If nobody believed in superstition it would be unable to hurt anyone

 

John the Baptist, Witness against Jesus
 
John the Baptist who Jesus said was the most important man ever born of woman must have been so if he was the forerunner of the Son of God. But John did not acknowledge Christ despite being in jail knowing he could be killed any time. Jesus himself then said that John was the most important witness in relation to him. Whatever John testified about Jesus had supreme standing on account of who John was. John did not believe in Jesus so he testified that Jesus was a fraud.
 
John sent his disciples to ask Jesus if he was the one who was to come the Christ and the Son of God (Matthew 11:2-6; Luke 7:18-23). Strange that John was regarded as a prophet and didn’t know already that Jesus was the Son of God and the Messiah for his role as forerunner was to foresee and predict the coming of the Lamb of God. This alone suggests that John did not believe in Jesus.

Before John’s head cut off in prison he sent his followers to ask Jesus if he really was the promised Messiah (Matthew 11). Jesus told them to tell him about his miracles as proof that he was. He then said that the man who finds nothing to make him doubt him is blessed implying that Baptist found him dubious. And that would have been because John saw him for the evil man he was. John believed a prophet did not have to show miracles having done none himself and would have been very unimpressed by Jesus’ answer. Jesus knew too that had John considered the miracles to prove anything he would not have needed to find out if Jesus was doing miracles for Jesus had done plenty before John went to prison. That is if the gospels are to believed that Jesus did miracles before John made his bed in the dungeon.

John would have heard of Jesus’ miracles had Jesus really been doing any. Jesus’ reply must have been sheer sarcasm. Did John lose his faith in him hence the query?
 
John did not lose his faith in Jesus if he was as holy as Jesus said he was and both were working for the same God. So it seems he must have simply been incapable of belief for he knew too much and scorned the miracles of Jesus for sound reasons. And when Jesus wanted him told about the miracles it is evident that John was not a person who lost faith for had he lost his faith reminding him about the miracles would have served no purpose for they would be part of what he disbelieved in. Here we have the word of a really holy man, John, who died for condemning immorality that Jesus was not who he professed to be.
 
John knew that Jesus thought it rude to fast while the Son of God was on earth but still he and his men fasted (Mark 2:18-22). He did not believe in Jesus because he saw the dark side of the self-styled saviour. He did not get his convictions from malicious gossips for he was strictly decent. The gospels say that John was the prophesied one who would identify the saviour and the Messiah so John’s testimony to Jesus was made next to the Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah the main credential for Jesus. Jesus called John the supreme prophet.
 
If the main prophet comes to tell us that the saviour is coming and point him out then how can we know we should listen to him or believe that he is sent by God? Obviously the prophet has to do miracles. But John did none. When the supreme witness does not do miracles and the saviour does them then there is a problem. The miracles of the saviour are being declared to be inferior to the testator. Why? For the testimony comes first not the miracles. We must believe in Jesus because John says so and not because Jesus does miracles. Jesus’ miracles then would be irrational and unnecessary. God doesn’t do miracles like that for they must be only done under exceptional and extreme circumstances according to Christian logic – if we couldn’t keep miracles within the boundaries of reason then only trouble and chaos and confusion could be expected. To accept Jesus just because of the miracles would be preferring the weak reason to the strong one. Jesus told John a wicked lie when he told him to believe in him on account of his great miracles. Incidentally, if John did no miracles and was the precursor then Jesus did none either. It would have been better if John and not Jesus had done them. God didn’t seem to know any of this. If miracles mean nothing as this scenario shows then they are no help at all in determining who is a prophet and who is the son of God and saviour.
 
It is ludicrous to believe in Jesus because the prophet commands it when the prophet does no miracles and Jesus does for the prophet is a bigger credential than the miracles meaning it is best if the prophet does them himself too.

John sent word asking Jesus if he was the Christ and if not if we should wait for another. John would have known his end was near in prison or that he would never be out of there to prepare for anybody else. So, John denied that he was a precursor for Jesus. The precursor would have to identify the Christ.

So Jesus said that John was the greatest person ever born and yet the least that enters the Kingdom of Heaven is better. So though John was the greatest person he was not going to Heaven. Jesus did not like John.
 
When most people - including the most reliable – think that a person is a fraud that means that they are likely to be right. All we have is a handful of writers to apparently say that Jesus never sinned and we have thousands of people who said he was a sinner.