This may fall under the “there are no stupid questions, only stupid people” umbrella, but I appeal to the wisdom of the teeming millions. From what I can gather, before he met Jesus, John “the Baptist” was a prophet who baptized people who were Jewish to cleanse them of sin, and told of the coming of a greater prophet than himself. Were these people who he baptised still Jewish, or were they becoming Christians (before John had even met Jesus), or were they being baptised into some other, long forgotten, sect? Anyone got any dope?
The answer: Baptizing doesn’t necessarily gain you membership in anything. John the Baptist just baptized; he didn’t switch people’s religions around.
It is worth noting that “baptism” was a part of Jewish ritual tradition already, and still forms part of the conversion ritual in Orthodox and Conservitive custom (see point 6 on the link) - this was not something invented by John or that “turns people Christian” (in spite of it having that association in some denomenations nowadays).
Grim
That’s a hella good answer grimpixie and a great link. So prior to his own baptism by Jesus, John was simply performing a standard Jewish ritual with no conversion stated or implied.
Also a good answer by you Priceguy, 'tho his later role as a converter did mean he did eventually “switch people’s religions around.” Or am I mistaken in this belief as well? He did eventually perform “conversion” baptisms, didn’t he? I think that’s where my original confusion arose from, as the two rituals he performed (converting vs. non- converting baptisms) do have the same title.
Blast! That last post wasn’t very clear given grimpixie’s post. I meant to say that John did both Jewish baptisms (before meeting Jesus) and Christian baptisms (after the “Jesus baptism incident”) in which he converted people from their previous religion (most likely Judaism) to Christianity.
I don’t think it’s fair to say that. Jesus wasn’t trying to form a new religion but rather to reform Judaism itself. It’s not until after his death that his followers split from Judaism.
The gospels tell of John the Baptist baptising Jesus. They do not tell of Jesus baptising John the Baptist; in fact it is not completely clear that Jesus baptised anyone at all, although his apostles certainly did. There is no assertion that John the Baptist was ever baptised himself. (All this assumes the accuracy of the gospel narrative, of course.)
There is, apparently, an ancient, non-scriptural tradition that Christ baptised Peter, that Peter baptised Andrew, James and John, and that they baptised the other Apostles. Again, this tradition does not assert that John the Baptist was ever baptised.
The mainstream Christian tradition agrees that Johannine baptism was symbolic of repentance of sin, and was not the sacramental Christian baptism believed to have been instituted by Christ. The Acts of the Apostles records how people who had been baptised by John the Baptist were subsequently baptised “in the name of the Lord Jesus”, whereupon the Holy Spirit came upon them.
The notion of baptism as marking a change to a different religion is a later addition (though not much later). If the Christian tradition and scriptures are accepted, Christian baptism was instituted by Christ before his death. But it was not until sometime after his death that Christianity came to be thought of – even by Christians – as a religion distinct from Judaism.
To continue what UDS said, John the Baptist remarks about Jesus, prior to seeing Jesus, that “I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” (Mk 1:8, echoed in Mt 3:11 and Lk 3:16 and expanded upon in Jn 1:24 - 34). So the early Christians already had established a tradition that Jesus was changing the nature of baptism while indicating that John’s baptism was the older purification rite without the additional Christian meaning.
Some will contend that:
John was a voice crying in the wilderness to prepare for the coming of Jesus the Messiah.
Jesus as the Messiah was the fulfillment of Judaism, doing away with the laws of commancments and establishing a law of commitment to observing a life of righteousness.
Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the light. No man comes to the Father but by me.”
.
John the baptist did start a sect. Or rather, there has been a sect, which survived for quite a long time (and is possibly still around, I can’t remember) and which related to John the Baptist.
Since some posters have mentionned this sect in previous threads, I hope some will come with more precisions.
Did you mean the Essenes?
Regards,
Shodan
Just a nitpick …
From what I can gather, before he met Jesus, John “the Baptist” was a prophet who baptized people who were Jewish to cleanse them of sin, and told of the coming of a greater prophet than himself.
John and Jesus were cousins. They had met long before he started running around the woods eating locusts and baptizing people 
Not Essenes but Mandaeans.
The Mandean Sabians, also called the Subba (the baptized) or the Nasuri. They’re a gnostic group, primarily in Iraq, and they believe that John the Baptist was a Mandean prophet and teacher. They say Jesus was a teacher too, but that he was a heretic who perverted doctrine and made religion too “easy”.
John the B was the latter-day Karl Rove? 
Wow. An interesting discussion all around, and thank you all. aldiboronti, this is exactly what I was looking for when I asked the question. Amazing link. The question of what ritual John the Baptist was performing and if there was some sect attached came up at the in-laws during easter dinner. Next time I’m over there they’re going to think I did a lot of research. Thank you Teeming Millions!
From what I remember from various commentaries, Jewish baptisms were supposed to be for the “dirty Gentiles” who wanted to become Jews. Except along comes John the Baptist saying that even the Chosen People needed to be washed. Then along comes Jesus, surprising the heck out of John.
Paraphrased, 'cause I’m too lazy to dig out my Bible at the moment:
John didn’t want to baptise Jesus at first - “I should be baptised by you!”
Jesus says, “Chill, cousin, this is what God wills.”
So John baptises Jesus, the dove descends, Jesus goes into the desert to meditate, etc.
Water purification rituals had been part of Judaism for a long time. The Dead Sea Scrolls mention such rites, not exclusively connected with admission to the sect, tho.
The progress of this event through the different Gospels is interesting.
Mark (earliest gospel): "In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. " - no problems, mate.
Matthew (later):" But John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?” 15 But Jesus answering said to him, “Permit it at this time…” - what!? baptise the Son of God? Matt adds a (poorly justified) excuse why it’s OK.
John (still later): "29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him and declared, "Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is he of whom I said, “After me comes a man who ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’ 31 I myself did not know him; but I came baptizing with water for this reason, that he might be revealed to Israel.” 32 And John testified, "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God.” F9 35 The next day John again was standing with two of his disciples, 36 and as he watched Jesus walk by, he exclaimed, “Look, here is the Lamb of God!” "
- now there’s lots of excuses supplied, and lots of glorification to counteract the idea that Jesus needed baptism, which was for the forgiveness of sins.
IIRC, in an even later apocryphal gospel, John the B refuses categorically to baptize Jesus, since he (Jesus) is too holy.