Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§11.2 Beginning from the Baptism of John
of the birth of John (Luke 1.5-25, 57-80); John appears to be the inescapable
preface to Jesus. 69 And somewhat like Matthew, Luke describes John as 'preaching
good news' (3.18 — euangelizesthai), the same verb used of Jesus' preaching
(4.18, 43; etc.). The Fourth Evangelist likewise makes it clear that the story of Jesus
cannot get under way without reference to John (John 1.6-8, 19-34), a point
all the clearer if the prologue (John 1.1-18) was added after the Gospel had been
drafted to begin with John the Baptist. 70
In many ways most illuminating of all are the references in Acts. According
to Acts 1.21-22 one of the key criteria in determining who could take Judas's
place was whether that person had been in the company of the disciples 'during
the whole time that the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning from the
baptism of John . . .'. 'The baptism of John', not just Jesus' baptism by John,
marked the beginning of Jesus' mission. Similarly, Peter's speech in Acts 10.37
sums up Jesus' mission in terms of 'what happened [or 'the word that was performed']
throughout the whole of Judea, beginning from Galilee after the baptism
which John proclaimed'. 71
The concern to 'locate' Jesus by reference to John is also evident in the Q
traditions utilised by Matthew and Luke. 72 The particular claim that John should
be recognized as Elijah returned (Matt. 11.14), forerunner of 'the great and terrible
day of the Lord' (Mai. 4.5), is also implicit in Mark's use of Mai. 3.1 in his introduction
to John (Mark 1.2, as also Matt. 11.10/Luke 7.27). The description of
John as 'wearing camel's hair and a leather belt around his waist' may have been
intended by Mark and Matthew to evoke the description of Elijah in 2 Kgs 1.8
(Mark 1.6/Matt. 3.4). 73 The identification is clearer in their conclusion to the account
of Jesus' transfiguration (Mark 9.11-13/Matt. 17.10-12). Luke achieves the
69. Brown considers the possibility that Luke 3.1-2 formed the original opening of the
Gospel and that the infancy narrative was prefixed after both Luke and Acts had been completed
(Birth 239-41).
70. Discussion in Schnackenburg, John 1.221-24.
71. For the syntactical problems of Luke's Greek in both texts see Barrett, Acts 101,
522-24. For the likelihood that Acts 10.34-43 includes echoes of very early Christian preaching
see below, vol. 2.
72. Matt. 11.2-11, 16-19/Luke 7.18-28, 31-35. The closeness of the parallel clearly indicates
literary dependence, with editorial introductions, and Lukan elaboration at 7.20-21 and
29-30. But the link between Matt. 11.12-15 and Luke 16.16 is less easily explained in terms of
literary dependence and may reflect oral transmission. The content of the passage is discussed
more fully below (§ 12.5c).
73. But see also Meier, Marginal Jew 2.46-49. In contrast L. Vaage uses such data to sweep
John also into the Cynic net ('More than a Prophet, and Demon-Possessed: Q and the "Historical"
John', in J. S. Kloppenborg, ed., Conflict and Invention [Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995] 181-202
[here 190-91]). Cf. Josephus' description of Bannus, 'who dwelt in the wilderness, wearing only
such clothing as trees provided, feeding on such things as grew of themselves' (Life 11).
353