Gospels

Review: Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, 2nd Edition

/ rtrube54 / 3 Comments
Cover image of "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses" by Richard Bauckham

Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, 2nd Edition, Richard Bauckham, foreword by Simon Gathercole. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802874313) 2017.

Summary: Argues from both early church fathers and internal evidence that the gospels are based on eyewitness testimony.

Gospel scholarship over the past hundred years has embraced the idea that the gospels reflect anonymous community traditions that have passed through a number of hands, or storytellers. It is assumed that the “historical Jesus” behind these gospels is only dimly and uncertainly accessible. In this work, Richard Bauckham, in Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, asserts that the gospels are based on eyewitness testimony concerning the life and teaching of Jesus. His contention is that this testimony is “both a reputable historiographic category for reading the gospels as history and also a theological model for understanding the gospels as the entirely appropriate means of access to the historical reality of Jesus” (p. 5). He cites Samuel Byrskog’s scholarship emphasizing the importance of eyewitness testimony in ancient historiography.

He then begins his case for the gospels as eyewitness testimony with the early church father, Papias. Papias, writing around 130 CE, argued for the “living and surviving voice” rather than information from books. He preferred elders who could testify to what any of the Lord’s disciples had said. Specifically, he gave credence to those who heard Peter, John, Matthew or John the Elder. Rather than collective traditions, he prized above all testimony–the testimony on which our gospels are based.

In succeeding chapters, Bauckham looks at the gospels. He begins with the named persons, arguing their significance as possible sources of the accounts in which they are named. To underscore the credibility of the gospels, he creates a table of names in the gospels. Then he compares it to the frequency of common names of the time, finding significant overlap. He considers the twelve named disciples, the variants on their names, and their significance as eyewitnesses.

Then Bauckham turns to Mark. He notes the use of inclusio in naming Peter at both the beginning and end of the gospel and more than others (he also notes similar forms of inclusio in Luke and John to establish eyewitness testimony). In addition, there is an unusual alternating from third to first person in Mark that Bauckham suggests indicative of Peter’s speech. At this point, Bauckham brings in Papias, who mentions Mark as the translator of Peter. He affirms Matthew as writing an Aramaic version of this gospel (from which our Greek version arises).

Bauckham then offers an extended discussion of oral tradition, memorization, arguing that individuals kept traditions rather than communities. This includes an interesting chapter on eyewitness memory in modern psychology, with the conclusion that the gospels represent genuine memories.

However, the most interesting, and perhaps controversial material in the book, concerns his chapters on the Gospel of John. He argues that John, unlike the other gospels is not based on eyewitness testimony but rather is eyewitness testimony. Specifically, it is the testimony of the Beloved Disciple. However, he would identify “John” not as the son of Zebedee but as “John the Elder,” based on Papias. He argues that this John was not one of the twelve. However, he was a “beloved” friend, part of a larger group of disciples who had been with Jesus throughout his ministry. Unfortunately, discussion over who John is can overshadow Bauckham’s more important point, that this gospel is eyewitness testimony.

The book concludes with Bauckham recapitulating his argument for the gospels as testimony. While such testimony must be weighed, he argues for a presumption of trust rather than suspicion. Bauckham adds several chapters to the second edition at this point. These address criticisms of the earlier edition, particularly concerning eyewitnesses in Mark and the identity of John. Provocatively, he concludes that if his case for the gospels as testimony holds up, this means the end of form criticism.

It is striking to me to encounter scholarly confirmation of conclusions that arose inductively from student Bible studies in my college days. While we didn’t have the tables or patristic evidence marshalled by Bauckham, we took seriously Luke’s testimony of how he wrote his work. We saw Mark’s focus on Peter. We accepted John’s claim to be offering eyewitness testimony and noted the details unique to his account that suggested an eyewitness presence. It has always been baffling to me to see the skepticism of many scholars toward these accounts. Bauckham makes a strong case that my early reading of the gospels was not off the mark. More than that, it suggests we can approach these accounts with a high degree of confidence that they render accounts of Jesus that may be trusted.

I’m sure that some will continue to quarrel over the question of Johannine authorship. While I incline to the traditional view of John the Apostle, Bauckham’s contention doesn’t trouble me. Either are equally eyewitnesses. We don’t know the authorship of Hebrews and affirm it as scripture. I do suspect that form critics and the questers for the historical Jesus have a problem with Bauckham. I would suggest the real problem is the contention that the gospels are not what they present themselves to be but rather are anonymous community traditions. Wouldn’t it be surprising if what most Christians through history believed the gospels to be and the best gospel scholarship were agreed? Bauckham gives us hope that might be possible.

Review: Jesus, Contradicted

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image for "Jesus, Contradicted" by Michael R. Licona.

Jesus, Contradicted, Michael R. Licona. Zondervan Academic (ISBN: 9780310159599) 2024.

Summary: Addresses the discrepancies in gospel accounts drawing upon the conventions of ancient biography.

One of the challenges that comes with reading the gospels closely is that we notice discrepancies in the accounts. Not in the major facts but in the details. It is enough, though, that it raises questions about the reliability of the gospel accounts. And some of the efforts to “harmonize” the accounts just seem forced. In Jesus, Contradicted, Michael R. Licona, meets these objections head on without resorting to forced harmonization.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke raise a number of these questions. Most scholars believe Matthew and Luke used much of the material in Mark. Part of what is called “the Synoptic Problem” arises from the discrepancies between the very similar accounts. Some is grammatical, with Matthew and Luke improving on Mark’s rough grammar (does our doctrine of inspiration allow for that?). Licona goes into all of this, inviting us, first of all, to allow for the variations that often occur in eyewitness accounts.

More than this, Licona’s main argument is that we should not base our case for gospel reliability on modern historical accuracy. Rather, we should assess the gospels for what they are: first century biographies. Such biographies permitted the biographer greater freedom in reporting. While they did not invent events, they may not meet standards of exactitude required in a legal deposition. Wording may vary and minor details in an account may vary and yet the biography is accepted as true, especially if other accounts broadly confirm what is written.

Furthermore, biographers used various compositional devices that contribute to variation including paraphrasing and editing, compression displacement, transferal, conflation, simplification, and spotlighting. Licona discusses these various devices and where they may have been employed in gospel accounts.

But this may be troubling for some who hold to a commitment to the inerrancy of scripture. Licona observes that often, this view results in preconceptions of what scripture must be like that lead to the efforts in forced harmonization. Rather, he argues that “our view of scripture should be consistent with what we observe in scripture.” In other words, scripture rather than some standard external to it ought determine our understanding of its inspiration and trustworthiness. Licona takes several chapters ar the end of this work to elaborate this idea. He contrasts what he calls traditional inerrancy with flexible inerrancy. In his apologetic work, he reports that his approach has helped people return to faith who had turned away because traditional approaches to inerrancy had proven unsustainable.

I believe Licona makes an important contribution not only to our apologetic work around discrepancies in scripture. This will be helpful to many raising questions as they begin reading the gospels. And he offers a robust response to the “new atheist” who belittle the scriptures. But this is not all. He moves our discussion of inspiration and inerrancy beyond abstract terminology to the data of scripture itself. Instead of trying to conform scripture to the Procrustean bed of traditional inerrancy, he proposes a bed that follows the contours of the scriptures.

Furthermore, Licona presents this material in a highly readable form, reflecting experiences of presenting the material to the front office staff of a sports team and an adult Sunday School. This is a great text for teachers, apologists, and anyone who has not found satisfying responses to discrepancies in scripture.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Gospel Media

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "Gospel Media: Reading, Writing, and Circulating Jesus Traditions" by Nicholas A. Elder

Gospel Media: Reading, Writing, and Circulating Jesus Traditions, Nicholas A. Elder. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802879219), 2024.

Summary: Addresses myths and generalizations about reading, writing, and publication in the Greco-Roman world shaping ideas of how the gospels were composed, used, and circulated.

Nicholas Elder writes to address the myths around how people read, wrote, and circulated written materials in the Greco-Roman world. It is assumed, for example, that no one read silently. Reading was a communal rather than solitary act. Likewise, it is assumed that texts were rarely composed in one’s own hand and that the gospels all reflect the same compositional practices. Circulation of written texts was believed to follow a “concentric circles model from intimate associates to a broader public. Elder’s study of Greco-Roman practices and the gospel texts reveal a much more complicated picture than has been generally assumed.

Reading

Elder observes that there are examples of both silent and vocal reading in the Greco-Roman world. He also notes at least one example in the gospels, when Jesus reads from Isaiah. Jesus would have read silently or at least scanned, to find the text he read. Reading also was not always a communal activity. For example, the Ethiopian eunuch was reading on his own when Philip came along. People read alone both silently and aloud. Also, reading aloud with others occurred in various settings, from large groups to intimate family settings, or even one person reading for another.

The gospels reflect these different reading practices. Mark reflects the oral recitations of the Jesus tradition converted to text whereas Matthew wrote a “book,” that best worked when read in sections communally. Luke reflects an account written for an individual, if we interpret Theophilus as such, that was also used communally. John is written as a document reflecting awareness of the other accounts, and complementing these. Elder notes the concluding colophons in John 20 and 21 in support of this idea.

Writing

Contrary to the idea that the same compositional practices, often in the form of dictation to an amanuensis, pertained in all instances, Elder proposes that the evidence supports a variety of practices. Both composing by mouth and by hand may be used, or some combination, whether in writing or revision. All of this may or may not be in connection with a prior oral event, with or without the approval of the speaker (such as unauthorized dissemination of lecture notes).

Elder notes evidence for very different compositional approaches with the gospels. He sees Mark as reducing oral preaching to text to be re-used in other oral readings. Matthew and Luke both reflect written compositions, working with Mark and other sources, removing the oral residues (for example, reducing the use of “and”). Matthew wrote for communal readings (its five-fold structure) whereas Luke wrote for individual and communal reading. John is more complicated, reflecting both oral and written aspects and the evidence, for Elder is less clear.

Circulation

How were written compositions circulated? One assumption is that many New Testament documents were circulated in codex, or book, form. Also, it was believed that compositions were circulated in successively larger concentric circles. This goes from initial text, to friends, a wider friend circle with feedback, a public release, and then further copying of texts by others.

Elder proposes that both the form in which they were circulated and the process varied with different documents, both in Graeco-Roman society and with the gospels. Things may be accidentally or intentionally published abroad with or without the author’s approval of the text. Or it may go through more limited circulation with authorial revision. It may even be suppressed.

Elder thinks that Mark was circulated in codex form to a select group, and presumably they circulated it to other churches. He believes Matthew and Luke to have been circulated in roll form in a public release. John, he believes, was read intramurally among friends, and then circulated more widely. This felt to me the most speculative part of his book.

Conclusion

Overall, I thought Elder raised interesting questions and proposed reading, writing, and circulation processes that are as complex as they are today. I found the section on reading fascinating as I relate to contemporary readers who also read in a variety of ways. The section on writing helped me reflect on the differences of the four gospels from a compositional point of view. I think the section on circulation the most speculative, but challenging the general adoption of codices seems to point to a direction for further research. What I most appreciated was Elder’s attention to textual detail in the gospels for clues to how they were written, form whom they were written and how they were intended to be used. All told, I thought this a fascinating account that challenged prevailing assumptions and asked interesting questions.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Passions of the Christ

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

Passions of the Christ, F. Scott Spencer. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2021.

Summary: A study of the emotional life of Jesus in the gospels, drawing upon both classical thought and emotions theory.

Sometimes, Jesus is presented to us as without passion, always in control. Some of this arises from belief in the impassibility of God. Yet what does the incarnation mean if the fully human as well as divine Jesus is emotionless. F. Scott Spencer presents a very different picture of the emotional life of Jesus. He observes a range of emotions in Jesus from anger and disgust to anguish to surprise, deep compassion, and joy. Often, in the same episode, there will be a complex mix of emotions. Not unlike us.

Spencer’s approach is a combination of exegesis, word study and cultural backgrounds, a consideration of classic philosophy concerning the emotions and contemporary psychology. This results in a deep, probing study of the emotions of Jesus, surprising and unsettling at times, particularly the instances of his anger or disgust, and yet consistent in his passion for the full human flourishing of those to whom he came to minister.

After two chapters laying out the basis for his study, Spencer explores in eight chapters key emotions of Jesus evident in the gospels: anger, anguish both during his ministry and in his final hours, disgust, surprise, compassion, and joy. One of the most interesting episodes is the resuscitation of Lazarus where anger, anguish, disgust (Jesus “snort”), and compassion all come together in one narrative.

Perhaps the most interesting chapter was that on the amazement or surprise of Jesus. We see this both in response to the unbelief of his own people, and the unexpected belief of the Roman centurion. Spencer proposes that there is a kind of “enlargement” of Jesus on perspective in these episodes. Likewise, we may wonder about the anger of Jesus at times, for example with the leper in Mark 1. Spencer contends that the leper’s “if you choose,” questions the life-giving mission of Jesus, a form of unbelief deeply disturbing, sufficiently explanation for the anger of Jesus.

Spencer makes us take a fresh look at these emotional expressions in Jesus’s life. Whether one agrees with his exploration of these emotions, it is unavoidable that Jesus manifests the full range of emotions we all do. He is not the incarnate God in appearance only. Yet anger, disgust, surprise, compassion and joy also make sense in light of a singular passion for human flourishing in relation with God. And in all this, the saving God is revealed.

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Review: The Nazarene

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

The Nazarene: Forty Devotions on the Lyrical Life of Jesus, Michael Card. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2020.

Summary: The author helps us consider Jesus through lyrics from his songs and biblically informed reflections.

Michael Card has been singing and writing about Jesus for over thirty years. I first encountered his music in the late 1980’s and was struck with the depth of the lyrics that made the biblical text of the gospels come to life. Later on, he began writing more about the biblical texts that had informed his lyrics in books like Scribbling in the Sand, and commentaries on the four gospels titled The Biblical Imagination Series. Last year, his book Inexpressible made my “Best of the Year” list (review).

This work is a series of forty devotions, nearly all associated with lyrics from his music, beginning with his title “The Nazarene.” They are grouped in four groups of ten based on each of the gospels. Each of the devotions can be read on its own or in conjunction with listening to the recordings (not included with the book).

Each section begins with an imagined reflection on each of the attributed gospel writers. Matthew is found reflecting on the expulsion of Jewish Christians from the synagogues. This gives added meaning to his reflection on Jesus’s words, “I desire mercy and not sacrifice.” His last devotion on the Kingdom reflects on the hidden and revealed, its smallness and enormity, its nearness and far off character.

In Mark, the devotion on “A Great Wind, A Great Calm, a Great Fear” brought to light the demonic character of the storm, enroute to the encounter with the Gadarene demoniac. Most fearsome was not the storm but the authority of the one who calmed it. It raises for me the question of whether I want Jesus to be that powerful. This is followed up with the devotion on “The Stranger” and how we the real Jesus may be a stranger to us. I think of the many times of reading the gospels, and asking, along with Card, “who is this Jesus?”

For me, one of the most thought-provoking of the reflections from the Luke section was number 26 on “The Bridge.” He writes:

From the head to the heart
From the heart to the mind
The Truth must make a journey

He believes that the “bridge” from heart to mind is the imagination–that we often read scripture only with our hearts or only with our heads. He proposes that the parables of Jesus help bridge these. It seemed to me that this devotional captured the essence of Card’s work–a life of studying and meditating on the word and using the imagination in lyric and writing to enter deeply into the narratives of Jesus.

Finally, in John, I felt Card brought to life for me the significance of Jesus’ proclamation on the last day of the feast, “come to me and drink” in the context of the Feast of Tabernacles. He also takes us deeply into the shortest verse in scripture, “Jesus wept” and why he did so at the death of Lazarus.

This work comes out just in time for Advent but equally would make a great collection of Lenten readings. More than that, Card invites us to join him in singing the songs of the Savior. When asked why he writes all these lyrics about Jesus, Card responds, “How can you not sing about him?” Perhaps amid a pandemic and after contentious election, we don’t want to sing at all, and perhaps if our worship is online, it has been a while since we’ve sung the songs of Jesus. This book will restore those songs, and perhaps help us approach with wonder the Jesus we thought we knew, but knew so little.

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review galley of this book from the publisher. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Review: The Jesus of the Gospels

/ rtrube54 / 3 Comments

The Jesus of the Gospels: An Introduction, Andreas J. Köstenberger. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2020.

Summary: An introduction to the four gospels, providing accessible scholarship, introductions and commentary focused on Jesus, to whom each gospel witnesses.

How I wish I had this work as a young Christian reading the New Testament for the first time (the Old Testament would come later). I thought back as I read through this work how much I had missed in my early readings. Sure, I noticed the amazing, and sometimes perplexing, things Jesus taught and did. I noticed the similarities between the first three gospels, and some of the differences but had no sense of why they were different. Then there was John, which seemed so different. But I missed so much that Andreas Köstenberger highlights in this work, designed as a companion for new readers and students of the gospels.

In the introduction and first chapter the author sets out his basic premises for the book. He accepts these as accounts either by witnesses or based on eyewitness accounts that are trustworthy, coherent, and centered on the person of Christ. Rather than provided lengthy discussions of critical scholarship, the focus is on the text in its context. Citing the “quests for the historical Jesus” which often are reflections of the interpreters, Köstenberger’s approach is to allow each gospel to speak for itself, offering four complementary accounts of Jesus life, and he advocates the reading of all four gospels, proceeding in the canonical order.

After the introductory material, the author takes a chapter for each gospel. First he answers the questions of who is the person to whom the gospel is attributed, how they tell the story of Jesus, what their distinctive emphases are and the major contours or outline of the gospel. This is followed by passage by passage commentary of the text with helpful background, and occasional sidebars (for example on “The Herods in the New Testament”). At the end of each section, there is a Recap, summarizing the section and how this connects to the theme.

Köstenberger notes key structural features of each gospels, such as the five sections of teaching in Matthew, or the book of signs and book of exaltation structure of John. He calls attention to the “Markan sandwich” and alerts the reader to instances of this. He shows Luke’s concern for women and the outsider. He also offers a list of suggested resources for those interested in further study (although all of these were written by him!) and a thirty day reading plan to work through the gospels.

The book is a large format paperback that easily lies flat on a desk (or one’s lap) while you are reading your Bible. The commentary is easy to read and often offers applications. This is a great resource for anyone beginning to read the gospels, for anyone wanting to discover Jesus again, or perhaps for the first time.

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Review: From Good News to Gospels

/ rtrube54 / 9 Comments

From Good News to Gospels

From Good News to Gospels,  David Wenham (Foreword by Donald A. Hagner). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2018.

Summary: Explores the role of oral tradition as a source for the written gospels.

Depending on the gospel and the scholar, anywhere between roughly 30 and 60 years elapsed between the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus and the accounts of the mission and message of Jesus we know as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Most scholars propose that Mark was the earliest of the gospels and that Mark’s material served as one of the sources for Matthew and Luke. At the same time these gospels share material not in Mark, often posited to originate in “Q” (short for Quelle, German for “source.”). There is also material unique to Matthew (“M”), and Luke (“L”). Most have considered these “literary sources,” that is written and circulated, but all we have are the canonical gospels. Q, M, and L exist only hypothetically.

David Wenham argues that serious consideration needs to be given to oral sources. The cultures in which the gospels arose were oral cultures and the possibility of accurate transmission is far greater than often credited. He contends that significant portions of Jesus life, teaching, as well as passion were proclaimed as early believers pursued the mission of Jesus. Wenham notes the emphasis on teaching, learning, remembering, and witness in Acts, as well as the four gospels, all having to do with the faithful transmission of the accounts of Jesus.

Wenham then turns to the writings of Paul, the earliest written documents. 1 Corinthians 15: 1-3 provides the clearest evidence of Paul’s reliance on what were probably oral traditions in speaking of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 is another example, as he speaks of what he received regarding the Lord’s supper. He goes on to note a number of passages including the “thief in the night” of 1 Thessalonians 5:2 and other teaching about the Lord’s return, teaching on non-retaliation in Romans 12:14-19 that echoes the Sermon on the Mount, “love fulfilling the law” in Romans 13:8-10 echoing the great commandment, and a number of others.

He also discusses the places where Matthew and Luke record material that is in Mark but seem to be drawing on another source that overlaps Mark. Traditionally, this is the hypothetical “Q” but Wenham argues that oral tradition is an equally plausible explanation. He also focuses on two incidents of oral tradition in the gospels and also in Paul’s writing, the references to the labor being worth his hire, and the discussions of “the thief in the night” and the surrounding material. Wenham argues that these are strong examples pointing to oral traditions around the mission and return of Jesus. He then considers how extensive this oral tradition is and notes that Paul’s writings show evidence of the whole story of Jesus–his ancestry, birth, ministry, last night, death, resurrection, and commission to evangelize the nations.

Wenham then concludes with some fascinating proposals, that the hypothetical Q might be oral tradition rather than a lost written document, and that Matthew and Luke may have drawn not only upon Mark, but perhaps upon oral material that pre-dated Mark. Rather than drawing on a couple of hypothetical literary sources, these writers may well have drawn upon widely circulated oral traditions, instead of or in addition to these.

Aside from offering a possible explanation as to why we have not found any manuscript evidence of hypothetical Q, L, or M, the primary contribution this makes is to help us see an alternate route to how oral traditions preached and taught became the written gospels (though there is little here about John), and how oral traditions may offer a good explanation for the connections between the gospels and Paul’s letters. I suspect if Wenham’s proposal gains traction, many will continue to find Q, L, and M helpful for delineating the departures of Matthew and Luke from Mark but that, increasingly, these may be posited as oral traditions rather than literary sources. There is a parsimony and explanatory power to Wenham’s proposal in this slim volume that is worth far more study.

____________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.