originally one of John the Baptist's followers. Does anyone have any info. on this?
2006-10-19 10:21:27 · 24 answers · asked by strpenta 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Scholars have the need to sound smart on issues about which there is little knowledge. There exists no record that Christ had contact with John the Baptist prior to His baptism (even though people might naturally imply such by the fact that they were cousins), but I bet that these academians are simply speculating that the fact that John the Baptist was chosen to baptize Jesus implies that Christ was one of his disciples. This thought might be appealing to them if they are interested in making it seem like Christ is less than John the Baptist. Atheists have this habit of trying to convince people that there is no God by rationalizing away His stature and importance.
Verily, John the Baptist said, "I have need of being baptized of thee [Jesus]. Wherefore comest thou unto me and asketh me to baptize thee." Christ replied, "Let it be so that the prophesies might be fulfilled.." I'm paraphrasing from memory here, but Christ goes on to cite the Old Testament prophesy. The historians obviously missed this part of the New Testament record on the subject of Christ's baptism by John the Baptist.
2006-10-19 10:35:00 · answer #1 · answered by Andy 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I've read the book. It's pretty lame. Without any evidence this writer leaps to the conclusion that John was jealous of Jesus and even hated him.
Where does that come from?
Jesus was related to John the Baptist. He loved John the Baptist. I'm certain they were close. But he was not one of John the Baptist's followers.
2006-10-19 10:26:16 · answer #2 · answered by Max Marie, OFS 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends upon how you define the word "follower". Clearly, according to the New Testament, Jesus went out to the desert (like many other people of the time) to be baptized by John, who was a popular evangelist at the time. And his baptism by John seems to mark the beginning of Jesus' messianic career (complete with a voice from heaven telling him that he is the son of God).
But his teachings also differed from John's. John, for instance, was an ascetic and a virtual hermit, who denied himself the pleasures of food and drink for religious reasons. Jesus did not, he was social, and was even criticized by some for his enjoyment of food & drink. Luke 7:33 has Jesus replying to his critics: "For John the Baptist came neither eating food nor drinking wine, and you said, 'He is possessed by a demon.' The Son of Man came eating and drinking and you said, 'Look, he is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' "
2006-10-19 10:30:29 · answer #3 · answered by george 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were contemporaries. John the Baptist played a very important role in the Gospel message. Read about it in the Bible rather than just watch a History channel show and you will find out so much more.
2006-10-19 10:29:44 · answer #4 · answered by creationrocks2006 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
pay attention to the scripture where John the Baptist said to Jesus, I have need to be baptised by you, and that he John was unworthy to loosen the shoes of Jesus. Sounds Like John was a follower of Jesus to me. The History channel should not be so free with such things. They seem to be trying to prove religion wrong. They are wrong.
2006-10-19 10:27:13 · answer #5 · answered by LatterDaySaint and loving it 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My only info would be to not trust the History Channels Scholars. Everything I've ever heard them say is contrary to anything even remotely biblical. I'd suggest you read the gospels and the account of John the baptist and how he first met and baptized Jesus...
2006-10-19 10:23:48 · answer #6 · answered by mamatoshreksboys 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
There somewhat is not any thank you to comprehend previous a shadow of a doubt that Jesus existed. lower back in that component era information weren't continually stored and preserved that would desire to fulfill the climate of present day learn. people make certain directly to make certain information of Jesus that would now no longer completely from the Christian bible. There are a handful of vauge references in ingredients that come some years after the activities, and maximum of doubt them as actual. Even *if* we've Jesus as a historic guy or woman, that does now no longer propose that Jesus replaced into the son of God via certainty the bible claims. the reason that Christians have plenty ideas-blowing on the existance of Jesus via certainty the son of God, the Savior, and so on. is becuase the bible and the accomplished faith isn't something without it. To counter, i could argue that in spite of if Guatma Siddheartha had *now no longer* been a historic guy or woman, now no longer to point the Buddha via certainty the Sutras declare that there continues to be exact worth and price in being a Buddhist. If my instructor is relatively a metaphor created as an party a component... then I nonetheless have greater effective fee in this faith than i modern-day in my entire time as a Christian.
2016-11-23 19:52:24 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He did follow after John the Baptist but John was the forerunner to announce the coming of the "One who follows".... That was the entire extent of the events concerning Johns mention within scripture. He was the one who baptized many including the Christ.
2006-10-19 10:25:30 · answer #8 · answered by mrcricket1932 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nothing scholarly about that. The Gospel says John the Baptist baptized Jesus, then told people to follow Jesus.
John said "He must increase and I must decrease".
The whole point of John's ministry was to point people to Jesus.
2006-10-19 10:28:33 · answer #9 · answered by Mr Ed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Never. John the baptist said that he need to be baptized by you and yet you come to me. They were cousins John grew up knowing who Jesus. The so called scholors may have evidence for something but I bet they are missinterpreting it. it is highly probably that some of Jesus's followers were folowers of John
2006-10-19 10:27:32 · answer #10 · answered by dreson k 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋