Hello, I hope everyone is doing well,
Lydia McGrew, in her book The Mirror Or the Mask: Liberating the Gospels from Literary Devices, criticizes much of Mike Licona’s views in his book Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? What We Can Learn from Ancient Biography. She disagrees with Mike in saying that the Gospels do not belong to the genre of ancient or Greco-Roman biography and claims there is no substantial evidence for this view. I do not know enough about the genre of the Gospels or the compositional devices used by them to give an opinion on the matter. I would like to see what you guys think of her criticism of Mike’s view and his response. Here is a video where Mike is refuting her points: ** you do not have permission to see this link **.
I’m afraid both Licona and McGrew are examples of scholars who let their previously arrived at faith positions dominate their views of the NT despite their divergent conclusions. For rather more critical views see ** you do not have permission to see this link **. Burridge’s work is considered the classic in the field.
I think the case for Mark and John being bioi is much weaker than say, Luke. I suspect Mark is more influenced by the Hebrew Bible, the tales of Elijah and Elisha, and Second Temple midrash narratives of OT scriptural figures, for example, ** you do not have permission to see this link **.
No. The gospels are not Greco-Roman Biographies.
Compare the gospels to Lives of the Caesars.
I am not even going to try to warm up and get going. This does not need discussion. No, the gospels are not Greco-Roman biographies.
Are the gospels closer to Lives of the Caesars or closer to poetry, drama/passion play, or epic?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)