Kata Markon

[Hudson Barton <hhbv AT highwinds.com>]

> 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.