Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - Re: Gospel Creation

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Hudson Barton <hhbv AT highwinds.com>
  • To: "Kata Markon" <gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Gospel Creation
  • Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 23:50:22 -0500


Mark made extensive use of the Old
Testament in creating his stories about Jesus, as has been demonstrated
repeatedly on this list.


This list has demonstrated nothing of the sort. The use of the word "create" in the above context sets forth Mark as a charlatan. That conclusion is well outside the scholarship that I am aware of, and I doubt there's any consensus to that effect here.

The gospel narratives are quite unlike the narrative accounts of Genesis where the text begs to be understood as non-history. In the gospels, the narrative begs to be understood as historically reliable. Hence the oft repeated claims to being "witnesses." Luke and John go to great pains to establish their gospels as factual (Luke i.1) and as being "real" (Jn xix.35). They are clearly concerned that the gospel(s) might be read as nothing more than myth. The issue of historicity was seen by the New Testament writers and by the early church as crucial to its credibility.

I believe it was Aristotle who said that when considering the meaning, purpose and origin of a text, that primary consideration ought to be given to what the text says about itself. The gospels claim to be historical. That much is a fact.

Some of the many justifications for NT historical reliability are:

1. There is much corroborated historical detail in the NT, notably from Luke;
2. All of the NT writers were close to Jesus and/or his disciples (meaning that there are just a few short years of oral tradition, if any);
3. Jesus's messianic vision differs significantly from the messianic vision commonly held in the culture (arguing against the notion that messianic fervor could concoct these stories).

If I'm not mistaken, the arguments put forth by Mr. Alward for a fictional NT origin are almost universally circular in logic. More specifically his error is one of petitio principii, making the same statement both as premise and as conclusion. To paraphrase, he says that the claims and events of the gospel account are not believable, therefore they must not be believed.


H.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page