(10 votes, average: 4.60 out of 5)
Loading...I’m discussing how scholars came to realize that Mark our earliest Gospel is not simply a nuts-and-bolts, unembellished, accurate report of what Jesus said and did. This kind of scholarship reached a kind of climax about a century ago with a group of scholars called “form critics.” To make sense of what they said and why they said it, I need to start where I left off yesterday — and so I’ll repeat the end of yesterday’s post to get us a running start on today’s, taken from my book Jesus Before the Gospels (HarperOne 2016).
******************************
Where did the stories found in the Gospels themselves come from? The “form critics” (a term I’ll explain below) maintained that they did not come from authors who were themselves followers of Jesus or who acquired their information directly from eyewitnesses. The stories instead came from oral traditions in circulation in the years prior to the Gospels.
The authors of the Gospels – all of them, not just Mark – wrote down stories that had been passed along by word of mouth for years and decades before they wrote. For that reason, when the Gospel writers produced their accounts, they were not simply inventing the stories themselves; but they were also not recording what actually happened based on direct testimony. They were stringing together stories that had long been circulating among the Christian communities. For Dibelius, “stringing together” is precisely what the Gospel writers did. The Gospel stories are “pearls on a string.” The authors provided the string, but they inherited the pearls.
Form critics such as Dibelius and Bultmann were principally interested in the pearls, not the string. They wanted to learn more about the kinds of stories that had been circulating orally within the Christian churches. We have access to these stories, of course, only in their written form as they appear in the Gospels. But by examining these stories we can acquire a better understanding of where they came from and how they came to acquire the shape that they have.
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Huh… and here I was thinking that form criticism was synonymous with body shaming… Now I better revisit the sermon I planned for next Sunday “Jesus walked everywhere; Did He walk enough?”
It has always amazed me that the writings of Papias, who directly interviewed witnessess to early events, were belittled by subsequent Church authorities, and sadly lost to direct modern scrutiny. Modern standards of journalism would accord his work more credibility than the hearsay accounts of those who had a vested interest in portraying the historical Jesus as a larger than life figure.
My sense is that if we actually had his five books, most modern readers would think they were pretty far out. (Given the few quotations of it we have!)
Thank you for the discussion of memory and stories about the NT. I had a question about Matthews’ account of Jesus as he is brought before Pilate, 27-11-54. In 27-19, Matthew describes how Pilate’s wife had a bad dream about Jesus and was pleading with him to release him. But how did Matthew have access to this conversation between Pilate’s wife and Pilate? Has there been any discussion of this by biblical scholars or earlier Christian theologians? It does seem to be a kind of poetic license on the part of Matthew to enhance the drama. How is this discussion dealt with in the Greek NT? Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Thanks, Ray
Yup, it almost certainly has to be an invented story. Whether Matthew or someone in the oral tradition invented it, there’s no way to know.
“Ultimately most of the stories they retold must have come from oral traditions, as followers of Jesus told and retold stories about him.”
Curious as to why you would assert this. Sure, stories about Jesus’ teachings, death, and resurrection circulated, but how many other stories? Excepting for the Gospels and Acts (a sequel to a gospel), in the rest of the NT books and the Apostolic Fathers, we don’t find any mention of Jesus doing signs, wonders, mighty deeds, healings, or exorcisms. It’s not until we get to later patristic writers (Justin, Irenaeus, etc) who definitely knew the Gospels that we find mention of such things. If we only had 22 NT books (not 4 Gospels + Acts) and Apostolic Fathers, would we suspect that Jesus did any such mighty deeds? Would we see him more like John the Baptist, an apocalyptic proclaimer, but not an exorcist or wonder-worker? Do you think many such stories were circulating about Jesus orally, and if so, upon what basis? Or was it only written stories in the Gospels?
I think they were circulating orally because there was no other way to circulate them among non-literate populations (most of the anicent world) and Christianity could not have spread otherwise (no one can believe in Jesus if they don’t know about him). Moreover, we have records of people telling stories (e.g., in the book of Acts; Paul). I don’t see how there could be Gospel sources (Mark, Q, M, L; those for John and Thomas, and Peter, etc.) if there were not sources of information.
A couple years ago, you posted how Paul rarely mentions Jesus’ teachings, offering three options: (1) Paul had no occasion to mention them; (2) Paul considered them irrelevant to his mission; (3) Paul didn’t know many teachings. You assumed there were considerable teachings circulating. And there is evidence of at least some teachings circulating (Paul, 1 Clement, Polycarp). But we have no mention in Paul, the rest of the NT, or the Apostolic Fathers of Jesus doing signs, wonders, mighty deeds, healings, or exorcisms. Such stories are only in the Gospels.
Paul’s silence about Jesus doing signs intrigues me more than his few refs to teachings. Paul had spent 15 days with Cephas and James. Paul himself claimed to do signs & wonders and recognized church members gifted to do miracles. And Paul argues that Jews sought signs (1 Cor 1:22-24) which is where one might expect Paul to mention Jesus’ mighty deeds (like the Gospels assert), but instead he only preached Christ crucified. And Paul only speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as the mighty deed that validates Jesus’ identity (Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15), not any signs, wonders, mighty deeds, healings, or exorcisms. Your thoughts on this complete absence in Paul?
I deal wiht this issue at some length in my recent on-line course, “Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide.” I suspect Paul didn’t know a *lot* about the historical Jesus and didn’t think much of what he knew mattered so much for his proclamation. Certainly seems strange. I’d love to know what he told his potential ocnverts….
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy
(and maybe a future Platinum Member blog post writer)
Authors of the Gospels Wrote These Things to the Mutual Exclusion of Jesus Saying These Things
1)
John 8: 1-11 Woman caught in adultery
This isn’t a pearl. Jesus did not experience this.
2)
Mark 12: 1-12 parable of the wicked tenants
Matthew 21: 33-43
Not a pearl. Jesus didn’t say this parable but Mark wrote about the obvious.
3)
Mark chapter 13
The destruction of the Temple Foretold
Not a pearl but obvious after AD 70 when Mark was written.
4)
Matthew 23: 38-39
Your house will be abandoned.
Not a pearl but obvious after AD 70 when Mark and the synoptic gospels were written.
Bart, do you agree on these four points–they were not passed on by word of mouth but were written by gospel authors without oral tradition?
The historical Woe-Saying Jesus did not reference our current day biblical Jesus. He did not say, Jesus of Galilee during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
James, the Brother of Jesus, did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius said this, that, or the other thing.
Jesus of Galilee who went to war against Vespasian and Titus did not say, Jesus of Galilee (time of Emperor Tiberius) said this or that.
King Agrippa II did not say, Jesus of Galilee who lived during the time of Emperor Tiberius made an impression on my father, King Agrippa, because he said or did this, that, or the other thing. My father never told me he knew the pharisees and priests tore their garments when Jesus predicted the future.
And the Temple Establishment–did anyone remember how the Biblical Jesus scared them into such sadness that they cried and ripped their clothes? Did High Priest Ananus and High Priest Jesus of Gamala remember Jesus when the Romans were at their Temple’s doorsteps or better yet when the rebels used the Temple as their base of operations?
(Not a pearl but also not form criticism.)
I actually think Jesus did predict the destruction of the Temple. Other Jews did so as well. And even today people predict things that will happen politically and militarily.