Friday, December 2, 2011

Beheading a Legend

'
Background
Recently in our studies, Jesus was rejected in His hometown, and John had Jesus deliver convoluted truth while condemning some Pharisees. The event in the following study happens after the hometown rejection, according to Matthew that is.

Beheading a Legend
It is difficult to come up with a good, believable story. If you focus too much on the plot, the plausibility of the story can suffer as unreasoned details strike against the credibility of the tale. Take the beheading of John the Baptist, for example.

Matthew 14:1-12 and Mark 6:14-29 similarly record the story: King Herod had put John the Baptist in jail because John the Baptist had kept telling Herod that he should not have married Herodias, Herod's brother's wife. On Herod's birthday, the daughter of Herodias danced for Herod. She was such a good dancer that Herod promised to give her whatever she wanted. Her mother told her to ask for the head of John the Baptist on a platter. Herod, begrudgingly bound by his promise, had John the Baptist beheaded. Now, Herod thinks that a local miracle worker (Jesus) is John the Baptist who has come back from the dead.

It is a good story, for sure, but it is not very believable. Why? Well, let us take a look at some of the details.

The first, and possibly weakest, objection is the simple question of who witnessed this event? Obviously, none of Jesus' disciples were there, and it is unlikely that John the Baptist's followers were invited to Herod's birthday party either. Yet if such a spectacle did really happen, I am sure that the rumors would have spread quickly, so this episode could have been relayed by word of mouth. That can work, but Mark 6:22-25 records both public dialog between the king and the daughter and private dialog between the daughter and her mother. To have such detail suggests embellishment at best, or downright fiction at worst.

Next, consider why John the Baptist was in jail. Matthew 14:3-4 and Mark 6:17-18 both say that he was arrested because he had been telling Herod (repeatedly and in person) that his marriage to Herodias was sinful. This is certainly possible, but very unlikely. Herod was a king living in a palace. John the Baptist was supposedly a prophet preaching in the desert in order to fulfill prophesy (Matthew 3:1-3, Mark 1:2-4, Luke 3:1-6, John 1:23). Why would Herod travel out to the desert to see John the Baptist, repeatedly, when John the Baptist kept accusing Herod of having a sinful marriage? Flavius Josephus records a more believable version of history, recording that Herod had John the Baptist killed because the people flocked to John the Baptist like a leader, and Herod was concerned that he might start a rebellion.

Next, consider the wild promise Herod made to this dancing girl. Matthew 14:6-7 suggests that, because of her dancing, Herod promised to give her anything she asked for. This might seem like hyperbole, and that Herod had not intention of giving her anything she wanted. But with the qualifier of “up to half of my kingdom” in Mark 6:22-23, it does seem that Herod had full intention of granting this girl nearly any desire. Just for that one dance. One dance. Not a promise to become his love slave, his concubine, his next wife, etc. Not even a promise for her to “keep him company” later that evening. It was just one dance, and the dance was already done. For Herod to give such a rich and boundless offering for the sake of some temporary and already complete entertainment seems highly unlikely.

Perhaps it is for these reasons that Luke edited out these questionable details from his version of the story. In Luke 9:7-9, you find a much more abbreviated tale where Herod had heard of the activities of Jesus and wondered who this was, because he had beheaded John the Baptist and some other people thought it was perhaps the resurrected John the Baptist. Very limited hearsay testimony. No strange imprisonment. No dancing girl. No silly oath.

Yet Luke does not escape all of the oddity seen in Matthew and Mark. Matthew 14:1-2, Mark 6:14-16, and Luke 9:7-9 show that Herod puzzled about who Jesus may be. Matthew and Mark explicitly, and Luke implicitly, show that Herod was thinking that this may be John the Baptist resurrected. That would be plausible if Herod was just some guy on the street, but Herod, as king, would have access to people who report the news to him (which is kind of important as a king). People with eyewitness accounts would be sharing what Jesus was doing, what His back story was, and what he looked like (as in He looks different from John the Baptist and is noticeably missing the scars of a beheading).

Finally, we will close out with yet another significant oddity. This is one point where the storyline of the Synoptic Gospels merge again. After this note about the beheading, all three continue on to the story of Jesus feeding the 5000 men.

Before these three Gospels come together, Mark and Luke had already synchronized with the sending of the Twelve Apostles on their first mission. So for Mark and Luke, the events which Herod hears about is (presumably) in relation to the work of Jesus and the Apostles on this mission. And right after this tale of beheading, the Apostles return to report to Jesus what they had accomplished on their mission (Mark 6:30, Luke 9:10).

Matthew, on the other hand, records Jesus' hometown rejection immediately prior to this, which makes Herod's inquisitiveness regarding Jesus seem misplaced. Yet it becomes even more anachronistic as Matthew's story continues. Matthew 14:12 records that right after John the Baptist was beheaded, John the Baptist's disciples told Jesus what had happened. Matthew 14:13 states:
When Jesus heard what had happened [regarding John the Baptist's beheading], He withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the crowds followed Him on foot from the towns. NIV

This feeds right into the feeding of the 5000 men, as they were the crowds who were supposedly following Jesus.

Did you catch the time loop? Herod thinks some teacher/miracle worker is possibly John the Baptist resurrected, implying that some time and events had passed since the beheading. Yet as the beheading story, and the rest of Matthew, continues, it reads as though the beheading had just happened, to which Jesus reacts by looking for a little alone time. Quite a tangled web.

6 comments:

  1. (What the--? I posted a comment, but it's not there anymore.)

    Anyway, another good analysis. I doubt that many believers have asked if the Bible's stories are even plausible, much less factually true.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Doh! I've had that happen before when commenting on Blogspot, I think actually on your blog once. It seems it glitches every so often. It's gotten me in the habit of writing longer comments in another program, and then copy-and-pasting into a comment box.

    Thanks Ahab! I think most believers just go into reading the Bible with the presupposition that it's all true, so they don't have any cause to think about the veracity of the story.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah... I had my long comment get deleted. I'll try again with the cut and past method.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you for using your wise mind to analyze this narrative. I have some questions, however, about your objections:
    Who witnessed this event? Of course the room was full of people. It only takes 1, but I suspect a party that ends with a man’s head on a platter generates some buzz. Who heard the women’s conversation? Does the text say they went to another private room and spoke in whispers? No? Knowing Herodias hates John, would it take a rocket scientist to piece it together that she was the one behind the request?
    Why was John in jail? Yes, you admit it’s possible because of the marriage thing. Josephus gives another reason. People don’t do things for multiple reasons? Or tell different people different reasons? Politicians never abuse their power for personal reasons and make up a “plausible” excuse? This action seems par for the course to me.
    The wild promise? A birthday party for a dignitary. A guess alcohol is never consumed at such events, right? And men never make grand boasts in the presence of alcohol, a beautiful woman doing an (implied) exotic dance and a bunch of their buddies?
    Luke? There are myriad reasons Luke could have edited this narrative down.
    The context in the Gospels? Where would be the best place to fit this information that John is dead into the Gospel about the kingdom of God and amidst Jesus’s teaching and preaching and healing… Somewhere in the middle to foreshadow what could happen to Jesus? Could there be a hand who used these narratives to create a counter-point to Jesus? The narrative ends with John’s body in a tomb. Will not that resonate with Jesus later on?
    You assume these are fictitious stories. I assume these are historical narrative (albeit with the possibility they were chosen and ordered for a literary and evangelical purpose). Neither of us can just toss out a couple vapid suggestions and come to the conclusion “this is a lie” or “this is 100% fact.” These are not GPS and atomic-clock ordered accounts and to assume they should be is foolishness.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Patrick, and thanks for the questions. This is response part 1 of 2.

    You said "Who witnessed this event? Of course the room was full of people. It only takes 1, but I suspect a party that ends with a man’s head on a platter generates some buzz."
    Indeed, that's essentially what I had said above, right... "Yet if such a spectacle did really happen, I am sure that the rumors would have spread quickly, so this episode could have been relayed by word of mouth."

    You said "Knowing Herodias hates John, would it take a rocket scientist to piece it together that she was the one behind the request?"
    I have no problem with the supposition of guessing the intents. I do have a problem with recording things that were guessed as intents as actual quotes of what was said. If that can heppen here, just think what the impact is to the rest of the Bible. For example, did Jesus actual say everything that he is recorded as saying, or are His words the work of someone guessing His intents?

    Regarding the questions on John's imprisonment, you are absolutely right. What you suggest, or imply through questioning, is certainly within the realm of possibility.

    As for your questions on the wild promise... what you suggest is possible but unlikely given the magnitude. Sure, there probably was alcohol involved, and people often make stupid promises under its influence, but the type of promise made one that would be seriously detrimental. Think of it this way: This was unlikely to be the first time he had a drink, a party, or a dancing girl for entertainment. Herod was into debauchery, no? I would wager that parties were probably a monthly occurance; celebrating the moon. Now, how long do you think he would have been a king of any significant stature if he kept promising things of such magnitude when drunken and with his buddies?

    Regarding Luke and the editing, this is one piece of evidence in a consistent trend of editing. Check out the Luke the Editor tag on the right for more.



    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Patrick. This is response part 2 of 2.

    You said: "The context in the Gospels? Where would be the best place to fit this information... "
    Generally speaking, the best place to record history is in its chronological order, or with framing to indicate its chronological order when a separate anecdote is used outside of its immediate context. That is, if your goal is to be accurate. If, however, your goal is to influence people or catch them up in the story, then, as you likely know from watching movies or TV, things can be arranged for the strongest emotional feedback.

    You said "You assume these are fictitious stories. I assume these are historical narrative (albeit with the possibility they were chosen and ordered for a literary and evangelical purpose). Neither of us can just toss out a couple vapid suggestions and come to the conclusion “this is a lie” or “this is 100% fact.” These are not GPS and atomic-clock ordered accounts and to assume they should be is foolishness. "

    Actually, I don't assume them to be fictitiuos. I think that they are rooted in truth to some extent. For example, I'm comfortably certain that Herod had John the Baptist killed. What I've done here in this blog is try to work very diligently to discern what is the truth and what elements are the embellishments, the interpolations, the extrapolations, and/or the outright fiction.

    Assuming is quite different. Assuming is easy, and requires little to no effort. I wouldn't recommend assuming anything when eternity is at stake. You have got to be diligent to find the truth.

    ReplyDelete