Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§11.4 Beginning from the Baptism of John
cording to Q this was John's expectation for the one to come — that he would
dispense judgment (Q 3.16-17). 111 But in the event, Jesus had not fulfilled this
expectation — at least not this aspect of John's expectation. The fact that Mark
lacks all note of judgment in John's preaching but knows the prediction of one
who would 'baptize in Holy Spirit' (Mark 1.8) is significant: Mark's version appears
to be an abbreviated or excerpted version of a fuller tradition which has
been retained in Q.
(2) The silence of Josephus can be explained in not dissimilar terms.
Josephus was evidently trying to present the Baptist in terms which would appeal
to his readers: John was 'a good man who exhorted the Jews to cultivate virtue
(areten epaskousin) and to practise justice to one another and piety towards God,
joining in baptism' {Ant. 18.117). Tradition of John's preaching as preserved in Q
would hardly enhance that appeal, as well as drawing on imagery unfamiliar to
the typical readers of Josephus.
(3) More to the point, Q alludes back to the fierceness of John's expectation
in the account of John's subsequent puzzlement: could Jesus indeed be 'the
one to come' (Matt. 11.3/Luke 7.19)? And both Mark and Luke recall sayings of
Jesus which use the imagery of 'baptism' for a fearful experience still to come. 112
Where did that imagery come from, if not from 'the Baptist' who coined the imagery
in the first place? We should also recall that the imagery of being 'baptized
in Holy Spirit', first coined by the Baptist, as all Evangelists (as well as Q) report,
is retained into Christian usage. 113
(4) Presumably this was one of the reasons why the Baptist's baptism made
such a strong appeal. The implication is strong that it was no mere appeal to virtue
and piety which drew so many out to John, but some threat of judgment
which called for speedy and visible repentance.
(5) Above all, perhaps, we need to ask why early Jesus-disciple tradition
should attribute such a fierce note of judgment to John if it was not what John
had preached. There was nothing to gain from it, though no doubt any who wish
to discount the Q tradition could find a reason or two. 114 In short, there seems to
111. There is no good reason to conclude that the two elements (Q 3.7-9, 16-17) originally
circulated independently (pace Kloppenborg, Formation 102-107; W. Arnal, 'Redactional Fabrication
and Group Legitimation: The Baptist's Preaching in Q 3:7-9, 16-17', in J. S. Kloppenborg,
ed., Conflict and Invention [Valley Forge: Trinity, 1995] 170). The linking theme of 'fire' (Q
3.9,16-17) indicates rather a connected sequence already in the earliest tradition formation.
112. Mark 10.38-39; Luke 12.49-51. The influence of John's vivid language may be detected
elsewhere: 'viper's brood' (Q 3.7; Matt. 12.34; 23.33); 'the coming wrath' (Q 3.7;
IThess. 1.10; Luke 21.23).
113. Acts 1.5; 11.16; 1 Cor. 12.13.
114. Arnal, 'Redactional Fabrication' 165-80, argues that Q's portrayal is wholly
redactional (169-74).
363