ministry as divine.
Incidentally, this honest revelation of Johns doubt is powerful testimony to the integrity of the biblical record. No forger would have included such a detail. Nonetheless, the balance of Matthews narrative reinforces the integrity of John in spite of the prophets momentary confusion.
And so John remained in prison, and Herodias waited for her chance to get him. The queen had a daughter, Salome, by her previous husband (Josephus, Antiquities, 18.5.4). Accordingly, on a convenient day, Herods birthday, a party was arranged, and the wicked queen sacrificed the virtue of her daughter, who may have been as vile as her mother. At any rate, the temptress danced. Scholars suggest that there is some historical evidence to indicate that the dance likely was punctuated with dramatic and sensual movements and postures (Johnston, I.858). Herod was so pleased that he offered the damsel whatever she wanted up to the half of his kingdom. Pleased indeed! She immediately consulted with her corrupt mother, and the request was made: Give me the head of John the Baptizer on a platter (Mk. 6:25).
ReplyDeleteThough the king was exceeding sorry at this vicious petition, his sorrow was not great enough to overcome his pathetic weakness. Immediately Herod dispatched John into eternity, having his head brought into the festivities as a bloody souvenir.
John thus ended his relatively brief life upon this earth. But what an impact he made. It may be reverently said that the cause of Jesus would not have enjoyed the immediate success it did but for the role of John the Baptist in the divine plan of redemption. And while John was truly a great ingredient in the heavenly plan, let us remember this: He that is but little in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John (Mt. 11:11). What a tribute this is to the value of our citizenship in Christs kingdom.
THE LINK AMONG JOHN THE BAPTIST, JESUS AND HEROD ANTIPAS
ReplyDeleteAccording to almost everyone, one of the most certain things that we can know about the historical Jesus is that he was a disciple of John the Baptist. This is bedrock stuff and anyone familiar with Jesus research will know all about why. As it happens, I am inclined to agree with this; I suspect that Jesus did indeed have an association with John the Baptist and that it was important, in some way, in his development. But how important was John the Baptist, as an influence on Jesus, in comparison to other people? We know about the link between the two men because John the Baptist was himself famous Josephus devotes more time to him than he does to Jesus. So the tradition remembers and underlines the association between the two men. But our influences are seldom solely other famous people. Perhaps the major influence on Jesus was his grandfather, whose fascination with Daniel 7 informed Jesus apocalyptic mindset. Or perhaps it was Rabbi Matia in Capernaum who used to enjoy telling parables drawn from local agriculture. Or perhaps it was that crazy wandering Galilean exorcist Lebbaeus who used to talk about casting out demons by the Spirit of God. The fact is that we just dont know. We cant know. Our knowledge about the historical Jesus is always and inevitably partial. If we take the quest of the historical Jesus seriously as an aspect of ancient history, we have to admit that many of the key pieces must be missing. The problem is that we are in denial. We simply do not want to admit that we do not have all the data we need to paint a complete picture of the historical Jesus Both [John and Jesus] are depicted as preaching similar eschatological messages of judgment and repentance and as demanding similarly high standards of righteousness ; in the last days of his life, Jesus is shown as justifying his dramatic action in the temple by reference of Johns authority to initiate his baptism (Mark 11.27-33 and parallels). (Justin Meggitt Cambridge)
The evangelists would hardly have invented the idea that Jesus was himself baptised by John the Baptists, since it is clear from Matthews account that Christians were disturbed by the idea that a sinless Christ underwent a baptism of repentance. So the story itself is probably authentic.
Antipas relative absence from the account of Jesus public ministry in Galilee is noteworthy. The fact that Jesus mentor, John the Baptist, was murdered by him because of the threat of social unrest, might have applied to Jesus also, one would have imagined. Yet it is only Luke who suggests a direct threat from Antipas in Galilee and he subsequently involves him, if only perfunctorily, in the trial in Jerusalem. (Sean Freyne Professor Trinity College Dublin, visiting Professor Harvard)
[re John the Baptist] Herod had him put to death, though he was a good man, and had exhorted the Jews to lead righteous lives, to practice justice toward their fellow and piety toward God, and so doing to join in baptism. When others too joined the crowd around him, because they were aroused to the highest degree by his words, Herod became alarmed. Eloquence that had so great an effect on people might lead to some form of sedition, for they looked as if they would be guided by John in everything they did. Herod decided that it would be much better to strike first and be rid of him before his work led to an uprising. (Josephus AJ 18.116-119)
Jesus may well have emerged from the circle of Johns followers. In several respects Jesus and John were similar: they were both perceived to be prophets; they both proclaimed Gods coming kingly rule; they both attracted large crowds Both John and Jesus were seen as prophets. Both called for radical repentance. Both attracted crowed. Both had an inner group of disciples. Both taught their disciples to pray in a distinctive fashion. Jesus links himself closely with John: John and Jess are both sent by God Gods wisdom is proved right by both her children (the original Q wording of Matt.11:19 = Luke 7:35). Both Jesus and John opposed the temple establishment.the comments of Josephus suggest that John and his followers were seen as a possible threat to political stability Jesus may have been put to death for similar reasons, at least as far as the Romans were concerned. Unlike John Jesus was not an ascetic Unlike John Jesus stopped baptising. Unlike John, who remained in the wilderness, Jesus travelled from village to village Unlike John, who performed no miracle (John 10:41), Jesus performed numerous healings and exorcism. Unlike John Jesus shared table fellowship with tax collector sand sinners. Unlike John, whose prophetic preaching focussed on the future, Jesus announced that Gods kingly rule was breaking into the present now, through his own actions and words
ReplyDeleteFinally it should be noted that despite John the Baptists importance in the Gospels and Acts, he is not significant for all New Testament authors. Paul, for example makes no reference to him.
INTRODUCTION.
ReplyDeleteMany scholars have made the assertions that Jesus Christ was baptized by John the Baptist, and John the Baptist was executed by Antipas, while Antipas was also involved in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Indeed, some have stated that the above assertions are one of the most sure facts we can know about Jesus, John the Baptist and Antipas. It is surprising, however, that few establishment has been made to link the three characters (Jesus, John and Antipas) together. The purpose of this essay is in twofold: First, is to unfold the relationship among John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and Antipas by revealing the significant events that brought them together. Second, is to establish the prominent link binding all three characters together.
HEROD ANTIPAS
Herod Antipas: Jewish leader, ruler of Galilee and Peraea between 4 BCE and 39 CE.
Herod Antipas - a nickname derived from Antipatros - was the son of the Jewish king Herod the Great and his wife Malthace; he was full brother of Archelaus and a half brother of Philip. With his brothers Archelaus and Philip, he was educated in Rome, a kind of honorable detention to guarantee his father's loyalty. In his father's testament, Herod Antipas was appointed tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea (the east bank of the Jordan). The Roman emperor Augustus confirmed this decision and Antipas' reign could begin (4 BCE). In 17 CE, he founded a new capital, which he called Tiberias, to honor the Roman emperor, Tiberius. Unfortunately, it was discovered that he was building this city on top of an old Jewish graveyard. This caused great unrest among his subjects. For a long time, no pious Jew would enter Tiberias, which was populated by Greeks and Romans.
However, Herod Antipas was a Jewish leader, or liked to pose as a Jewish leader. For example, he is known to have celebrated Passover and Sukkoth in Jerusalem. Unfortunately, his subjects were not convinced by their leader's piety. Jesus of Nazareth compared him to a fox, an animal that was ritually unclean. He was first married to Phasaelis, a daughter of Aretas IV, an Arabian leader. Later, he divorced her in order to marry Herodias. She had been the wife of Herod Antipas' half-brother (who was also called Herod). Marriage to the ex-wife of one's brother was not uncommon, but Herodias was also the daughter of another half-brother, Aristobulus. Marriage to one's niece was also permitted, but marriage to a woman who was both one's sister-in-law and one's niece was unusual.
According to the Gospel of Mark, John the Baptist criticized the king and was consequently killed. Flavius Josephus writes that Herod Antipas' subjects were convinced that the war with Aretas that broke out in 36, and the Arabian successes during this war, were a divine punishment (text). The author of the Gospel, however, offers a different explanation: Antipas' daughter Salome had been dancing in public, much to the delight of her father, who asked her to ask a present, and was shocked to learn that she demanded the head of the Baptist. The readers of this story must have understood that Antipas a terribly wicked man, because no loving father would ask his daughter to dance in front of strangers.
In 37, Herodias' brother Agrippa became king of the realms of Philip. She thought that the royal title ought to be given to her husband and made a plan to make Herod Antipas king. The emperor did not agree and exiled the tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea to Lyon in Gaul.
This comment should be at the beginning ma. Sorry for the mistake ma.
DeleteThat's ok. However, do post the references. The work is lengthy and interesting.
ReplyDeleteThank you.