And here it is appropriate to remember about Bethabar, in which John allegedly baptized. From outskirts of Jericho to Nazareth it is about 150 kilometers. Imagine: the next day after the meeting between Jesus and John, and the never happening baptism of Jesus by John, they meet again but this time in Galilee, as is obvious from the following text. Have they covered one and a half hundred kilometers from the Dead Sea to Nazareth overnight on cars with personal drivers? Doubtedly. John did not baptize in Judea, he baptized in pagan Galilee, in Bethabar near the Sea of Galilee, where he did not risk being caught and arrested for anti-Jewish blasphemy. And no Pharisees went to him except with the guards to capture as indeed happened as soon as John stuck his head out with his sermon to Samaria, on the border with Judea (And John also baptized in Aenon, near Salem, because there was a lot of water there Jn 2:23): where he was immediately captured by zealots, sentenced and executed as a detractor of Jewish Law. That was later masked by the synoptics by the absurd disarray in the royal family.
Bethabar, in fact, means a crossing, that is, a place where the river becomes so shallow that you can wade it easily. Such a passage, presumably, was about three kilometers from Capernaum up the river it was here, apparently, that John baptized. On the other side of the Jordan was the village of Bethsaida Julia, and, apparently, John found a shelter there. It can be assumed that Jesus came to him in the village to talk, and he also found a place for himself there for the night. But in order to get to the village, you had to enter the river. Perhaps the myth about the baptism of Jesus by John is connected with the fact that, having met with John, Jesus went with him to the village where John lived, to talk, and together they entered the water, crossing the river.
By the way, in the Mandean sacred books, discovered by science just a century ago, along with the John the Baptist, who is portrayed as a great prophet, teacher and martyr of the pre-Christian Gnostic Nazarite, Jesus is declared a false prophet, a traitor to John and a detractor of the Nazarene doctrine. So, it seems, something went wrong: Jesus brings the disciples of John, the Nazarenes, Andrew the First-Called and the future John the Theologian, to where? Home in Nazareth? No, its about fifty miles from Capernaum to there. In the Greek text, the word μένω is used, which means to stay that is, Jesus temporarily stopped somewhere, apparently to meet with John. And, most likely, in Capernaum, from where he came to meet with John, he spent the night with him in Bethany in conversation, they did not find common grounds, and Jesus leaves back to Capernaum, where he brings the disciples of John, and they spend with him a full day in a conversation that shakes them so much that they completely and forever forget about John. At night, Andrei rushes to another city nearby, to Bethsaida, three kilometers from Capernaum, to inform his elder brother, Simon-Peter, that they have found the messiah (what kind of messiah if they are disciples of John the Baptist, Nazarenes and believe in another, non-Jewish god? This is clearly an insert that aims to make Jesus a Jew), and leads Peter to Jesus. Apparently, they spend the night in conversations, and in the morning they run first to Philip, and then to Nathanael they are all friends and, of course, participants and disciples of the John sect, so that all references to the messiah and phrase that from Nazareth can there be anything good in terms of the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies: these are just absurd Judaizing insertions, which we will continue to meet in abundance.
And what is it that Jesus tells Nathanael that Nathanael, shocked, although he had just been skeptical saying what good is from Nazareth, suddenly immediately falls on his face before Jesus with the words You are the Son of God? What a change! I saw you under the fig tree Jesus said, and what does it mean, what mystery is behind these words that shocked Nathanael with its revelation? I personally have long guessed it: Nathanael, the gardener, in the depth of the garden under the fig tree had a secret, hidden from prying eyes shelter where he spent time during the afternoon heat, praying to God, being a secret prayer, ascetic. And it is this fact, which no one but God could know, Jesus saw through the Spirit. No one has seen Nathanael under the fig tree, except God, and this episode gives us hope that God accepts the prayers of even those who turn to him with all their hearts, even if they do not know the true God.
It is worth adding that the mention of Nathanael as a true Israelite is clearly added later, all with the same purpose. Nathanael was a gardener in Galilee, not in Judea.
This is the story of the calling of disciples by Jesus it was not He who chose them, but they chose Him out of their own free will, the free will of people, which God never forces!
Conclusion: There was no Baptism of the Lord from John and the Spirit of God did not descend on Jesus in the form of a dove. And in general there was no need for Jesus the Son of God in all this absurd baptism-washing with water from the river for the remission of sins the Son of God is already sinless. And the man-Jesus, born of earthly parents, does not need the forgiveness of original sin, because, being the Son of God, he knows that all these idle biblical tales are all the same traditional ancient Jewish paganism, and no original sin over humanity in reality gravitated, because it simply did not exist. Jesus Himself, as we will see below, never baptized neither with water nor the Spirit, Jesus was never a disciple of John the Baptist, He was not the performer of the prophecies about the Mashiach, and He was neither a Jew nor a Nazirite. Water baptism for the remission of sins is an ancient Mandean tradition of pre-Christian Gnosticism, and has nothing to do with Jesus and His Teachings, CHRESTIANISM.
Thus, the dry remainder of the first chapter of John:
1 No one has seen God at any time; Jesus, the Fathers beloved and only Son, spoke about Him. And to those who received Him, believing in His name, He gave the authority to be children of the Father, who were born neither of the blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a husband, but of the Father.
2 John sees Jesus walking towards him
3On the next day, John stood again and two of his disciples. And when he saw Jesus walking, he said
4Having heard these words from him, the two disciples followed Jesus.
5 And Jesus, turning and seeing them walking, saith to them: What do you want? They said to Him: Rabbi, which means teacher, where do you live?
6 He says to them: go and see. They went and saw where He lives; and stayed with him that day. It was about ten oclock.
7One of the two who heard about Jesus from John and followed him was Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter.
8He first finds his brother Simon and saith to him, We have found;
9and brought him to Jesus. And Jesus, looking at him, said: You are Simon the son of Jonah; you will be called Cephas, which means: a stone (Peter).
10The next day Jesus wanted to go to Galilee
11Philip was from Bethsaida, from the same city with Andrew and Peter.
12 Philip finds Nathanael and says to him: We have found Jesus the son of Joseph of Nazareth.
13 But Nathanael said to him, Can anything good be out of Nazareth? Philip says to him: go and see.
14Jesus, seeing Nathanael coming to Him, says of him: Behold, indeed, in whom there is no guile.
15Nathanael saith to him, Why do you know me? Jesus answered and said to him: Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.
16Nathanael answered him, Rabbi! You are the Son of God
17 Jesus answered and said to him: You believe, because I told you: I saw you under a fig tree; you will see more than this.
Thats all!
John, chapter 2
In this chapter, a very important event takes place a miracle at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. Small everyday details, very vital and obviously not invented, convince in the reliability of the narrative.
1 On the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee, and the Mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus and His disciples were also called to the marriage what disciples could be called to the marriage, if they had just started to be with Him? Three John, Andrew and Simon on the second day counting from the meeting of Jesus with John; two more Philip and Nataniel on the very third day in question; there is also Johns brother James or Jacob (Zebedee), who is not mentioned here. Also, apparently, Thomas we will meet with him later, but he comes from the same place, which follows from the list of the disciples who returned to Galilee from Jerusalem after the Passion of Jesus: (John 21,2) and Nathanael from Cana of Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two others from His disciples it is obvious that Thomas belongs to the same company. The mentioned two others are, presumably, all the same Philip and someone else from the Galileans, not named. In total eight. Jesus mother was invited to the wedding, and this is understandable but what does Jesus and his disciples have to do with it? And another question why is Mary invited alone, without her husband?
Apparently, the father of Jesus, conditionally Joseph, since information about him is found only from records by the synoptics, who we have no faith in, by that time he had already died, Mary remained a widow, but it was indecent for the woman to appear alone at the wedding, and Jesus, as the eldest son, had to accompany her. And the disciples, as is typical of youth, simply followed him it is more fun together. In the future, we will return to this assumption; there is confirmation of it in the text.
By the way, we note that it is the presence of Jesus at the wedding that destroys the pious legend about the origin of His brothers and sisters as step-siblings: as if Joseph had them from the first marriage and then married Mary after his first wife died; and that Mary gave birth without husbands participation; and therefore Jesus was the youngest in Josephs family. No, he was precisely the eldest son, the duty to protect the honor of the mother passed to Him from the late father in seniority and that is why He, the only one of Marys children, accompanies her at the wedding in Cana of Galilee. And he was born, like his younger siblings, from their father, Marias husband, in a legal marriage.
3 And as there was a lack of wine, the mother of Jesus said to him: they have no wine. 4 Jesus said to her: what is to me and you, woman? My hour has not yet come. 5 His mother said to the attendants, Whatever He says to you, do it.
There are many meanings hidden in this small episode.
A wedding is an expensive and even ruinous business for a poor family and then Jesus brings with him a whole bunch of guys who are not shy to eat and drink. And Mary feels awkward in front of the family of the newly-wed, feels guilty for the lack on the table that was not prepared for a whole group of extra strangers and therefore she turns to Jesus with reproach, hinting that the lack happened because of them. Jesus answers her, as modern sons do to their mothers in a similar situation: This is not our problem, and adds that His hour has not come, that is, the time has not yet come for what? For what happens next. That is, these two KNOW. They know that Jesus is the Son of God and that EVERYTHING in this world is available to Him. And therefore, Mary, without entering into an argument, puts Him in a position without a choice: His duty to correct the created inconvenience for her is obvious, and He has no right to refuse, even referring to the untimeliness of His Divine intervention. She no longer speaks to Him, but to the attendants: do as He tells you. Well, he wont send them to the store for wine, will he? And they dont have much money to get the whole feast drunk.
And Jesus humbles himself before his mothers will.
6 There were six stone waterpots here, standing according to the Jewish custom of cleansing, containing two or three measures what kind of Jewish customs can be obeyed in pagan Galilee?
In general, a separate comment should be made on this topic, since the absurd insertions about Jewish customs and similar points will continue to appear often. Therefore, you need to understand what Galilee was in the time of Jesus. In order not to delve into a major historical study, lets take a brief reference from Wikipedia:
Galilee is a historical area in the north of Israel. In the 3rd millennium BC. e. Galilee was settled by the Canaanites. In the 2nd millennium BC. e. here the Hurrians, Hittites and Egyptians appear. Then the country comes to the attention of the Israeli tribes and is included in the kingdom of Israel. In 722 BC. e. Galilee is part of the Assyrian state, the local population is evicted and replaced by Assyrian colonists. In 539 BC. e. Galilee comes under the rule of Persia. In 333 BC. e. from the Persians, Galileo was captured by the troops of Alexander the Great, and the colonization of the lands by Greek and Macedonian colonists began. After this period, Galilee changed hands several times between the Hellenistic dynasties of the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Syrian Seleucids, until the conquest of Galilee by Rome in 63 BC. e.
From the reign of the Hasmoneans and the Maccabean Wars to the conquest by Roman troops in 63 BC. e. Galilee was repeatedly subjected to predatory raids by the Kingdom of Judah. In the 1st century A.D. e. Judas Galilean[42]together with several Jewish priests, started riots in the city of Sepphoris, which provoked the arrival of Roman troops in Galilee, as a result of which it was devastated, most of the local population was killed, and the rest were sold into slavery by the Romans. From the period of the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in the 70s A.D. e. begins the mass migration of Jews to the devastated Galilee, the development of the territories of Galilee and Samaria, the development and construction of synagogues. In 636, Galilee was annexed to the Jordanian province of the Caliphate.
This publication builds on a fundamental study of the history of Galilee[43], from which and others like it it is composed.
Is everything clear, it seems? There were no Jews in Galilee in the time of Jesus and could not have been. They were there only with robber raids, like bandits and, of course, the Galilean population treated them like enemies. And the Galileans themselves were a mix of languages, which is why the Jews also called ths land Galilee pagan. In Galilee, apparently, representatives of many nations lived alongside, with their gods, faiths and religions, among which only one was missing the Jewish with the Law of their evil and vengeful god-Yahweh. They dreamed of the genocide of those who lived in the territory which used to be theirs, as memory had it.
So, no Jewish customs were observed at the wedding in Cana of Galilee, and none of those present at it was a Jew including Jesus, His Mother, and His disciples they were not Jews, and they could not be. And from this point of view, the entire Gospel story begins to look completely different from what it is presented like in the canon of the New Testament and in church teaching. And the absurdity of Judaizing inserts and patches like the above one about Jewish customs becomes obvious.