The Life of Jesus Part 10
[Footnote 7: I have treated of this at greater length in the _Journal Asiatique_, Nov.-Dec., 1853, and August-Sept., 1855. It is remarkable that the Elchasates, a Sabian or Baptist sect, inhabited the same district as the Essenes, (the eastern bank of the Dead Sea), and were confounded with them (Epiph., _Adv. Haer._, xix. 1, 2, 4, x.x.x. 16, 17, liii. 1, 2; _Philosophumena_, IX. iii. 15, 16, X. xx. 29).]
[Footnote 8: See the remarks of Epiphanius on the Essenes, Hemero-Baptists, Nazarites, Ossenes, Nazarenes, Ebionites, Samsonites (_Adv. Haer._, books i. and ii.), and those of the author of the _Philosophumena_ on the Elchasates (books ix. and x).]
[Footnote 9: Epiph., _Adv. Haer._, xix., x.x.x., liii.]
This practice was baptism, or total immersion. Ablutions were already familiar to the Jews, as they were to all religions of the East.[1]
The Essenes had given them a peculiar extension.[2] Baptism had become an ordinary ceremony on the introduction of proselytes into the bosom of the Jewish religion, a sort of initiatory rite.[3] Never before John the Baptist, however, had either this importance or this form been given to immersion. John had fixed the scene of his activity in that part of the desert of Judea which is in the neighborhood of the Dead Sea.[4] At the periods when he administered baptism, he went to the banks of the Jordan,[5] either to Bethany or Bethabara,[6] upon the eastern sh.o.r.e, probably opposite to Jericho, or to a place called _aenon_, or "the Fountains,"[7] near Salim, where there was much water.[8] Considerable crowds, especially of the tribe of Judah, hastened to him to be baptized.[9] In a few months he thus became one of the most influential men in Judea, and acquired much importance in the general estimation.
[Footnote 1: Mark vii. 4; Jos., _Ant._, XVIII. v. 2; Justin, _Dial.
c.u.m Tryph._, 17, 29, 80; Epiph., _Adv. Haer._, xvii.]
[Footnote 2: Jos., _B.J._, II. viii. 5, 7, 9, 13.]
[Footnote 3: Mishnah, _Pesachim_, viii. 8; Talmud of Babylon, _Jebamoth_, 46 _b_; _Kerithuth_, 9 _a_; _Aboda Zara_, 57 _a_; _Ma.s.seket Gerim_ (edit. Kirchheim, 1851), pp. 38-40.]
[Footnote 4: Matt. iii. 1; Mark i. 4.]
[Footnote 5: Luke iii. 3.]
[Footnote 6: John i. 28, iii. 26. All the ma.n.u.scripts say _Bethany_; but, as no one knows of Bethany in these places, Origen (_Comment. in Joann._, vi. 24) has proposed to subst.i.tute _Bethabara_, and his correction has been generally accepted. The two words have, moreover, a.n.a.logous meanings, and seem to indicate a place where there was a ferry-boat to cross the river.]
[Footnote 7: _aenon_ is the Chaldean plural, _aenawan_, "fountains."]
[Footnote 8: John iii. 23. The locality of this place is doubtful. The circ.u.mstance mentioned by the evangelist would lead us to believe that it was not very near the Jordan. Nevertheless, the synoptics are agreed in placing the scene of the baptisms of John on the banks of that river (Matt. iii. 6; Mark i. 5; Luke iii. 3). The comparison of verses 22 and 23 of chap. iii. of John, and of verses 3 and 4 of chap.
iv. of the same Gospel, would lead us to believe that Salim was in Judea, and consequently in the oasis of Jericho, near the mouth of the Jordan; since it would be difficult to find in any other district of the tribe of Judah a single natural basin in which any one might be totally immersed. Saint Jerome wishes to place Salim much more north, near Beth-Schean or Scythopolis. But Robinson (_Bibl. Res._, iii. 333) has not been able to find anything at these places that justifies this a.s.sertion.]
[Footnote 9: Mark i. 5; Josephus, _Ant._, XVIII. v. 2.]
The people took him for a prophet,[1] and many imagined that it was Elias who had risen again.[2] The belief in these resurrections was widely spread;[3] it was thought that G.o.d would raise from the tomb certain of the ancient prophets to guide Israel toward its final destiny. Others held John to be the Messiah himself, although he made no such pretensions.[4] The priests and the scribes, opposed to this revival of prophetism, and the constant enemies of enthusiasts, despised him. But the popularity of the Baptist awed them, and they dared not speak against him.[5] It was a victory which the ideas of the mult.i.tude gained over the priestly aristocracy. When the chief priests were compelled to declare themselves explicitly on this point, they were considerably embarra.s.sed.[6]
[Footnote 1: Matt. xiv. 5, xxi. 26.]
[Footnote 2: Matt. vi. 14; Mark vi. 15; John i. 21.]
[Footnote 3: Matt. xiv. 2; Luke ix. 8.]
[Footnote 4: Luke iii. 15, and following; John i. 20.]
[Footnote 5: Matt. xxi. 25, and following; Luke vii. 30.]
[Footnote 6: Matt., _loc. cit._]
Baptism with John was only a sign destined to make an impression, and to prepare the minds of the people for some great movement. No doubt he was possessed in the highest degree with the Messianic hope, and that his princ.i.p.al action was in accordance with it. "Repent," said he, "for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."[1] He announced a "great wrath," that is to say, terrible calamities which should come to pa.s.s,[2] and declared that the axe was already laid at the root of the tree, and that the tree would soon be cast into the fire. He represented the Messiah with a fan in his hand, collecting the good wheat and burning the chaff. Repentance, of which baptism was the type, the giving of alms, the reformation of habits,[3] were in John's view the great means of preparation for the coming events, though we do not know exactly in what light he conceived them. It is, however, certain that he preached with much power against the same adversaries as Jesus, against rich priests, the Pharisees, the doctors, in one word, against official Judaism; and that, like Jesus, he was specially welcomed by the despised cla.s.ses.[4] He made no account of the t.i.tle "son of Abraham," and said that G.o.d could raise up sons unto Abraham from the stones of the road.[5] It does not seem that he possessed even the germ of the great idea which led to the triumph of Jesus, the idea of a pure religion; but he powerfully served this idea in subst.i.tuting a private rite for the legal ceremonies which required priests, as the Flagellants of the Middle Ages were the precursors of the Reformation, by depriving the official clergy of the monopoly of the sacraments and of absolution. The general tone of his sermons was stern and severe. The expressions which he used against his adversaries appear to have been most violent.[6] It was a harsh and continuous invective. It is probable that he did not remain quite a stranger to politics. Josephus, who, through his teacher Banou, was brought into almost direct connection with John, suggests as much by his ambiguous words,[7] and the catastrophe which put an end to John's life seems to imply this. His disciples led a very austere life,[8]
fasted often, and affected a sad and anxious demeanor. We have at times glimpses of communism--the rich man being ordered to share all that he had with the poor.[9] The poor man appeared as the one who would be specially benefited by the kingdom of G.o.d.
[Footnote 1: Matt. iii. 2.]
[Footnote 2: Matt. iii. 7.]
[Footnote 3: Luke iii. 11-14; Josephus, _Ant._ XVIII. v. 2.]
[Footnote 4: Matt. xxi. 32; Luke iii. 12-14.]
[Footnote 5: Matt. iii. 9.]
[Footnote 6: Matt. iii. 7; Luke iii. 7.]
[Footnote 7: _Ant._ XVIII. v. 2. We must observe that, when Josephus described the secret and more or less seditious doctrines of his countrymen, he suppressed everything which had reference to the Messianic beliefs, and, in order not to give umbrage to the Romans, spread over these doctrines a vulgar and commonplace air, which made all the heads of Jewish sects appear as mere professors of morals or stoics.]
[Footnote 8: Matt. ix. 14.]
[Footnote 9: Luke iii. 11.]
Although the centre of John's action was Judea, his fame quickly penetrated to Galilee and reached Jesus, who, by his first discourses, had already gathered around himself a small circle of hearers.
Enjoying as yet little authority, and doubtless impelled by the desire to see a teacher whose instruction had so much in common with his own, Jesus quitted Galilee and repaired with his small group of disciples to John.[1] The newcomers were baptized like every one else. John welcomed this group of Galilean disciples, and did not object to their remaining distinct from his own. The two teachers were young; they had many ideas in common; they loved one another, and publicly vied with each other in exhibitions of kindly feeling. At the first glance, such a fact surprises us in John the Baptist, and we are tempted to call it in question. Humility has never been a feature of strong Jewish minds.
It might have been expected that a character so stubborn, a sort of Lamennais always irritated, would be very pa.s.sionate, and suffer neither rivalry nor half adhesion. But this manner of viewing things rests upon a false conception of the person of John. We imagine him an old man; he was, on the contrary, of the same age as Jesus,[2] and very young according to the ideas of the time. In mental development, he was the brother rather than the father of Jesus. The two young enthusiasts, full of the same hopes and the same hatreds, were able to make common cause, and mutually to support each other. Certainly an aged teacher, seeing a man without celebrity approach him, and maintain toward him an aspect of independence, would have rebelled; we have scarcely an example of a leader of a school receiving with eagerness his future successor. But youth is capable of any sacrifice, and we may admit that John, having recognized in Jesus a spirit akin to his own, accepted him without any personal reservation. These good relations became afterward the starting-point of a whole system developed by the evangelists, which consisted in giving the Divine mission of Jesus the primary basis of the attestation of John. Such was the degree of authority acquired by the Baptist, that it was not thought possible to find in the world a better guarantee. But far from John abdicating in favor of Jesus, Jesus, during all the time that he pa.s.sed with him, recognized him as his superior, and only developed his own genius with timidity.
[Footnote 1: Matt. iii. 13, and following; Mark i. 9, and following; Luke iii. 21, and following; John i. 29, and following; iii. 22, and following. The synoptics make Jesus come to John, before he had played any public part. But if it is true, as they state, that John recognized Jesus from the first and welcomed him, it must be supposed that Jesus was already a somewhat renowned teacher. The fourth Gospel brings Jesus to John twice, the first time while yet unknown, the second time with a band of disciples. Without touching here the question of the precise journeys of Jesus (an insoluble question, seeing the contradictions of the doc.u.ments and the little care the evangelists had in being exact in such matters), and without denying that Jesus might have made a journey to John when he had as yet no notoriety, we adopt the information furnished by the fourth Gospel (iii. 22, and following), namely, that Jesus, before beginning to baptize like John, had formed a school. We must remember, besides, that the first pages of the fourth Gospel are notes tacked together without rigorous chronological arrangement.]
[Footnote 2: Luke i., although indeed all the details of the narrative, especially those which refer to the relationship of John with Jesus, are legendary.]
It seems, in fact, that, notwithstanding his profound originality, Jesus, during some weeks at least, was the imitator of John. His way as yet was not clear before him. At all times, moreover, Jesus yielded much to opinion, and adopted many things which were not in exact accordance with his own ideas, or for which he cared little, merely because they were popular; but these accessories never injured his princ.i.p.al idea, and were always subordinate to it. Baptism had been brought by John into very great favor; Jesus thought himself obliged to do like John; therefore he baptized, and his disciples baptized also.[1] No doubt he accompanied baptism with preaching, similar to that of John. The Jordan was thus covered on all sides with Baptists, whose discourses were more or less successful. The pupil soon equaled the master, and his baptism was much sought after. There was on this subject some jealousy among the disciples;[2] the disciples of John came to complain to him of the growing success of the young Galilean, whose baptism would, they thought, soon supplant his own. But the two teachers remained superior to this meanness. The superiority of John was, besides, too indisputable for Jesus, still little known, to think of contesting it. Jesus only wished to increase under John's protection; and thought himself obliged, in order to gain the mult.i.tude, to employ the external means which had given John such astonishing success. When he recommenced to preach after John's arrest, the first words put into his mouth are but the repet.i.tion of one of the familiar phrases of the Baptist.[3] Many other of John's expressions may be found repeated verbally in the discourses of Jesus.[4] The two schools appear to have lived long on good terms with each other;[5] and after the death of John, Jesus, as his trusty friend, was one of the first to be informed of the event.[6]
[Footnote 1: John iii. 22-26, iv. 1, 2. The parenthesis of ver. 2 appears to be an interpolation, or perhaps a tardy scruple of John correcting himself.]
[Footnote 2: John iii. 26, iv. 1.]
[Footnote 3: Matt. iii. 2, iv. 17.]
[Footnote 4: Matt. iii. 7, xii. 34, xxiii. 33.]
[Footnote 5: Matt. xi. 2-13.]
[Footnote 6: Matt. xiv. 12.]
John, in fact, was soon cut short in his prophetic career. Like the ancient Jewish prophets, he was, in the highest degree, a censurer of the established authorities.[1] The extreme vivacity with which he expressed himself at their expense could not fail to bring him into trouble. In Judea, John does not appear to have been disturbed by Pilate; but in Perea, beyond the Jordan, he came into the territory of Antipas. This tyrant was uneasy at the political leaven which was so little concealed by John in his preaching. The great a.s.semblages of men gathered around the Baptist, by religious and patriotic enthusiasm, gave rise to suspicion.[2] An entirely personal grievance was also added to these motives of state, and rendered the death of the austere censor inevitable.
[Footnote 1: Luke iii. 19.]
[Footnote 2: Jos., _Ant._, XVIII. v. 2.]
One of the most strongly marked characters of this tragical family of the Herods was Herodias, granddaughter of Herod the Great. Violent, ambitious, and pa.s.sionate, she detested Judaism, and despised its laws.[1] She had been married, probably against her will, to her uncle Herod, son of Mariamne,[2] whom Herod the Great had disinherited,[3]
and who never played any public part. The inferior position of her husband, in respect to the other persons of the family, gave her no peace; she determined to be sovereign at whatever cost.[4] Antipas was the instrument of whom she made use. This feeble man having become desperately enamored of her, promised to marry her, and to repudiate his first wife, daughter of Hareth, king of Petra, and emir of the neighboring tribes of Perea. The Arabian princess, receiving a hint of this design, resolved to fly. Concealing her intention, she pretended that she wished to make a journey to Machero, in her father's territory, and caused herself to be conducted thither by the officers of Antipas.[5]
[Footnote 1: Jos., _Ant._, XVIII. v. 4.]
[Footnote 2: Matthew (chap. xiv. 3, in the Greek text) and Mark (chap.
vi. 17) have it that this was Philip; but this is certainly an inadvertency (see Jos., _Ant._, XVIII. v. 1, 4). The wife of Philip was Salome, daughter of Herodias.]