Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Introduction I’ll begin this post by acknowledging my debt to Earl Doherty. It was he who convinced me that the gospel Paul believed and preached was derived only from scripture and visions/revelations, and that it did not include a Son of God who lived a human life on earth. Doherty’s demonstration of those points in … Continue reading “A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 7: The Source of Simon/Paul’s Gospel”
It seems the topic of the day is Amanda Witmer’s article in The Bible and Interpretation, Jesus, the Gospels and History. It covers many points I have addressed often enough here, and that others have addressed at length, so I will refer only in brief to some of these arguments in my little contribution to … Continue reading “Amanda Witmer on “Jesus, the Gospels and Historicity””
How was Brodie’s method of arguing that the Gospel narrative of Jesus is indebted to the OT narrative of Elijah and Elisha received by his scholarly peers before he published his conviction that there never was an historical Jesus? Was it laughed out of the academy as an unfortunate attack of “parallelomania” (as McGrath would … Continue reading “Reviews of Brodie’s Works: Elijah-Elisha Influence on Gospel Narratives”
Updated 18th January, 2013. 8:40 pm. I recently confessed that I have too often written with the assumption that my points are surely so well-known that there is no need to explain them. This post attempts to make amends for one such recent gaffe. I explain why I claimed Hoffmann is out of touch with … Continue reading “Pharisees and Judaism, Popular (Gospel) Caricatures versus Modern Scholarly Views”
This post concludes Thomas Brodie’s critique of the role oral tradition has played in Biblical studies, especially with respect to accounting for the Gospel narratives about Jesus. It is taken from chapter 6 of The Birthing the New Testament: The Intertextual Development of the New Testament Writings. Even if a hypothesis is unclear in its … Continue reading “Oral Tradition Is Unnecessary to Explain the Gospels”
It seems obvious to most scholars that our estimate of the age of a certain book . . . must be founded on information contained in the book itself and not on other information, and the estimate should certainly not be based on the existence of a historical background that may never have existed. The … Continue reading “Scientific and Unscientific Dating of the Gospels”
Revised and updated 3 hours after the original posting. Both the letters of Paul and the narrative in the Gospels speak of Jesus crucified. Jesus’ death is significant. The Gospel of John speaks of Jesus’ blood and Paul refers often to his blood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke in particular stress his birth from … Continue reading “Jesus: the Same in Both Paul and the Gospels”
Last year I posted an amateurish discussion about puns in the Gospel of Mark. During my recent break from blogging I stumbled across a classical scholar’s discussion of puns in the Gospels in an online scholarly journal. The subject is far richer than I had ever imagined. There are possibly major implications for our understanding … Continue reading “Gospel Puns on the Name Above All Names”
Jewish scholars of midrash have recognized that “midrashic” techniques, methods of interpretation of texts in the Hebrew Bible, have been creatively woven into Christian Gospel narrative and teaching material as much as Jews worked creatively with midrash in their own literature. Jon D. Levenson Jon D. Levenson wrote The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved … Continue reading “Midrash and Gospels 3: What some Jewish scholars say (and continuing ‘Midrash Tales of the Messiah’)”
(Added a paragraph commentary in the “proves historicity” section about half an hour after original posting.) New Testament scholars do not speak with one voice when it comes to applying the word “midrash” to the Gospels. Some have resolutely opposed the idea; others take its justification in their stride. In this post I would like … Continue reading “Midrash and the Gospels 2: debates in the scholarly sphere”
Updated 4th August to clarify reference to Lewis John Eron’s definition of midrash. New Testament and Jewish studies scholars have often used the terms “midrash” or “midrashic” in connection with the Gospels, but some scholars object to applying the term to the Gospels. The difference is essentially between “purists” who want to restrict the term … Continue reading “Midrash and the Gospels 1: Some definitions and explanations”
There is a passage in the Gospel of Thomas that would seem to encapsulate the historical methodology some scholars use to reconstruct the historical Jesus: 77 Jesus said, “I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of wood; … Continue reading “Finding Jesus Under the Stone: The Gospel of Thomas Guide to the Scholarly Search for the Historical Jesus”
Let’s keep it simple and consider the Gospel of Mark only. No heavy analysis this post; only a moment to look out the window and think over how the arguments of recent posts would affect our reading of Mark. Firstly, we open with the prophetic announcement. What we are about to read is a fulfilment of prophecy as … Continue reading “Lighter Literary Intellections on the Gospels”
Sara Mandell and David Noel Freedman give us some valuable tips on how to read the pagan Greek work of “History” by Herodotus much of the biblical history of Israel (Genesis to 2 Kings) and the Gospels in their 1993 volume The Relationship Between Herodotus’ History and Primary History (Genesis to 2 Kings). Among several … Continue reading “How to Read the Gospels”