James F. McGrath Archives

Cover image of "John of History, Baptist of Faith" by James F. McGrath

John of History, Baptist of Faith, James F. McGrath. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802883995) 2024.

Summary: A historical-critical study of New Testament and Mandaean sources, developing a historical portrait of John.

James F. McGrath has recently made a certain scholarly “splash” in focusing our attention on the neglected figure of John the Baptist, who he argues played a significant role in history. He’s not just the forerunner of Jesus who fades from view, an idea he argued in Christmaker (reviewed here). This work goes further in developing his ideas, delving into a historical-critical study of the sources we may draw on to arrive at “the John of History.”

First of all, McGrath argues in Chapter 1 for the Q sayings source as one of the historical sources for information about John. Given that it begins with John’s preaching and ends with an apocalyptic sermon, it may stand to reason that the teaching found here reflects continuity with John that sheds light on his message. Then in Chapter 2, McGrath assesses the Mandaean sources, the other major body of texts to consider, arguing neither for wholesale acceptance or rejection but critical assessment. He likens their value in understanding John to the Nag Hammadi or rabbinic sources.

From here, McGrath asserts that Jesus was a disciple of John as reflected in the continuity between the ministries of the two men. These continuities include baptism, the preaching of the kingdom, the ethical teaching, and the threat against the temple. In addition, there is the high esteem by Jesus for John. It is an intriguing suggestion, though I am not persuaded that Jesus was a disciple under John for any significant period. Apart from the baptism of Jesus, the two appear to operate separately in the gospel accounts, though aware of each other.

Chapter 4 turns from the relation of Jesus and John to the nativity narratives of Luke. Along with Luke, he considers the Protevangelium of James and the Mandaean Book of John. Drawing on these sources, he suggests a nativity narrative of John that includes Elizabeth and Zechariah as inspiration for the parents of Mary and the Magnificat as a prayer of Elizabeth, and that Luke reworked these materials. This seemed interesting but speculative to me.

Above all, John was known as the Baptizer, and chapters 5 and 6 concern baptism. Chapter 5 considers where John may have gotten the idea of baptism from. Instead of priestly sacrifices, John draws on ritual ablutions signifying cleansing. Then Chapter 6 turns to the baptism of Jesus, particularly as it became caught up in Mandaean polemics about john and Jesus.

I found Chapter 7 particularly intriguing as McGrath explores Jesus’ use of “the Son of Man.” He connects this with John’s references to one “greater” or “stronger” than himself. He also notes John’s use of “the one” to come. Linguistically, “the one” and “the Son of Man” are synonymous.

Given the gnostic character of Mandaeaism, Chapter 8 weighs what aspects of John’s ministry may have given rise to this. While John was no gnostic, his followers Dositheus and Simon Magus may have been. I personally wonder how Gnosticism might have arisen from Hebraic sources and think Hellenist ones more likely. But these two worlds intersected during this time.

Finally, McGrath considers the prayer of John. He notes the reference by Jesus’ disciples to John teaching his disciples to pray. Then he argues that the Our Father may have roots in John’s prayers.

Overall, what McGrath does is make a strong case for both the significance of John and his influence with Jesus. He raises a number of interesting questions for further scholarly work. I do wish he could have included translations of the Mandaean Book of John and the Protevangelium. Non-scholars like myself do not have ready access to them. That said, I look forward to seeing how other scholars interact with this work and how McGrath builds on this work. Clearly, he has demonstrated that this is a fruitful (and neglected) field of inquiry!

Addendum: The author wrote the following in comments below that I wanted to include in the review:

“There are open access translations of both works online, which was one reason I didn’t think it necessary to include them. When I worked with Charles Haberl on the Mandaean Book of John, we made sure the translation would be available. You can find that here: https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/facsch_papers/1065/

A couple of translations of the Protevangelium (Infancy Gospel) of James can be found here: https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/infancyjames.html“

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Cover image of "Christmaker" by James F. McGrath

Christmaker, James F. McGrath. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802884008) 2024.

Summary: A life of John the Baptist making the case that he was a far more important figure than just the opening act for Jesus.

When I learned of this book, I realized that I had never given John the Baptist a great deal of thought. You might say I just considered him the opening act, perhaps somewhat eccentric, for Jesus. James F. McGrath contends that John was far more influential than that, not only with Jesus, but also with other religious movements that sprang from his influence. For example, he points to the Mandaeans, a gnostic sect still in existence. They see themselves as faithful disciples of John. Not only does McGrath seek to argue for the influence of John. He also sets out to “offer a full-fledged biography of John the Baptist.”

McGrath begins with John’s beginnings, the child of Zechariah the priest and Elizabeth. He explores why john did not follow his father as a priest but rebelled. He argues there is a good case, given John’s dress and diet, that Elizabeth had dedicated him as a Nazirite. This conflict in the family drove him into the wilderness, and to an alternative to the temple system of sacrifices–a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. He took an act of purification or initiation for converts and turned it into a challenge to the temple system. He laid the basis for Jesus to speak of “Destroying this Temple” and his act of purifying it.

His wilderness ministry was to “the Lost Sheep of Israel,” diverse groups who were not only on the cultural margins but, in the case of some sects, on the theological margins. McGrath explores how this interplay led to the emergence of Gnostic groups who connected to John, even when John would not have embraced their ideas. John’s preaching of “one who is to come” would have attracted multiple aspirants to that role. Given John’s prophetic role, many thought John to be speaking of a coming king, and several aspirants died at Roman hands as a result.

McGrath goes on to explore the ways Jesus ministry reflected that of John. Both taught on prayer, spoke in parables, proclaimed justice and a coming rule of God. McGrath also explores the accounts of John’s death at the hands of Herod Antipas and the growing focus of Jesus on inaugurating his rule through death.

Finally, he concludes by considering evidence for the widespread influence of John, beyond his influence on Jesus. In addition to Mandaeism, he notes influences upon Islam, Manichaeism, and his immersion practices on religion in India. Aside from Mandaeism, this seemed the most speculative part of the work, subject to alternate explanations. But he raises questions worth further inquiry.

McGrath, looking at the fine details, particularly of Luke’s account, finds discrepancies and is candid about them. He argues against either trying to harmonize the accounts or just treating them as literature, abandoning the pursuit of history. Instead he adopts an approach of “seeking the gist of what was remembered as that which is most likely correct, while recognizing that individual details can and will be wrong in any source.” I would question whether the approach in the first part of this statement requires the conclusion of the latter part. I wonder if a belief in the trustworthiness of scripture might call for acknowledging but suspending judgment on the apparently discrepant details while focusing on the gist of the text.

Overall, I found this to be an illuminating study. I had not thought about the rebellion against vocation that John’s wilderness represented. I had not considered his influence as a “Christmaker,” not only with Jesus but others. Nor had I considered the ways he might have influenced the ministry of Jesus. I’m also weighing personally his “takeaways,” which I will leave for you to discover!

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.