Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - [GMark] [biblical-studies] why attribute wonders to Jesus?

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000 AT comcast.net>
  • To: Kata Markon <gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [GMark] [biblical-studies] why attribute wonders to Jesus?
  • Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:19:00 -0600

Here's one that should be right up Eric Eve's street:


Jeffrey

****
Hi Folks,

I've been working on this topic for a while and am interested in any kind of feedback folk might have (I should note that this was first posted on Xtalk, and then Biblicalist).

Ever since the English Deists up through Bousset, Bultmann, and beyond, it has been suggested that Jesus¹ miracles were first comparable to and then later explicitly derivative of Graeco-roman and Hellenistic wonders, and finally mediated through Hellenistic Judaism. But if so, I¹m wondering to what end?

If early Christianity is to be seen primarily as a philosophy (which several scholars have argued is how many ancients would have seen it), how many philosophical movements in the first century required the working of wonders to establish the credibility of their founder? Given that the increasing skepticism and naturalism in this period (as per Lucian and Cicero) often lead to charges of invention and fabrication, and the near certain potential for accusations of sorcery (as per e.g. Celsus), why run the risk when wonders it seems were not part of the standard warrants of attestation? Why not instead simply rely on the ethical impact of Jesus (such as Origen finally did in defending against Celsus¹ charges of sorcery and trickery and as 19th century liberals were wont to emphasize)? In other words, why the need for wonders if they were in fact so problematic and unnecessary? I realize that Neo-pythagoreanism was making a comeback (Pythagoras being a
wonder worker) which might indicate a trend associating wonders with certain kinds of philosophy. But then Pyth.'s wonders are very different from the kinds of things attributed to Jesus.

If seen as a religion with Jesus as a new deity, which of course begs the enormous question of why anyone would have thought the teacher Jesus to be a deity in the first place, then how many of the new religions from the east felt that they needed to be attested by the wonder working power of the central figure? Franz Cumont has argued that the Oriental religions succeeded in the West because they appealed more strongly to the senses and emotions, spoke directly to the individual, and satisfied the intellect via their written scriptures. Notice the absence of any reference to wonders. As far as I am aware neither the Cybele nor the significantly more successful Isis were known for their manifold wonders (remember Jesus has an extraordinary 35, give or take, distinct wonders/miracles attributed to him).

Further, as Koskenniemi has observed reminding us of what older handbooks noted long before, wonder-workers per se seem to have gone out of fashion in the Gentile world during the two centuries before and first century and a half after Jesus, about 350 years in total. (One of the major defects Bultmann inherited from Bousset was a lack of discrimination in terms of date and genuine parallels). The one or two healings associated with Prryhus and Vespasian seem rather scanty evidence upon which to build a reputation as a wonder worker while in the East Eunus¹ wonders were confined to oracles and breathing fire from his mouth. Not until the end of the second century do we find a bevy of names flourishing, which suggests that the desire for wonders comes a little too late to have influenced the gospels. Again, I note nascent Neo-pythagoreanism (per Apollonius) but it's not really until the late second century that we find explicit wonders being attributed.

Now there is some first century evidence of Jewish magicians (Elymas, Simon Magus, both in Acts) and probably others (see Flintermann¹s response to Koskenniemi, though our material evidence from this period is thin); but were these magicians wonder workers per se, or were they more oracular in orientation? Even so, this seems hardly to explain the extraordinary list of deeds attributed to Jesus.

So, historically speaking, in terms of a putative Hellenistic agenda why
bother to attribute mighty deeds to Jesus? Comments, crits, etc.?

Regards
Rikk Watts





  • [GMark] [biblical-studies] why attribute wonders to Jesus?, Jeffrey B. Gibson, 03/06/2008

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page