Contents of Course and Notes:

Contentsof Course and Notes:

Week Topic

1 The HistoricalJesus.................................................................................................................... 2

Theological; Historical: Deism, Rationalism,Idealism, Romanticism, Skepticism, Present Situation, Jesus Seminar; Summary onLiberal Lives

2 The JewishBackground............................................................................................................ 23

Ancient Sources, Daniel=s Overview, Persia,Greeks, Hasmoneans, Romans, Messianic Expectation, End of Jewish State, AfterFall of Jerusalem

3 Narratives(Visit of the Wise Men, Matt 2:1-23)...................................................................... 35

Features to Build On, Typical Schedule,Genres, Narrative

4 Authorship& Date of the Synoptics......................................................................................... 41

Authorship, Date, Characteristics

5 Parables (TheMarriage Banquet, Matt 22:1-14)....................................................................... 78

Definitions, How Parables Function: Stories,Analogies, Examples

6 The Gospels asLiterary Works................................................................................................. 84

Literary Form, Techniques

7 Mid-TermHour Test........................................................................................... 87

8 The SynopticProblem............................................................................................................... 89

The Problem, Phenomena, Sketch History,Discussion, Proposed Solution

9 The Geographyof Palestine.................................................................................................... 108

Physical Features, Political Features,Jerusalem

10 Miracle Accounts (Demons & Pigs, Mark 5:1-20)................................................................ 118

Genre, Features, Function, List of Miraclesin Gospels

11 The Theology of the Synoptics.............................................................................................. 119

Introduction, Kingdom Characterized, Present,Provisional, Gospel of Kingdom, Kingdom & Church, Future Consummation

12 Form Criticism & Redaction Criticism................................................................................... 127

Form Criticism: Terminology, Background,Methods, Application, Evaluation; Redaction Criticism: Definition, History,Methodology, Results, Evaluation; Conclusions on Gospel History

13 Controversy Accounts (Beelzebub, Luke 11:14-28).............................................................. 158

Narrative or Discourse, Items to Keep inMind, Controversy and Dialogue Accounts in the Synoptics

14 FinalExam................................................................ seesuggestions on pp 87-88

I.The Historical Jesus

People have enormously diverse views aboutJesus. Some of these are motivatedby their religion or world view, others claim to be honest grappling with thehistorical data. Here we give justa quick tour of influential modern views.

A. Basically Religious Views

The biblical data pointsto Jesus who is somehow fully God and fully human.

Other religious alternatives divide into twocategories:

- Jesus only human, not God in any real sense;

- Jesus divine in some sense, but not biblicalsense.

1. Jesus was only human, not God in anyreal sense.

a. Atheism - Jesus was at bestonly human; many atheists claim he was fictional. This was a standard Communist view.

b. Islam - Jesus was a trueprophet, born of a virgin, worked miracles, will one day reign as Messiah, buthe is not God, since Allah is strictly one and he has no son. Jesus did not die on the cross, but wassnatched to heaven and a substitute was put in his place.

c. Old Liberalism - The Gospelscontain much legendary material since miracles don't happen. God only worked providentially throughJesus, but people misunderstood him and he was deified by the early GentileChristians. He was some sort ofethical teacher, who had more of God in him than others did. He died on the cross as an example, buthis resurrection is only spiritual.

d. Neo‑Orthodoxy - Similarview of Gospels to Old Liberalism, but feel that Jesus of history not nearly soimportant as the Christ of faith. An attempt to rescue religious value while accepting"scientific" history.

2. Jesus is divine in some sense, butnot in the biblical sense.

a. Jehovah's Witnesses - Jesus isa god, actually some sort of "reincarnation" of the archangelMichael, by whom Jehovah God created all things. He is not the Almighty God and is not to be worshipped. He was born of a virgin, workedmiracles, died on the cross. Hisbody dissolved in the tomb, but he will one day return to set up an earthlykingdom for his faithful witnesses.

b. Mormonism - Though the Book ofMormon is fairly orthodox (more or less Trinitarian), and Jesus is viewed asvirgin born, Messiah, miracle-worker, who rose from the dead, their laterscriptures indicate that men can become gods like Jesus and the Fatherdid. Jesus was merely a man at thetime he was on earth, but unusual in that he was the first‑born soul ofhis Father and his spiritual mother in heaven. He was sent from heaven when Mary conceived, and since hisascension has become a god. Hisdeath only saves us from original sin.

c. New Age Movement - A verydiverse group of views that are characterized by a mixture of western attitudesand ideas with elements (especially reincarnation) borrowed from Hinduism andBuddhism. Generally Jesus isviewed as one of the great (but usually not the greatest) ascended masters, whothrough spiritual effort and enlightenment have risen far above the level ofmost humans. You, too, can becomea god by one or more techniques. The term Christ is typically used for a level of spiritualenlightenment, and was not an office held uniquely by Jesus.

B. Allegedly Historical Views

The past 200 years have seen numerous attemptsto produce the "real, historical" Jesus who is allegedly quite differentthan the person pictured in the Gospels. These attempts have regularly assumed that miracles do not occur (havingbeen disproved by science), so that the Gospels (filled as they are withmiracles) cannot be reliable. Proponents of such views accept some of the Gospel material and rejectthe rest. We give some exampleshere characteristic of various philosophical movements since just before1800. Albert Schweitzer, in his Questof the Historical Jesus discusses over 100 such liberal biographies of Christ.

1. Deism: Reimaurus' Wolfenbüttel Fragments (1774-78)

Deism sees God as the Creator watchmaker, butone who does not intervene in human affairs.

Hermann Samuel Reimaurus' book was publishedposthumously in fragments; two of these deal w/ Jesus:

- "Concerning the Story of theResurrection"

- "The Aims of Jesus and hisDisciples"

Jesus claimed to be a Jewish‑type Messiah,to bring the Jews back to God, to be a military commander to"deliver" them, but made no attempt to found a new religion. He did some psychosomatic healings (notmiraculous), tried to start a revolt against Rome, but failed. He was put to death as a revolutionary.

After Jesus' death, his disciples realized hehad failed. Out of the habit ofworking by this time, they decided to start a new religion. They stole Jesus' body, claimed he hadrisen and sent them out to preach this new religion. They invented a new eschatology with a2nd coming.

Publication of Reimaurus' material created asensation, destroyed his reputation, and his family discouraged furtherpublication. Yet it opened the wayfor later liberal reconstructions which were mostly less drastic. It set a precedent of ignoring theepistles of Paul, Peter, and John; of emphasizing Jesus' eschatologicalteaching (which Reimaurus and most liberals do not like); and of claiming muchmaterial in Gospels was the creation of the apostles and the later churchrather than going back to Jesus.

2. Rationalism: Paulus' Leben Jesu (1828)

Rationalists think revelation unnecessary becausemoral truth is eternal and can be deduced by good reasoning.

Unlike Reimaurus, Heinrich Paulus wrote a"sympathetic" life of Christ. Jesus was a great moral teacher of unusual insight andability.

Our main interest in Paulus' work is his"rationalistic" treatment of miracles as non-supernaturalevents misunderstood by the disciples as miracles. Jesus really healed people by someunknown spiritual power which worked on the nervous system, something like ESPor hypnosis. He used naturalmedicine and diet rather like today's holistic healers and health food people.

His nature miracles are harder to explain, butPaulus suggested that Jesus' walking on water was really on the shore or asandbar; that Jesus used the little boy's loaves and fish to shame the adultsinto sharing their hidden lunches; that Jesus' transfiguration was really thesunrise illuminating his hair and clothes from behind; that the resurrectionsof Lazarus et al was Jesus' recognizing they were in a coma and waking themup.

Jesus' own resurrection was similar. He did notdie on the cross, but went into a coma. The cool tomb and aromatic spices revived him. An earthquake opened the tomb, and Jesus appeared to hisdisciples for a while, but later left them to die. His departure was misunderstood as an ascension, as hewalked up the hill into low clouds.

The importance of Paulus' work was to spreadsuch liberal views into "Christian" circles, claiming sympathy forJesus, but still debunking miracles. Paulus did not lose his job or prestige over the book. His rationalizing approach to miracles,though soon ridiculed by liberals, is still used by them in some cases.

3. Idealism: Strauss' Leben Jesu (1835)

Idealism is used here in the philosophicalsense: ideas are the basic reality rather than matter.

According to David Friedrich Strauss, the entirelife of Christ has been colored by mythological interpretation (not just hisbirth and resurrection as some had suggested). Myth is here defined as timeless religious truth clothed inhistorical form, often by using legendary materials. Thus the religiousideas expressed in the events of Jesus' life are true, but the events did notreally happen. For example,the deity of Christ is not a historical truth, but a myth expressing the"highest idea ever conceived by man: the unity of Godhood andmanhood" (i.e., we are all divine).

In Leben Jesu, Strauss attacks boththe orthodox and rationalistic ideas of Jesus, especially mockingPaulus' explanations for the miracles. But he presents few positive explanationsof his own for the historical events, probably because he was not greatly concernedwith what happened.

Strauss' book met with strong reaction in hisday because it was both anti‑Christian and anti‑rationalistic. It laid the groundwork for Bultmann andthe demythologizing school in the 20^th century. He posed three problem areas which havecontinued to dominate liberal studies on Jesus to this day:

- Miracle vs. myth: Strauss virtually ended the liberalacceptance of miracles in the gospel accounts as historical. Only the healing accounts are acceptedby some liberals today, who say Jesus did some psychosomatic healing asfaith-healers still do.

- Jesus of history vs.the Christ of faith: Strauss separatedhistorical truth from religious value, favoring a "Christ of faith"approach.

- Gospel of John vs. theSynoptics: Strauss established awidespread rejection of John by attacking its reliability moreeffectively than Reimarus had done earlier.

4. Romanticism: Renan's La Vie deJesus(1863)

Romanticism a reaction against rationalism'semphasis on reason and logic. Emotions and intuition give insights which you cannot obtainthrough reason.

As Ernest Renan sees it, the Gospel picture ofJesus doesn't make sense [with themiraculous removed]. So he sortsthe materials into three different phases in Jesus' life:

- ethical teacher

- revolutionary

- martyr

Renan claimed that all 3 phases were historical,but they got mixed together chronologically in the gospel accounts. Each facet was a distinct period in hislife.

1) Jesus begins as an optimistic, pleasant ethicalteacher who learned to preach from John the Baptist. He returns to Galilee as a gentle teacher of love, attractsa devoted following of young men and women, plus large crowds of charmed Galileans. He does no miracles except some psychosomatichealings.

2) When Jesus goes to Jerusalem, he finds therabbis will not accept him. As aresult, he becomes a revolutionary and campaigns to get rid of them. He begins doing faked miracles toattract a larger following.

3) Soon Jesus realizes that his movement doesnot have enough popular support to beat the rabbis, and that he cannot continueto stage miracles indefinitely without being discovered. He decides to throw off earthlyambitions and become a martyr. Before his death, he starts a religious movement so that his teachingswill be preserved. He institutesthe simple ceremonies of baptism & Lord's supper to give unity to the groupand chooses its leaders (apostles). He allows himself to be caught and dies on the cross.

His strategy works out better than he expected,as Mary Magdelene has a hallucination that Jesus is alive.

Renan's work is important in spreading liberalreconstructions of Jesus' life to the popular educated classes andparticularly into Catholicism. He opened the door to the idea that reliability can be judged by aesthetics: "God can't be that way because Idon't like it." His idea thatthe chronological framework of the Gospels is untrustworthy will be picked uplater in form criticism.

5. Scepticism: Wrede's Messianic Secret (1901)

Sceptics are doubters to a greater degree thanthe positions above, feeling it is impossible to reconstruct a life ofJesus.

Wilhelm Wrede reacts against reconstructionslike those sketched above, arguing that much in these pictures is obtained by"reading between the lines" and ignoring what Jesus has to say aboutthe second coming, judgment, hell, and such.

Wrede does not attempt a full life of Christ,but tries to solve a single problem: why (if Jesus claimed to be Messiah)did he keep telling people to keep this a secret? Wrede's answer is that Mark invented the Messianic Secretbecause Jesus never claimed to be Messiah but Mark and his circle thought thathe was.

Wrede comes to believe that Mark's wholenarrative framework is unreliable, so that only some of the individual storiesand sayings in his Gospel really happened.

At this point in our narrative of liberal livesof Jesus, notice that liberals have now thrown out all the Gospels: John islate, Matthew and Luke build on Mark, and Mark is unreliable.

This deep scepticism toward the Gospel accountsled to the application of form criticism to the life of Christ by RudolfBultmann and others beginning about 1920, and thereafter brought a stop tothe writing of liberal lives of Christ until about 1950.

Quests for the historical Jesus were resumed inthe 1950's (the so-called second quest) by liberals who were dissatisfied withthe particular form of extreme scepticism advocated by Bultmann. We are now generally thought to be in aphase called the Athird quest.@

6. The Present Situation: Considerable Diversity

Renan's observation is correct: Once the miracles are excluded fromJesus' ministry, his person and life do not make sense, and a variety ofpossibilities can be imagined. Modern theories are often simply various combinations of previouslynoticed possibilities. We give afast sketch of some of the views advocated since World War 2.

a. The Post-Bultmannian Paradoxes

Post-Bultmannian is a term for former studentsof Bultmann, especially:

Gunther Bornkamm

Hans Conzelmann

Klaus Fuchs

Ernst Kasemann

James M. Robinson

Bornkamm is the only one who wrote a life ofChrist, Jesus of Nazareth (1960); the others wrote encyclopedia and journalarticles. All are anti‑supernatural,but feel Bultmann went too far in his scepticism. They have more interest in history than he did, and feelthat the NT material gives us at least the atmosphere of what people thoughtabout Jesus.

Their historical methodology is very skeptical: ignore the Gospel of John and use theSynoptics; pick out the authentic incidents and sayings of Jesus by using the methodof dissonance.

Method of Dissonance:

Jesus himself was a Jew and his followers wereChristians. Thus any features of Jesus' reported teachings which lookJewish may go back to the Jews, not to Jesus himself. Any material which looks Christian may go back to the earlyChristians, not to Jesus. Onlythat which is incompatible with both Judaism and Christianityprobably goes back to Jesus. Examine this material to get Jesus' self‑understanding.

Dissonance has problems as a methodology: usingsame on Martin Luther, you would reject any material where he sounds eitherCatholic or Lutheran!

Some Results:

However, these Post-Bultmannians have deducedsome interesting results which do not fit the liberal models well.

(1) Jesus' view of himself.

Kasemann: A very distinct atmosphere is presentin the NT. Jesus thought ofhimself as divinely and uniquely inspired, and that he was greater than aprophet. Jesus made messianicclaims.

Bornkamm and Fuchs: Jesus claimed that he couldforgive sins.

(2) Jesus' teachings.

Kasemann: Jesus' main messages are that God hascome to give men what they don't deserve and to set them free from bondage.

Conzelmann: Jesus spoke of a future kingdom which in somesense is confronting us right now. This point was regularly lost in old liberalism, which typically setsthese two elements in contradiction.

(3) Jesus' conduct.

Bornkamm and Fuchs: Jesus' actions show that heis submitted to God, yet he claims a unique authority (seen in the cleansing ofthe temple). He also showed greatgraciousness to outcasts (contrast Jesus' attitude vs. Pharisees'attitude).

The results seem rather minimal, but they arestriking. They suggest that Jesus is much more than liberals have granted, andthat they should reconsider their scepticism.

b. Schonfield's Passover Plot (1966)

Hugh J. Schonfield was a liberal British Jew whoworked on the international Dead Sea Scroll committee. Apparently he accepted the claimsof Jesus at one point in his career but later gave it up. He is quite familiar with evangelicalinterpretations of OT prophecy.

According to Schonfield, Jesus' ministry is aelaborate plot to fulfill the OT prophecies regarding the Messiah, especiallyhis death and resurrection.

Jesus, convinced he is the Messiah, gathersdisciples, but avoids claiming publicly to be the Messiah for his ownsafety. Eventually, however, Jesusis rejected in Galilee and realizes that he must "die" and riseagain in order to fulfill OT prophecy (Ps.22).

Jesus decides to fake his death rather thantrust God for a resurrection. Heconstructs a plot using several assistants who are only in on parts of theplot. Lazarus' death and resurrectionis faked to build tension with the authorities. The colt is arranged for the triumphal entry, forcingthe Jewish authorities to take action to avoid a revolt. Jesus controls the timing of his arrestso that he will be crucified for only a few hours. With the code words "Eli, Eli,lama sabachtani!" an assistant drugs him with a sponge and Jesus goesinto a coma.

The plot, almost perfect, is ruined by the spearthrust from the Roman soldier. Jesus is taken down by Joseph of Arimathea and an unnamedconspirator we'll call "Mr.X." That night he is removed from the tomb, taken to another place, revived. He gives Mr. X a message to carry tohis disciples: "Tell them to meet me in Galilee." Jesus dies after Mr. X leaves todeliver the message.

Mr. X tries to tell the women at the tomb; theythink he is an angel. He tries totell some disciples on road to Emmaus; they mistake him for Jesus. The confusion continues. Any appearances where Jesus was notimmediately recognized are treated as those of Mr.X. The clear and solid appearances were stories made uplater by the church.

Schonfield's story reflects the influence of thediscovery of Dead Sea Scrolls, with more emphasis on the Messianic expectationat Jesus' time, and renewed appreciation for the Gospel of John as asource. It is peculiar in itsdaring treatment of OT Prophecies. It is a classic example of a plot theory.

c. An Aside on Plot Theories

A "plot theory" claims that some set ofhistorical events can better be explained C not by the stated or surface motivationsbut C by an unstated, hidden,secret, plot. The claim thatKennedy was killed by the CIA, or Lincoln by the Radical Republicans, areexamples.

Plots clearly occur in human history, but plottheories face serious methodological problems:

- The better the plot,the more hidden it was (and is), and therefore the less useful our datais. The perfect plot doesn't fitthe data at all!

- Therefore it ispossible to construct far more plots than could actually happen, so that thechance of any one plot being true is very small.

‑ It is impossibleto prove a plot theory right or wrong before the Last Judgment, but verydangerous to hang one=s world view on aparticular plot theory.

d. Allegro, The SacredMushroom and the Cross (1970)

John Marco Allegro was a professor at Universityof Manchester, England, and another British representative onInternational DSS team. This bookruined his academic reputation!

Allegro has a super plot theory, more radicalthan Bultmann or Schonfield. Jesusnever existed! Christianity andJudaism never existed (in the 1st century)! Their books and teachings are all expressions of code‑wordsused to disguise a super‑secret mushroom fertility cult. Judaism and Christianity do notappear to be such now because the secrets were lost under persecution, and the"front organizations" continued and developed on their own.

Allegro tries to prove by etymology that the OTand NT are filled with secret codes relating to hallucinogenic mushroomsand sexual orgies. He uses Latin,Greek, Arabic, Persian, Syriac, Hebrew, Aramaic, Sanskrit, Ugaritic, Accadianand Sumerian, enough to snow all but the best linguists.

e. Smith, The Secret Gospel (1973); Jesus theMagician(1978)

Morton Smith was Professor of Ancient History atColumbia University; studied in Israel 1941‑45, Ph.D. Hebrew University;Th.D. Harvard.

Smith claims he discovered C in 1958 at the Mar SabaGreek Orthodox Monastery in Israel C a letter from Clement of Alexandria(fl 200 AD) copied into the back of a Greek book published in the1700s. The book with letter C if it ever existed C has disappeared. For the text of the letter see pp.14-17of Secret Gospel.

Letter answers some charges made by a gnosticgroup called the Carpocratians who had a different version of the Gospel ofMark (included lewd materials used to justify their sexual immorality). Clementsays he has a secret longer version of Mark (not including lewd material) whichthe Carpocratians stole, then corrupted for their libertine group.

Smith sides with the Carpocratians in claimingJesus was really a libertine gnostic magician and that this explains hismiracles, personal claims of deity, secrecy and statements about the law(men are not responsible to the law in any way).

This is not a clumsy fraud: Clement wasinterested in these topics. Theletter resembles Clement's style. If it is a forgery, the writer knew at least as much as Smith (!) [seerecent interesting parallel with clever crook Mark Hoffman in Mormoncircles].

7. The Jesus Seminar

A group of radical NT researchers who have beenmeeting for twenty years or so to produce a scholarly presentation on Jesusthat will blow traditional Christianity out of the water. They have been given extensive mediapublicity every time they meet (about every 6 months), and in 1993presented their first book-length production:

Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and the JesusSeminar, The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus. New York: Macmillan, 1993.

Let us sketch where they are coming from andtheir results they obtain (numbers in parentheses are pages in Five Gospels):

The seven pillars of scholarly wisdom (2-5; their numbering)

1. Jesus of history vs. Christ of faith

2. Jesus of synoptics vs. Jesus of John

3. Priority of Mark

4. Existence of Q

5. Eschatological vs. non-eschatological Jesus

6. Oral culture vs. print culture

7. Gospels assumednon-historical unless proved otherwise

Rules of written evidence (16-25; my numbering)

Clusteringand contexting

1. The evangelistsfrequently group sayings and parables in clusters that did not originate withJesus.

2. The evangelistsfrequently relocate sayings and parables or invent new narrative contexts forthem.

Revisionand commentary

3. The evangelistsfrequently expand sayings or parables, or provide them with an interpretiveoverlay or comment.

4. The evangelists oftenrevise or edit sayings to make them conform to their own individual language,style, or viewpoint.

Falseattribution

5. Words borrowed fromthe fund of common lore or the Greek scriptures are often put on the lips ofJesus.

6. The evangelistsfrequently attribute their own statements to Jesus.

Difficultsayings

7. Hard sayings arefrequently softened in the process of transmission to adapt them to theconditions of daily living.

8. Variations indifficult sayings often betray the struggle of the early Christian community tointerpret or adapt sayings to its own situation.

ChristianizingJesus

9. Sayings and parablesexpressed in "Christian" language are the creation of the evangelistsor their Christian predecessors.

10. Sayings or parablesthat contrast with the language or viewpoint of the gospel in which they areembedded reflect older tradition (but not necessarily tradition that originatedwith Jesus).

11. The Christiancommunity develops apologetic statements to defend its claims and sometimesattributes such statements to Jesus.

12. Sayings and narrativesthat reflect knowledge of events that took place after Jesus' death are thecreation of the evangelists or the oral tradition before them.

Rules of oral evidence (25-34; my numbering)

Fromthe gospels to Jesus

1. Only sayings andparables that can be traced back to the oral period, 30-50 CE, can possiblyhave originated with Jesus.

2. Sayings or parablesthat are attested in two or more independent sources are older than the sourcesin which they are imbedded.

3. Sayings or parablesthat are attested in two different contexts probably circulated independentlyat an earlier time.

4. The same or similarcontent attested in two or more different forms has had a life of its own andtherefore may stem from an old tradition.

5. Unwritten traditionthat is captured by the written gospels relatively late may preserve very oldtradition.

Oralityand memory

6. The oral memory bestretains sayings and anecdotes that are short, provocative, memorable C and oft repeated.

7. The most frequentlyrecorded words of Jesus in the surviving gospels take the form ofaphorisms and parables.

8. The earliest layer ofthe gospel tradition is made up of single aphorisms and parables thatcirculated by word of mouth prior to the written gospels.

9. Jesus' disciplesremembered the core or gist of his sayings and parables, not his precise words,except in rare cases.

Thestoryteller's license

10. To express whatJesus is imagined to have said on particular occasions: Jesus says tothem, "Let's cross to the other side." (Mk 4:35)

11. To sum up themessage of Jesus as Mark understood it: "The time is up. God's imperial rule is closing in. Change your ways and put your trust inthe good news." (Mk 1:15)

12. To forecast theoutcome of his own gospel story and sum up the gospel then being proclaimed inhis community, Mark has Jesus say, "The son of Adam is being turned overto his enemies, and they will end up killing him. And three days after he is killed he will rise!" (Mk9:31-32)

13. To express Mark'sown view of the disciples and others, Mark has Jesus say to the frighteneddisciples after the squall had died down, "Why are you so cowardly? You still don't trust, do you?"(Mk 4:40)

14. Since Mark linkstrust with the cure of the sick, he has Jesus say to the woman he has justcured, "Daughter, your trust has cured you." (Mk 5:34) Jesus' remark is underscored by Mark'snarrative aside: "He was unable to perform a single miracle there, exceptthat he did cure a few by laying hands on them, though he was always shocked bytheir lack of trust." (Mk 6:5-6)

15. To justify the laterpractice of fasting, in spite of the fact that Jesus and his first disciplesdid not fast: "The days will come when the groom is taken away from them,and then they will fast, on that day." (Mk 2:20)

16. To elicit the rightconfession, Mark has Jesus ask, "What are people saying about me?"(Mk 8:27) A little later in theconversation, he asks, "What about you, who do you say I am?" (Mk 8:29) Peter then responds, "You are theAnointed," which is what Christians are supposed to say.

Distinctivediscourse

17. Jesus'characteristic talk was distinctive C it can usually be distinguished from commonlore. Otherwise it is futile tosearch for the authentic words of Jesus.

18. Jesus' sayings andparables cut against the social and religious grain.

19. Jesus' sayings andparables surprise and shock: they characteristically call for a reversal ofroles or frustrate ordinary, everyday expectations.

20. Jesus' sayings andparables are often characterized by exaggeration, humor, and paradox.

21. Jesus' images areconcrete and vivid, his sayings and parables customarily metaphorical andwithout explicit application.

Thelaconic sage

22. Jesus does not as arule initiate dialogue or debate, nor does he offer to cure people.

23. Jesus rarely makespronouncements or speaks about himself in the first person.

24. Jesus makes no claimto be the Anointed, the messiah.

The colors in the text (36-37)

Voting Option 1:

red: I would includethis item unequivocally in the database for determining who Jesus was.

pink: I would include this itemwith reservations (or modifications) in the database.

gray: I would not include this itemin the database, but I might make use of some of its content in determiningwho Jesus was.

black: I would not include this item inthe primary database.

Voting Option 2:

red: Jesus undoubtedlysaid this or something very like this.

pink: Jesus probably said somethinglike this.

gray: Jesus did not say this, butthe ideas contained in it are close to his own.

black: Jesus did not say this; itrepresents the perspective or content of a later or different tradition.

Results

An index of red and pink letter sayings liststhe ninety sayings scoring .5 or better, with detailed votes for their variousversions in the different Gospels (549-553).

According to a remark on page 5,"Eighty-two percent of the words ascribed to Jesus in the gospels were notactually spoken by him." Soonly 18% of the words spoken by Jesus in the Gospels are admitted to be his.

In Mark, only one saying is viewed as authentic(red): "Pay the emperor what belongs to the emperor, and God what belongsto God!" (12:17). Not manyeven come in as pink

In John, only one saying even makes it to pink:"A prophet gets no respect on his own turf." (4:44)

The Gospel of Thomas is rated ahead of both ofthese, with several reds and a fair bit of pink, about comparable to Matthewand Luke.

Response

The best book I have seen so far in response tothe work of the Jesus Seminar is Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland, eds., JesusUnder Fire: Modern ScholarshipReinvents the Historical Jesus (Zondervan, 1995).

Some Specific Responses to Liberal Lives:

Blomberg, Craig. The Historical Reliability of theGospels,1987 (Inter-Varsity).

Boyd, Gregory A. Cynic Sage or Son of God? Recovering the Real Jesus in an Age ofRevisionist Replies,1995 (Bridgepoint).

Craig, WilliamLane. Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, 1994 (Crossway).

McDowell, Josh and BillWilson. He Walked AmongUs: Evidence for theHistorical Jesus,1988 (Here's Life).

Strimple, Robert B. The Modern Search for the RealJesus: An Introductory Survey ofthe Historical Roots of Gospel Criticism, 1995 (Presbyterian and Reformed).

8. Summary on the liberal "lives of Christ".

a. The guiding principle ofliberal reconstructions is the rejection of the miraculous.

This is not a necessary principle to suchreconstructions, but it is currently standard. Could use spiritism (Jesus studiedunder Tibetan guru), but modern scholarship still considers this trash atpresent.

1) So fulfilledprophecy is dismissed as one of the following:

-- Later invention

-- Intentional fulfillment

-- Prophecy was vague

-- Fulfillment was misinterpreted

2) Miracle accountsare similarly handled.

-- Later inventions ("myth") ‑did not actually happen.

-- Staged ("fraud").

-- Misinterpreted natural event (rationalizing).

-- Faith healing (psychosomatic).

b. The resulting attitude towardBiblical materials is progressive Scepticism.

c. But the resulting picture ofJesus is an historical enigma:

-- If Jesus neverexisted (like Paul Bunyan), where did the historical evidence come from?

-- If he existed, butwas only a fraud, where did His moral teaching come from?

-- If Jesus was only agentle teacher of righteousness, why did he receive all the opposition,particularly from the sources pictured?

-- If Jesus was only arevolutionary, where did all the non‑revolutionary teaching come from?

-- How can the moralteaching of Jesus be reconciled with his Messianic claims apart from theBiblical explanation?

-- If Jesus is notsupernatural, then we must leave out part of the data to construct a consistentpersonality model for a human‑only Jesus.

Note that whenever some aspect of the data isthrown out, we must explain how itgot there ‑‑ early.

This usually requires the insertion of somesecret plot theory into Jesus' life, or of an unknown genius into earlyChristianity. It presumes that theGospels are basically unreliable.

But if Jesus is the God‑man Messiah, whohas also come to demonstrate what sin is and point it out to people, thenJesus' multi‑faceted personality and actions make sense. The Gospels are reliable. Craig Blomberg (book listed above)shows that if it is not assumed in advance that miracles cannot happen, thenthe Gospels look very impressive indeed.

d. Are the arguments against themiraculous valid?

This is the primary issue to which NThistoricity reduces. If miraclescan occur, then the NT gives every evidence of reliable history. If miracles cannot happen, then the NTis unreliable and the liberals may be justified in leaving out whatever NT"data" does not fit.

1) The Deductive Argument (apriori).

Newman has not seen this in print formally, butit does color liberal arguments.

a) Form of theArgument:

/1/A miracle is a violation of natural law.

/2/To violate natural law is to:

/a/ commit a sin,

/b/ commit a logical fallacy, or

/c/ blunder esthetically.

/3/God cannot sin, commit fallacies, or blunder esthetically

_____________________________________________________

/4/Therefore: God cannot do miracles.

b) Discussion:

Note that this argument will not work againstSatanic miracles, since he can certainly sin, commit logical fallacies, and mayeven blunder esthetically!

The logical structure of the argument is sound,but we must examine the content of the propositions.

/1/ Is a miracle necessarily a violation ofnatural law?

Islifting a chair a violation of the law of gravity? Depends on our definition of"violation".

However, as /1/ has been used by Christians as acommon (though perhaps notaccurate) definition of a miracle, we should not fault it heavily.

/2/ There is an ambiguity in the term"law".

‑-"sin" implies a moral law.

--"fallacy" implies a logical law.

--"blunder" implies an esthetic law.

But are we justified in mixing moral preceptswith physical constraints? Doesbreaking a physical "law" necessarily imply a moral "sin" has occurred?

Also, are these the only possibilities forcategorizing a violation of natural law? Perhaps there is another, physical law, and we should not limit Godto these 3.

So /2/ is an incomplete statement,trading on theambiguity of "law".

/3/ Even if /1/ and /2/are granted, it is clear that the Bible contains moral laws which are intendedonly for man, hence God can "violate" them.

E.g., God can command us to worship Him (becauseof who He is), but we should not command people to worship us.

Thus the Bible has a precedent for person‑dependentlaws. What is a violation for usmay not be for God, as that law does not apply to Him. It is dangerous to limit or judge Godby our standards.

/4/ The deductive argument is not conclusive.

Especially as miracles are connected with God asone of His attributes.

Since we cannot (safely) explore thesupernatural on our own, arguing with revelation about it just leaves us in thedark.

Sometimes people will argue that the Biblicalpicture of God is inferior because it pictures God as needing to"tinker" with his universe. If God were really great, He would have made the natural laws better sothat He would not need to infer with them.

However, this assumes that God desired to createa universe which was fully automatic. Perhaps He desired to create a universe which allowed for His self‑expression. [e.g., contrast a clock (automatic)with a guitar (input)].

2) Inductive Arguments (aposteriori).

a) David Hume. His is the most famous and influential.

/1/ When someone tellsus of an event, we tend to accept the report or be skeptical of it inproportion to the degree that it is unusual.

/2/ By definition, amiracle is a very rare and unusual event, and our uniform experience dictatesagainst the miraculous. Thus weshould be very skeptical about any reports of miracles.

/3/ The means by whichwe know something is our experience in the world. Since miracles go against this and upset our uniformexperience, we tend to explain them by some naturalistic means unless thatexplanation would itself be more unusual than accepting a miracle.

Hume now shifts from an argument to a program:

/4/ Thus when a miracleis reported, we should reject it unless any naturalistic explanation would beeven more unusual.

Analysis:

/1/ is certainlytrue. Our scepticism does increaseas one claims to have met X yesterday, as X shifts from Dr. Zimmerman toPresident Clinton, to Queen Elizabeth, to Martin Luther, to Jesus.

/2a/ is correct: The Bible says that miracles arevery rare events. We should tend to be skeptical ofreports of them.

/2b/ is incorrect: Hume has shifted the definition of amiracle from a rare event to an impossible event. His conclusion is thus the result of a circular argument.

Whose "uniform experience" is Humeconsidering? Over what timeperiod? How many individuals is heincluding? To try to use the"uniform experience" of all humanity would not work as some peoplereport that they have seen miracles.

This is true even in modern times. We have nonsympathetic reports ofoccult miracles in the literature [e.g, Fatima, spontaneous human combustion].

A more general problem: If we assume that miracles do occur,this methodology tells us to explain it away anyhow.

Thus the argument must be inadequate since it doesnot include a method to test their possible occurrence.

-- C.S. Lewis respondsto the "uniform experience" argument in Miracles, pp. 122‑124.

--J.W. Montgomerydiscusses it in Christianity for the Tough‑Minded, p. 42.

"Uniform experience" is a poor argument,as there may be a whole realm of reality which we cannot sense and which mustbe revealed to us by revelation (as a deaf or blind person must depend onrevelation for the sense they lack).

b) Adolf Harnack in Whatis Christianity?pp. 24‑25 in the Harper Torchbook edition.

We do not need to accept miracles because theyare based on primitive ignorance (p 24):

/1/ In NT times,miracles were thought to be commonplace.

Andrew Dickson White argues this at great lengthin his History of the Warfare between Science and Theology in Christendom.

Problem: The reactions of people in the NT accounts show that they did not expectmiraculous interventions; they were no ho-hum events.

The disciples did not typically expect Jesus towork a miracle to get them out of a jam: e.g., feeding 5000, storm at sea, etc.

NT people always marvel when miracles occur andthey have trouble drawing simple lessons from them. This implies they did not view them ascommon or even as expected.

Harnack argues from reports in secularliterature that miracle accounts were common in the NT period. These reports are not as well‑attestednor as clear as the NT accounts, but we should not rule out some of these asthe Bible itself allows for miracles by satanic power.

We must be careful when deciding what can or cannotoccur on the basis of our preconceptions:

Late 18th century scientists in France andAmerica (including Thomas Jefferson) refused to believe that stones fell fromthe sky, because only peasants and priests reported seeing them.

The "sky does not contain rocks"principle proved to be inaccurate.

/2/ NT people did notknow enough science to recognize a miracle when they saw one (p 25):

This appeals to our pride in hightechnology. Much of our advancedtechnology does look miraculous to "primitives" (radio,telephone, computers, etc.).

However, can we now explain away Jesus' miraclesby means of high technology? (Walking on water? raising dead?).

NT people knew which diseases did not healsuddenly (blindness, death,leprosy, crippled limbs, etc.).

People today still cannot explain these miracleswith technology.

Consider Mark 6:47‑52 - walking on water

7:31-37 - deaf & mute healed

8:1-20 - feeding 4000

It is impressive that Jesus did just those typesof miracles which still stump us in the 20th century!

e. What does acceptance ofthe miraculous do to scientific history or to science in general?

Many historians and scientists are scared ofmiracle because they think that then the whole bottom drops out of theirwork: "My job is to explainreality, and this would introduce a whole new realm."

Scientific historians feel there should be nomiraculous interventions needed to explain history.

Adding miracles does add a new dimension toreality for many people.

History has thus been "explained"without miracles. But we don'tknow if these explanations are true since we can't check them.

1) It makes an enormousdifference on the scale of ultimate explanations.

If there is a God who intervenes, then historywill be affected on a large scale.

God and other supernatural beings introduce thepossibilities of new purposes and goals.

2) What difference itmakes on a small scale depends on the actual frequency of miracles at that timeand place.

May be points in history when miracles werehappening but they were not important historically.

Regeneration is miraculous and does effecthistory.

There may be points in history where miraclesare extremely important for understanding the events.

3) It adds anothervariable for use in constructing models, but it doesn't follow that thisvariable must be invoked at every gap, any more than any other mode ofexplanation.

There already are plenty of difficult‑to‑assessvariables in understanding history: Individual personalities, backgrounds,motivations, economics, etc.

We do not have to evoke a miracle whenever anevent occurs which we cannot explain.

4) From the Biblicalperspective, the miraculous is not irrational because it is the action of arational being and, in God's case, is accompanied by revelation.

Some people object that miracles add anirrational element to history. Bythis they mean it adds an element which they can not predict what it will do.

This destroys the historian's dream of beingable to predict the future.

The Christian realizes that something irrationalis notbeing added. Another mind isinvolved, but God's mind islogical and rational.

Through revelation, God explains what He isdoing in His miracles before and/or after the event.

Satan may or may not tell what he is doing. He is not trustworthy in any case.

Sin and sinful minds are irrational, but God isnot.

Thus Satanic miracles may be irrational, but indealing with the motivations of (sinful) humans, we already have plenty of theirrational in history.

5) In fact, themiraculous itself is a revelation of the unseen supernatural person (e.g. ofGod) just as human activity is a revelation of the unseen inner man.

Note the parallel activities of God and man.

Miracles reveal an unseen supernatural person,just as human activity reveals the unseen inner man.

There is already an [irrational] hidden elementin history since man and his motivations can not be mathematicallyexplained or absolutely foreseen.

Miracles are not the only item that keepshistorians from being able to predict the future: People also mess them up.

6) The miraculous surelysolves a lot of problems in Biblical history, as well as in natural pre‑history.

Liberals have not been able to make sense ofJesus without miracles.

With miracles, Jesus and rest of Scripture makessense:

-- How the disciplescame to believe in the Resurrection;

-- Where the elaborateritual, moral, and legal code of the Pentateuch came from (Liberals had to spread its evolution over 1000years);

-- Fulfilled prophecies,especially of coming of Jesus.

Also natural pre‑historyis explained: Origins of life, earth, universe, etc.

f. What are we to make ofliberal reconstructions?

1) They are Satan's work.

see C.S. Lewis, Screwtape Letters, pp.105‑109, Macmillanpaperback; pp.116‑118 hardcover edition.

Screwtape describes how to keep peopledistracted from the real Jesus: Have them search for the "historicalJesus" and write a new life of Jesus every year.

Such work is called "brillant" inliterary circles, but is based on the type of guesswork which would beruinous in business, betting on horses, etc.

This distraction from the real Jesus is a modernform of idolatry, since they make up their own Jesus.

2) Why does God permit this?

Deut. 13:1‑5 discusses why the LORD wouldallow false prophets to arise (parallel to liberals):

Test for people to see if they love the God whoexists in comparison with gods of human invention who often look moreattractive, or more tolerant of their sin.

The world (and its history) is a testing groundto demonstrate that humans are as bad as God says they are and that only Hismercy can save us.

Anice discussion of the reality of miracles from an evangelical perspective isgiven in R. Douglas Geivett and Gary R. Habermas, eds. In Defense of Miracles: AComprehensive Case for God=s Action in History. Intervarsity, 1997.

II.Jewish Background to the New Testament

To understand the New Testament, especially theGospels, it is helpful to know a good deal about the Old Testament. It is also helpful to know something of what went on during the fourcenturies that separate the end of the OT narrative from the beginning of theNT narrative. It is this latter wewish to look at here, called in Christian circles Athe intertestamentperiod,@ and in Jewish circles Athe second templeperiod.@

A.Ancient Sources of Information on the InterTestament Period

1. Predictive Passages in the OldTestament

Daniel gives an overview of the period and somedetails

2. OT Apocrypha &Pseudepigrapha

Religious writings of Jews,mostly during IT period

Give insight into culture, religious ideas,sects, biblical interpretation during period

3. Philo (c20 BC-40+ AD)

Jew who studied Greekphilosophy, tried to combine OT with selected ideas from Greek philosophy

Shows partial accommodation to Hellenism

4. Josephus (AD 37-100+)

Jew who was involved on both sides of Jewish war66‑73

Wrote Jewish War and Antiquities ofthe Jews

5. Dead Sea Scrolls

Literature written/copied by Qumran sect(probably some sort of Essenes)

6. Rabbinic Literature

Oral traditions of rabbis

Midrash, Mishnah, Talmuds

B.Daniel's Overview of the Period

1. Nebuchadnezzar's Image (Danielchapter 2)

a. Image pictured (vv 32‑35)

(0) Statue & action

(1) Head of Gold (32)

(2) Breast & Arms of Silver (32)

(3) Belly & Sides of Bronze (32)

(4) Legs of Iron (33)

(5) Feet, part Iron, part Clay (33)

(6) Stone smashes image, grows to fill earth (34‑35)

b. Image explained (vv 38‑45)

(0) What will happen hereafter (45)

(1) Nebuchadnezzar's universal rule (38)

(2) Another kingdom inferior [?] to Neb's (39)

(3) 3rd kingdom to rule over all the earth (39)

(4) 4th kingdom strong as iron, breaking (40)

(5) The same [?], part strong, part broken (41‑43)

(6) God will set up a permanent kingdom (44)

2. Daniel's Four Wild Animals(Daniel chapter 7)

a. Animals pictured (3-14, more details in 19,21-23)

(0) Diverse beasts from sea (3)

(1) lion w/ eagle's wings; plucked, lifted,heart (4)

(2) bear raised on one side; 3 ribs in mouth (5)

(3) leopard, 4 wings, 4 heads (6)

(4) dreadful, terrible,iron teeth, bronze claws; 10 horns, 11th horn rises, wars w/ saints (7-8, 19,21-22)

(5) 4th destroyed, dominion given to son of man(9-14)

b. Animals explained (17-26)

(0‑4) 4 kings who will arise from earth(17)

(4) 4th kingdom, diversefrom others; horns = kings; wears out saints for 3‑1/2 times (23‑26)

(5) Saints take kingdom & possess it forever(18)

The Kingdoms

The Image (Dan 2)

The Beasts (Dan 7)

Babylon: 609-539 BC

Gold Head

Lion w/ wings

Medo-Persia: 539-331 BC

Silver Arms & Breast

Bear eating ribs

Greece: 331-30 BC

Bronze Abdomen

Leopard w/ 4 heads

Rome: 30 BC- 476 AD

Iron Legs

Terrible 10-horned

C.Palestine under Persia (539‑331 BC)

1. Rise of Cyrus

Cyrus (559) inherits small kingdom of Anshan(Persia)

Cyrus defeats Medes (550); Nabonidus cancelssupport!

Cyrus takes Asia Minor (546), then Babylon (539)

2. Return of the Jews (underCyrus 1: 539‑530)

Cyrus tries to avoid offending other religions

Ends deportation policy, so Jews can return(Ezra 1:2‑4)

3. Rebuilding of the (2nd) Temple(Darius 1: 521‑486)

Cyrus initially allowedrebuilding to start, but stopped it due to opposition of neighbors (Ezr 6:3‑5;Ezr 4)

Jews allowed to rebuildtemple after showing loyalty at accession of Darius as king of Persia

Temple completed 515under leadership of prophets Haggai & Zechariah, governor Zerubbabel &high priest Jeshua

4. Revival in Judah &Rebuilding Walls of Jerusalem (Artaxerxes 1: 465‑423)

Ezra (c458) comes fromBabylonia, restores people to observance of law, w/ permission of Persian king

Nehemiah (445) sent by Persian king as governorto rebuild walls

5. The Aramaic Language

a. Old Language of Syria (upper Euphrates)

b. Becomes Diplomatic Language of the AncientNear East

c. Adopted by the Jews

apparently during Babylonian exile (see Neh 8:7‑8)

oral translations of OT called Targums

still in use at time of Christ

used in rabbinic Talmud, c550 AD

6. Rise of the Synagogue

place of worship for those unable to attendtemple

features prayer & Bible study but nosacrifice

date of origin obscure

continued alongside 2nd temple (515 BC ‑AD 70)

only place of Jewish worship after destructionof 2nd temple

7. The Intertestament Temples

a. Second(Jerusalem) Temple (515 BC ‑ AD 70)

orthodox, continuation of Mosaic regulations

b. Samaritan(Mt. Gerizim) Temple (450/330 ‑ 128 BC)

Samaritans, w/ help from renegade priests

destroyed by Hasmoneans (Maccabees)

still a holy site in NT times (see John 4:20)& today

c. Elephantine(Egyptian) Temple (c525-c390 BC)

Jewish mercenaries lived here, possibly refugeesfrom Manasseh

polytheistic? cp Jer 44:15‑19: "Queenof Heaven"

d. (Later)Leontopolis Temple (c160 BC ‑ AD 72)

built in Maccabean period by refugee high priestOnias 3

destroyed by Romans after Jewish War

D.Palestine under the Greeks (331‑c160 BC)

1. Alexander (336‑323 BC)

succeeds assassinated father Philip at age 20(336 BC)

invades Asia Minor (334) w/ 35,000 men

victories at

Granicus River (334) - opens Asia Minor

Issus (333) - opens Syria, Palestine, Egypt

Gaugamela (331) - destroys Persian empire

continues eastward to India, turning back atdemand of his soldiers

dies in Babylon at age 33

his agenda includes mixing East & West;Hellenism, spread of Greek language

2. The Struggle for Succession (323‑301BC)

Alex's son still baby at Alex's death; Alex=s brother incompetent

generals keeping throne for son fall to fighting

eventually empire broken into several pieces:usually counted as four

Lysimachus ruling Thrace

Cassander ruling Macedonia

Seleucus ruling Asia Minor, Mesopotamia

Ptolemy ruling Egypt & Syria

only latter two important for Jewish background

3. The Ptolemaic Dynasty (to 30BC; over Palestine 301‑198 BC)

Ptolemy grabbed off Palestine while othersdefeating Antigonus

reasonably favorable treatment of Jews both inPalestine, Egypt

(a large number settle in Alexandria)

4. The Seleucid Dynasty (to 63BC; controls Pal 198‑c160 BC)

in long series of wars finally got Palestinefrom Ptolemies

Seleucid ruler Antiochus4 favors Hellenistic Jews, allowing them to establish Jerusalem as Hellenisticcity

Ant 4 later attempts to abolish Judaism (168),leading to Maccabean revolt (167)

5. Hellenism

From Greek word for Greece, AHellas@; “hellenistos” meaningGreek-like

name for Greek culture as it developed in Eastafter Alexander

influenced Judaism and somewhat influenced by it

includes religious mixing (syncretism)

various schools of philosophy

(Epicurean, Stoic, Platonic)

political benefits of citizenship

6. The Septuagint Translation ofthe Old Testament

a. Origin of the Version (c250 BC)

acc to Letter ofAristeas: 72 Jewish elders come to Egypt,translate Law at request of Ptolemy 2

later additions to story:

translation covers whole OT;

identical translations produced by translatorsworking in pairs

general opinion of story today

translation into Greek made at Alexandria

Pentateuch translated as a unit about 250 BC

scrolls from Jerusalem (possibly translators,too)

Ptolemy 2 allowed work, may have given aid

b. Importance of Version

1) Longest translationof any ancient writing known in antiquity

2) Gives text of OT acentury or so before oldest Heb texts for most of OT

3) Set pattern for Greektheological terms used in OT & NT

4) Put OT in universallanguage of Mediterranean

5) Became OT of earlychurch

E.Jewish Independence under the Hasmoneans (160‑63 BC)

1. Antiochus 4 Epiphanes &the Abomination of Desolation

usurps throne from under-age nephew (175 BC)

tries to unify diverse empire via Hellenism

favors Hellenistic Jews,who refound Jerusalem as "Antiochia"

deposes orthodox highpriest Onias 3 for Hellenistic brother Jason, then Jason for Menelaus (whobribes him to get office)

fuming from defeat inEgypt (168) and rebellion in Israel, Ant 4 tries to destroy Judaism, forbiddingcircumcision & kosher, destroying Scripture, rededicatingtemple to Zeus (Ant considered himself a manifestation of Zeus)

2. The Maccabean Revolt (167‑134BC)

a.Origin

Seleucids go through townsof Judea, enforcing A4's decrees and commanding pagan sacrifice

At village of Modin,aged priest Mattathias kills Jew who tries to sacrifice, then kills official& his troops

Mattathias & 5 sons call for armed resistance, flee to mountains

b. Judah the Maccabee (166‑160 BC)

3rd son of Matt, military nickname"hammer" or "hammerer"

JM leads guerillacampaign, destroying several Seleucid armies

JM's forces grow w/ success, matching Seleucidescalation of forces

Macc's take Jerusalem(exc citadel), cleanse & rededicate temple (Dec 164; origin of Jewishfestival of Hannukah)

Meanwhile Antiochus 4dies (163), Lysias (regent) offers peace terms acceptable to Hasidim but notMacc's, splitting opposition

JM, heavily outnumbered, killed in battle (160)

c. Jonathan(160‑142 BC) and Simon (142-134 BC)

surviving brothers of Judah

Seleucid empire weakenedwith division, so J & S able by diplomacy to gain strength until Judeabecomes virtually independent

both murdered byopponents, but not before Simon gains hereditary priesthood and rule for family

3. The Hasmonean Dynasty (134‑63BC)

a.John Hyrcanus (134‑104 BC)

greatly expands Judean territory:

coastal cities, Idumea, Samaria

rise of Pharisees & Sadducees

b.Aristobolus (103 BC)

after killing severalbrothers, taking title "king," dies within a year from fear, drink,disease

c.Alexander Jannaeus (102‑76 BC)

Aristobolus' brother,released from prison & married to A's wife

continues expansion ofkingdom until nearly as big as David & Solomon's

Pharisees revolt, callfor Syrians to help; AJ about to lose when Phar's defect; AJ wins, crucifiesmany Pharisees

d.Salome Alexandria (75‑67 BC)

wife of Arist & Alex J, succeeds at AJ'sdeath

2 sons: Hyrcanus 2 ‑ made high priest

Aristobolus 2 ‑ given military command

e.End of Hasmonean Independence (66‑63 BC)

Salome dies, succeededby H2 (& Phar's), but A2 (supported by Sadd's) takes throne from him

H2 flees, opens civil war, calls on Romans forhelp

4. Pharisees, Sadducees &Essenes

origins rather obscure,but all 3 app arise in this period; Phar's & Essenes app from Hasidim

theology:

Essenes

Pharisees

Sadducees

hasid - faithful

parash - separate

tsedek - righteous

super Pharisees,

abandoned temple

ritual purity,

hedge around Law

more pragmatic,

compromising

Calvinistic

Arminian

OT + secret books

OT + oral tradition

OT only

Immortal souls?

Resurrected bodies

No survival

Emphasis on angels

Belief in angels

No angels

Emphasis on eschatology.

Last judgment

No judgment

influence & survival:

Few, withdrawn

Popular, not large

Few richest

Withdrawn from politics

Dominant religiously

Dominant politically

Wrote or copied Dead Sea Scrolls

Rabbinic literature by heirs

No known writings survive

Qumran destroyed 68, some survived

Survive AD 70 to dominate Judaism

Destroyed w/ temple

F.Palestine under the Romans (63 BC‑135 AD & beyond)

1. The End of the Hasmonean Dynasty (63 BC)

Romans intervene in dispute between H2 and A2

Judaea loses much of its conquered territories

Hyrcanus 2 made"ethnarch" of Judea (including Idumea, Perea, Galilee), demoted from"king"

2. The Pax Romana (c30 BC‑c170 AD)

2 centuries of peace over Roman Empire beginningw/ Augustus

Great growth in prosperity, reaches peak in 2ndcen AD

Pax Romana important for early spread ofChristianity

Other features important for spread of Xy:

-- Roman roads

-- lack of national boundaries

3. The Herod Family

a. Antipater, Herod's father

Idumean advisor to Hyrcanus 2, power behindthrone

Made Procurator of Judea for aiding JuliusCaesar

Made own sons Phasael & Herod administrators

Assassinated 43 BC

b. Herod the Great (37‑4 BC)

Appointed joint tetrarch w/ brother Phasael (42)

Brother killed by Parthians invading, Herodflees to Rome (40)

Senate appoints him King of Jews (40)

Herod returns with army, takes Jerusalem (37)

Throne insecure til Anthony & Cleopatradie (31)

Terrible familytroubles:

kills favorite wife, Mariamne, 3 sons, etc.

His Accomplishments:

ruled large territory

refurbishes Jerusalem Temple (19 BC‑66 AD)

building projects @ Caesarea, Sebaste, etc.

killing of the Bethlehem's children

c. Herod's Sons ‑ ruled by his will atdeath

Archelaus ‑ Judea/Samaria/Idumea (to AD 6)

Antipas ‑ Galilee/Peraea (to 39)

Philip ‑ Iturea/Trachonitis (to 34)

d. Herod's Descendants ‑ by Mariamne(royal blood)

Herod Agrippa 1 ‑ King of Jews, AD 41‑44

Herod Agrippa 2 ‑ King (but not of Jews)dies about AD 100

G.Messianic Expectation at the End of the I.T. Period

1. Messianic Fervor

strong in 1st cen AD, infl in Jewish revolt

(see my "Time of the Messiah," Evidenceof Prophecy)

2. The Person of the Messiah

Views change w/ time:

early extra‑Biblicalmaterials see Messiah as more than human, though no clear view of his deity

later rabbinic material tends to minimizeMessiah

OT data posed variousparadoxes re/ office, activity, type of coming, type of being; these solved byNT and Jesus (see my "NT Model of Messiah," Evid of Prophecy)

3. Various Views of the Messianic Period

a. Messianic period only (Millennium, on earth)

b. Eschaton only (Eternal State, heaven orparadise)

c. Both Messianic period and Eschaton (M.P. 1st,naturally)

most common

4. The Order of Events (acc to view 3c)

a. Signs preceding end

moral decay, calamities, signs in heaven,forerunner

b. Messianic kingdom established

Return of Israel from exile

Punishment of nations

Messiah Rules (role in conquest varies)

c. The Days of the Messiah("Millennium" in Christian theology)

Variable features (e.g.,place of nations), but usually marvelous

Length uncertain (40 yr to over 1000)

Ends w/ rebellion of Gog & Magog

d. The Age to Come ("Eternal State" inXn theol)

Resurrection

Judgment

Eternal state of punishment/reward

H.The End of the Jewish State

1. The Roman Procurators (AD 6‑66)

Began with replacementof Archelaus, deposed (at Jewish request) for misgovernment

Revolt of Zealots atcensus of AD 6 a sign of things to come; Zealots grow stronger as Roman‑Jewishrelations deteriorate

Roman emperor Gaius(Caligula) orders own statue erected in Jerusalem Temple (41), but dies beforeorder carried out

Procurators continue(except for 41‑44, when Herod Agrippa I rules) until outbreak ofJewish revolt

In general, procuratorsdid not understand Jews, were frequently antagonistic, aggravating conditionsand so strengthening Zealots; last two (Albinus, Florus) especially wicked

2. The (First) Jewish Revolt (AD 66‑73)

Started by incidentbetween Jews and Gentiles in Caesarea, spread and fanned by procurator &Zealots to enflame whole country

Moderate Jews able totake leadership at first, but gradually lost out to more radical Zealots

Ended in destruction ofJerusalem, its temple (AD 70) and Jewish state; mopping up operation completedwith fall of Masada in AD 73

I.Palestine after the Fall of Jerusalem (AD 70‑135)

1. Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai & Jamnia

Johanan escaped besieged Jerusalem in coffin

got permission from Romans to establishrabbinical school and Sanhedrin at Jamnia

rebuilt Judaism (w/ostate or temple) along lines of Pharisaism, eventually leading to Mishnah &Talmuds

Jewish Christiansexcluded from synagogue by adding curse on Nazarenes to synagogue liturgy (AD90‑100)

2. The Bar‑Kochba (Second) Revolt (AD 132‑35)

Set off by Romanpreparations to build pagan city Aelia Capitolina on site of Jerusalem

R. Akiba recognizesSimeon b. Koseba as Messiah & fulfillment of Num 24:17 (star = kochba)

Revolt at 1st successful, w/ Roman troops spreadthin

eventually put down w/ considerable slaughter

Jews forbidden to come near Jerusalem (Aelia)

Judaism ceases to be a missionary religion

J.Materials for Researching Jewish Backgrounds of NT

1. Commentaries:

Those commentators which put some effort intothis often have good material. Itis easily organized by the passage you are studying, but be sure to look atparallel passages in the other Gospels.

2. Bible Encyclopedias:

These will be alphabetical by topic, which isgreat if you know what topic to look under! Most have subject indices with more categories than articlesat the end (EJ at beginning), but still may not know what Jewish term touse to study a subject which has a different name in Christian circles (e.g.,baptism, look under mikva or tevilah).

The standard liberalencyclopedia is Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, 4 vols withsupplement; an Anchor Bible Dictionary is now complete.

The best evangelicalencyclopedias are International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE) and ZondervanPictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible (ZPEB).

For Jewish background tothe NT, one should also consult Encyclopaedia Judaica and the older JewishEncyclopedia.

3. Specialized Works:

Everett F. Ferguson, Backgroundsof Early Christianity.2nd ed. (Eerdmans, 1993). BothJewish and Gentile backgrounds, organized by topic with indices. Lots of pictures and bibliography.

Craig S. Keener, IVPBible Background Commentary: New Testament (InterVarsity, 1994). Arranged by passage, withcross-references to parallels. Good material, but no information on sources.

Strack, H. L. andBillerbeck, P. Kommentar zumNeuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 7vols. Munich: Beck, 1922‑61. Alas, in German, this valuablereference work gives rabbinic parallels to NT material by biblical passage.

Dictionary of NT Background (IVP, 2000), articlesin alphabetical order.

III.Introduction to Exegesis

Here we provide a quick sketch of things tothink about in doing exegesis. Amore thorough presentation of exegesis will be found in the course NT 650Advanced Greek. Two helpful booksrelating to biblical exegesis are: Dan McCartney and Charles Clayton, Letthe Reader Understand(Bridgepoint, 1994) and Robert Stein, A Basic Guide to Interpreting theBible(Baker, 1997).

A.Some Features We Need to Continually Build

Exegesis is not simply a mechanical process, inwhich you learn a few rules and just apply them without thinking. It is not even totally scientific (atleast as the average layperson thinks about science), as there may be lots ofsurprises. You may find yourselfnoticing things that the commentary you are reading does not, and (of course)vice versa. You will not be anexpert exegete when you graduate from seminary. But if you will work on the following items, your exegesiswill get better and better as the years go on.

1. English (or your native language) BibleKnowledge

The more you know the rest of the Bible, thebetter you will understand the particular passage you are working on. God really did design the Bible so thatScripture will help you to interpret Scripture.

The advent of computer Bibles has made it easierto find all other occurrences of particular English (Greek, Hebrew) wordselsewhere in Scripture, but this doesn't guarantee you'll find all the passagesthat are relevant to the one you're working on. Even cross-reference Bibles and topical concordances won'tguarantee this, though they can be very helpful.

One important item to keep working on the restof your life is your knowledge of the Bible in your native orheart-language. To help myselfwith this, I try to read through the Bible once a year, and have done so for 25years or so. The OT has 929chapters, the NT has 260, for a total of 1189. To get through the Bible in a year, you need to read severalchapters per day. To be exact, toget through just once in a year, you must read 3.26 chapters/day (approx 3/daywith 5 on Sundays). If you read 4chapters/day, you can get through the OT once and the NT twice. I try to use various versions of theBible C once spent two yearsreading through the NIV Study Bible with all its notes C and have several timesused one or another of the one-year Bibles.

2. Biblical Language Competency

Even after you have put in the (considerable)effort to learn Greek and/or Hebrew, much of this stuff will evaporate if youdon't use it. I suggest that youtry to put in some time each day (or at least each week) working with one orboth of the original languages, even if it is as little as translating only oneverse! Tom Taylor recommends adevotional book Light for the Path that provides a short passage from theGreek NT and a verse or so from the Hebrew Bible for each day. Another way is to translate the passageyou are going to preach from that week (or teach from in a Sunday School class,Bible study, etc.), trying to mix OT and NT so as to keep both languagesfunctional. Another friend ofmine, Al Jackson, a pastor in Virginia (now retired, but probably stillpreaching) goes through Metzger's Lexical Aids for Students of NT Greek yearly! I would recommend that you try toreview your grammar now and then and work on sight-reading of Greek.

3. Bible Background

If you are serving the Lord in any capacitywhich involves study of the Scriptures (preaching, teaching, home Bible study,etc.), you will need to spend time working through the particular passage forthe next sermon, session, etc. This special study for specific passages should get you into thecommentaries, and perhaps Bible encyclopedias and such, so that you will getsome exposure to the historical, cultural background of that particularpassage.

[I should say here that you need to berealistic. Don't overkill on theamount of preparation you do and then give up after a few weeks. Put in enough time that you are satisfiedyou understand the passage better than you did before you began onit. You may not be able to solveall its mysteries to your satisfaction, but look at some commentaries to seehow they think these should be solved. You want to come to the people you are serving with freshness, so that they,too, will be encouraged to study the Word.]

An important facet you need to develop for yourknowledge of Bible background will probably not come through working onspecific passages. You need to getsome kind of overview C of ancient history,culture, religions, etc. C that will help you tounderstand the impact of the OT and NT in their own times, and thus give yousome insight into how to apply the Word to our own times and cultures. This will probably only come throughwide reading.

For some years, I kept a list of all the books Ihad read since about 1968. Thisamounted to over 50 books per year (over 100 for six of these years), andusually over 50 in the broad area of religion. I have read primary sources such as Josephus, the Dead SeaScrolls, OT and NT Apocrypha, the Nag Hammadi gnostic texts, some of therabbinic literature, and am currently hung up part-way through Philo(!). I have read works on ancienthistory, encyclopedias of the ancient Greek and Roman worlds, books oneveryday life in Rome, ancient Greek warfare, archeology, and such.

If you are a pastor or counselor, you willobviously need to put some of your reading effort into books specificallyrelated to these areas, but you should not neglect reading that will strengthenyour understanding of the biblical world.

4. Spiritual Insight

Just as Paul said that the most spectaculargifts are worthless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3), so the most complete setof mental and bibliographic tools for exegesis will be counterproductivewithout real spiritual life and insight. If we don't know Jesus, all our exegetical skills will onlyadd to our condemnation in the end. If we know Jesus, then we will grow in spiritual insight as we gainexperience through our own problems, and through helping others withtheirs. It is absolutely crucialthat we have a close communion and love for Lord to do good exegesis.

B.Typical schedule of exegesis sessions

We will normally have three 50-minute sessionsfor each week featuring exegesis. We will divide these into three pieces, though not necessarily of 50minutes each.

1. Genre discussion

2. Translation

3. Verse-by-verse, with discussion of worksheet

Since all these sessions occur on the same dayin our current block-scheduling system, you need to have your translation,commentary reading, and worksheet done when you come to class on these exegesisdays.

C.Genres in the Synoptic Gospels

Etymologically, the term "genre" ismerely a French word for "kind." It has become a technical term in literary studies for akind of literature, writing or speaking. It may be as broad as the distinction between prose and poetry; it maybe as narrow as a particular kind of specialized poem such as the limerick, orthe little stories we call parables. To be recognizable, a genre must have some list of features thatdistinguish it from other genres. We will look at several genres common to the Synoptic Gospels in theweeks of this course.

Class exercise: What are some of the features of: poetry?

a sermon?

a pun?

Genres covered in class exegesis: TP = termpaper passage

1. Narrative:

Visit of Wise Men (Matt 2:1-23)

TP: Emmaus Road (Luke24:13-35)

2. Miracle Account:

Gadarene Demoniac (Mark 5:1-20)

TP: Faith of Centurion(Luke 7:1-10)

3. Parable:

Royal Wedding Feast (Matt 22:1-14)

TP: Wicked Tenants (Mark12:1-11)

4. Controversy Account:

Casting out Demons by Beelzebub (Luke 11:14-28)

TP: Picking Grain onSabbath (Mark 2:23-28)

Genres not covered in class:

5. Discourse:

TP: Do Not Worry (Matt 6:25-34)

6. Symbolic Action(Acted Parable):

Cleansing Temple (Matt21:12-13)

Washing Feet (John 13:1-9)

Cursing Fig Tree (Mark11:12-14,20-25)

7. Genealogy:

Matt 1:1-17

Luke 3:23-37

8. Dialogue:

Temptation (Luke 4:1-13)

Following Jesus (Matt8:18-22)

Rich Young Ruler (Mark10:17-30)

D.The Narrative Genre.

1. Definition

A narrative, very briefly, is a story, account,or tale of events. It may beeither factual or fictional, though I understand all biblical narratives to befactual unless somehow marked. Forexample, narratives in parables are probably fictional; Jotham's narrativeof the trees electing a leader (Judg 9:8-15) is presumably (!) fictional.

Narrative is a very broad genre, usually asubclass under prose, though poetic narratives do exist in literature(e.g., the Song of Deborah and Barak, Judg 5; Homer’s Iliad). It may be distinguished from prayer,exposition, dialogue or discourse, for instance, though these may beincluded in a narrative or even occasionally have a narrative included inthem. E.g., the Gospels and Acts arenarratives, yet include these other genres.

2. Components of Narrative

a. Actors/Characters

The persons who appear in the narrative, causingthe events narrated, or affected by them.

b. Events/Action

Occurrences described by the narrative.

c. Scenes

Where the events occur: time, country, region,town, indoors or out, etc.

d. Plot

The interconnection and development of theevents in a narrative. A complexnarrative may have more than one plot, with the various plots interwoven insome way or other. The plotitself, often a conflict of some sort, may be subdivided into sections where,for example, tension is building, the climax is reached, the conflictis resolved, tension is released, etc.

E.Types of Narrative within the Gospels

Leland Ryken, in Words of Life: A Literary Introduction to the NewTestament(Baker, 1987), pp 36ff, suggests the following types of narratives occur in theGospels:

1. Annunciation/Nativity Stories

Narratives of events surrounding the birth ofJesus. Emphasis on uniquenessof Jesus, historical validity, supernatural occurrences, fulfilment ofprophecy, excitement, etc.

2. Calling/Vocation Stories

Narratives of Jesus' calling people. Who is called, in what circumstances,what is the nature of the call, what kind of response was made?

3. Recognition Stories

Narratives of people discovering who Jesusis. What were the circumstanceswhich led to recognition, what did the person come to recognize about Jesus?

4. Witness Stories

Jesus or another character testifies who Jesusis or what he has done, and what the evidence is for this.

5. Encounter Stories

Representative stories of how Jesus seeksothers. They begin with his ortheir initiative, continue with Jesus making some claim on their lives, endwith their response, either acceptance or rejection.

6. Conflict/Controversy Stories

Most common in Gospels, pitting Jesus asprotagonist against an opposing person or group (antagonist). Note the defense, offense, how Jesusgets the advantage, what lesson we are to learn.

7. Pronouncement Stories (in Form Criticism,Apothegm Stories)

An event is linked with a notable saying byJesus. How do the story and sayinginterrelate?

8. Miracle Stories

We discuss this later under the genre"Miracle Story," Ryken suggests typical structure as follows:

a. Need is established

b. Jesus' help sought

c. Person in need (or helper) expressesfaith/obedience

d. Jesus performs a miracle

e. Characters respond to miracle/Jesus

9. Passion Stories

Narratives of events surrounding the trial,death and resurrection of Jesus. Can be viewed as whole section for each Gospel, or subdivided intoseparate stories.

10. Hybrid Stories

Narratives which combine elements of the above,e.g., miracle stories which produce recognition, pronouncement storieswhich are also encounters, etc.

IV.Authorship and Date of the Synoptic Gospels

We here sketch the historical evidence for theSynoptic Gospels being written by their traditional authors Matthew, Mark, andLuke, and all before AD 70. Wesuggest that Matthew was written first (also traditional), that the order ofMark and Luke is uncertain (traditionally Mark is next), though we favor Lukein the late 50s and Mark in the early 60s, shortly after Matthew was translatedinto Greek.

A.Authorship of the Synoptics

We will take each Gospel in turn, following thetraditional order of the NT canon, citing first internal evidence of authorship(which is rather skimpy) and then external, citing the major quotations infull.

1. Matthew's Authorship

a. Internal Evidence

Except for the title (and we never have a copyof Matthew with any other person listed in the title), the text is anonymous(i.e., the writer never indicates when he is alluding to himself in anidentifiable manner). We do notknow if the title was put on the autograph by the author or not.

Given that Matthew wrote it, is interesting thatin his apostle list (Matt. 10:2‑4)he calls himself a tax collector, not exactly a popular profession in NTPalestine! Mark, Luke and Actsomit this detail from their apostle lists. This suggests the humility of Matthew and a probable reasonfor all the Gospels being anonymous, to keep the focus on Jesus.

b. External Evidence

1) Papias (writing c130 AD)

Then Matthew wrote the oracles (τλόγια) in the Hebrew dialect (διαλέκτå), but everyoneinterpreted them as he was able.

Expositionof the Oracles of the Lord,

citedin Eusebius Church History 3.39.16

The original of Papias' Exposition is not extant, butextracts are cited by several ancient and medieval writers, and the whole wasapparently still extant in the middle ages.

What is meant here by "theoracles": Was this theGospel? Liberals who hold to theTwo Document Theory (see our later discussion of the Synoptic Problem) oftensay that "the oracles" were the Q source.

However, Papias later uses "oracle" torefer to Mark, and everyone agrees he is referring to the Gospel there. Irenaeus gives the same traditionregarding its origin, but explicitly identifies it as the Gospel of Matthew.

What is meant by "Hebrewdialect"? This could refer toeither Hebrew or Aramaic language, as both are sometimes called"Hebrew" in antiquity. This would imply that the original of Matthew was in Hebrew or Aramaic,and it was translated later.

In opposition to the above idea, some take"dialect" to mean "Greek written in a Hebraisticstyle." This theory does notfit Papias' comment as well, as it is hard to see how a simple stylisticdifference would make Matthew so difficult to interpret. The idea of a language foreign to aGreek audience is more in keeping with Papias' remark.

Recently, George Howard at the University ofGeorgia has argued that a rather poorly preserved text of the original Hebrewof Matthew has come down to us in a medieval Jewish polemical (anti-Christian)text Even Bohan;see George Howard, The Gospel of Matthew according to a Primitive HebrewText(Mercer Univ Press, 1987).

2) Irenaeus (c180 AD)

Now Matthew published also a book of theGospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul werepreaching the Gospel in Rome and founding the Church.

AgainstHeresies3.1.2 (Latin);

Greekin Eusebius Church History 5.8.2.

Note that Irenaeus calls Matthew's work aGospel, in the Hebrew dialect, and gives it a date C when Peter and Paulwere in Rome (we know Paul was in Rome in early 60's AD).

3) Pantaenus (c.180 AD)

Pantaenus also wasone of them and is said to have gone to India, where the story goes that he found the Gospel according toMatthew, which had preceded his arrival, among certain people there who had learned of Christ; that Bartholomew,one of the Apostles, had preached to them; and that he had left the writing ofMatthew in Hebrew letters, which also was preserved to the time indicated.

Eusebius,Church History5.10.3

Pantaenus was a Christian from Alexandria,Egypt, who was head of the catechetical school there before Clement and Origen.

Notice that this is indirect information:"The story goes that ..." Pantaenus notes that Matthew was written in "Hebrew letters"(could still be either Aramaic or Hebrew, but not Greek). The text is said to have been preservedstill in the late 2nd century.

The remark about India is not far‑fetched;there was travel between India and the Roman world at this time.

4) Clement of Alexandria (c200 AD)

Head of catechetical school afterPantaenus. Left Alexandria duringpersecution in 203, died 210-217 AD.

Again in the same books Clement gives atradition of the early presbyters concerning the order of the Gospels inthe following manner: He said that those Gospels which contain the genealogieswere written first; but the Gospel according to Mark had this occasion...

Outlines, cited in Eusebius6.14.5

By "tradition of the presbyters,"Clement means information he haslearned from leaders before him.

Explicitly states that Matthew and Luke werewritten first, so before Mark.

5) Origen (c240)

Clement's successor in Egypt; later went toCaesarea, where he built up alarge library inherited eventually by Eusebius.

In the first of the books on theGospel according to Matthew,observing the ecclesiastical canon, he testifies that he knows only fourGospels, writing somewhat as follows: As he has learned by tradition concerning the four Gospels,which alone are undisputed in the Church of God under heaven, that first therewas written the Gospel according to Matthew, the one‑time publican butafterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it in the Hebrewlanguage (γράμμασιv) for those fromJudaism who believed.

Commentaryon Matthew:cited in

Eusebius,Church History6.25.3

Order: is Origen giving chronological orcanonical order here?

Language = letters. This is clearer than saying "dialect."

The next two witnesses are important more fortheir access to written documents which have not survived, than for theirlikely access to reliable oral tradition. Eusebius is the major historian of the ancient church, Jerome one of itsbest scholars.

6) Eusebius of Caesarea (c325)

Bishop of Caesarea after the end of Romanpersecution, with access to the same library as Origen.

Yet of all the disciples of the Lord, onlyMatthew and John have left usmemoirs; and they, it is reported, had recourse to writing only under pressureof necessity. For Matthew, whopreached earlier to Hebrews, when he was about to go to others also, committinghis Gospel to writing in his native tongue, compensated by his writing for theloss of his presence to those from whom he was sent away.

Eusebius,Church History3.24.5‑6

"Memoirs" - an ancient genre forfamous people thinking back over events in their own lives. Matthew and John had not planned towrite but when they saw the need arise (e.g., leaving Palestine) they did so.

7) Jerome (c400)

Matthew who is also called Levi, and whochanged from a publican to anApostle, was the first one in Judaea to write a Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words for those from thecircumcision who believed; who translated it afterwards into Greek is notsufficiently certain.

Jerome,Lives of Illustrious Men 3

c. Summary on Authorship of Matthew

1) That Matthew wrote the Gospel ascribed tohim is the unanimous opinion of tradition and (perhaps not independently) ofthe titles on extant manuscripts.

This is consistent with title and content of thefirst Gospel. No other names areassociated with it. The earlychurch knew of fake gospels and rejected them.

2) That Matthew's Gospel was the first writtenis also given several times in the tradition.

This is frequently disputed today, as mostliberals (and many conservatives) think Matthew's Gospel uses Mark's.

3) That Matthew's Gospel was written in Hebrew(or Aramaic) is a regular feature of the tradition.

This, too, is often disputed today because theextant Greek Gospel does not look like translation‑Greek from a Semiticlanguage. [Translation-Greek: a lot of Hebrew syntax and vocabularyrange carried over into the Greek.] The LXX is an example of translation‑Greek in most of its text,though it varies from book to book.

But it could be that the translator tried togive it a more fluent Greek style. Some OT translations into Greek were concerned about style: e.g.

Symmachus and Theodotion ‑ good Greekstyle;

contrast Aquila ‑ very literal translationGreek.

In English, the NASB is something liketranslation-English, the NIV has a good English style.

Perhaps Matthew himself made a free translationat a later time. We don't know forsure if it was a translation, or (if so) who made it.

Effect on inspiration if it is atranslation: No problem if Matthewtranslated it. More a concern ifdone by someone besides an apostle or a trusted associate (Luke, etc.). However, the church has been withoutthe Bible in the original languages for long periods in church history: Western church only had Latin in MiddleAges. Even today, most Americansdon't know the Biblical languages.

What languages were used in Palestine in NTtimes? Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greekwere all used in Bar-Kochba materials which we have been found recently incaves. Latin, Greek, and Hebrew(or Aramaic) were used in the signover the cross. Don't know howmany people were multi‑lingual. Since several of Jesus' NT statements are in transliterated Aramaic,this was probably Jesus' native language.

2. Mark's Authorship

a. Internal evidence

Like Matthew, except for book title, Mark isanonymous in its text.

Some have suggested the style seems to fit thepersonality of Peter:

1) impressionable rather than reflective.

2) emotional rather than logical.

3) many vivid details, including:

Jesus's emotions, looks,gestures (Mark 3:5; 6:6,34; 7:34; 8:12; 10:14,21; 14:33)

Peter's own thoughts(9:6 at transfiguration; 1:21 "being reminded, Peter said")

This would suggest closecontact with Peter, but Luke 9:33 also gives Peter's response at thetransfiguration.

The outline of Mark is close to that of Peter'stalk at Cornelius' house (Acts 10:37‑41). Both start with John's baptism rather than Jesus' birth orpre-existence (like the other gospels).

The standpoint of narrative is consistent withPeter as author. By Astandpoint@ we don't mean author refersto self in 1st person; rather, he structures narrative so that reader tends toidentify with him or his group (rather like the way the birth narratives inMatthew and Luke are written from Joseph's or Mary's view). E.g., compare Mark 5:37f and Matt 9:23(raising Jairus' daughter). Matt.tells little of what happened in house. Mark gives much more detail: age of girl, food for her, people put outof room. This is consistent withthe idea that Matthew remained outside and got a few details later, while Peterwent in and saw all the action (which is what we are told happened).

Mark 14:51 (young man who loses his sheet atarrest of Jesus) makes best sense as a brief sketch of Mark himself. Otherwise, it is strange to introducesomeone with no explanation, especially when they have no connection with thenarrative.

b. External Evidence for Authorship of Mark

1) Papias (c130 AD)

And this the Presbyter [apostle John?] usedto say: Mark, indeed, since he was the interpreter of Peter, wrote accurately,but not in order the things either said or done by the Lord as much as he[Peter? Mark?] remembered. [*] For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him,but afterwards, as I have said [heard and followed] Peter, who fitted hisdiscourses to the needs [of his hearers] but not as if making a narrative ofthe Lord's sayings; consequently, Mark, writing some things just as heremembered, erred in nothing; for he was careful of one thing C not to omit anythingof the things he had heard or to falsify anything in them.

Expositionof the Oracles of the Lord;

citedin Eusebuis, Church History 3.39.15

This is the most complete statement from Papiasregarding any Gospel. The bracketsare either explanatory material added by translators to clarify his statementor my comments.

Papias is citing information which goes backbefore him. The"Presbyter" (elder) is most likely the author of 2 and 3 John C the Apostle John. Irenaeus notes that Papias studiedunder John.

Note the problem as to where the quotation fromJohn ends. It probably ended asearly as [*], since the next sentence is in the 1st person (Papias?).

Mark as the "interpreter ofPeter": Might refer to a language which Peter did not know. Peter probably knew Greek as he wrote 1 and 2 Peter, perhapsMark translated into Latin. However, Mark could be called an "interpreter of Peter"because he wrote Peter's memoirs for him.

"Accurately, but not in order..." isstrange, since many feel that the chronology/order of events in Mark isquite good. This might, however,refer to Mark's original note‑taking: i.e., Peter did not give the data in chronological order but"fitted it to the needs of his hearers" as he gave messages invarious Christian churches. Inthis case, Mark's compilation is in order, but the data as given him by Peterwas not in order.

"As much as he remembered..." alsoprobably refers to Peter, notMark.

"Accurate" (first occurrence) iswithin the direct quote from John.

Probably Papias is following rabbinic usagehere: The student memorizes (exactly) a teacher's statement (the Mishnah) and then gives anexplanation of that statement (Gemara). Thus the quotation above before [*] is the exact statement; the materialafterwards is Papias' explanation.

2) Justin Martyr (c140-50 AD)

After speaking several times of the memoirs ofthe apostles called Gospels, and having just mentioned Peter, Justin says: It is written in his [Peter's]memoirs that He [Christ] changed Peter's name, as well as the sons of Zebedee,Boanerges,alluding to Mark 3:16‑17.

Dialoguewith Trypho106.

The assumption that "his memoirs"refers to Peter as author and not to Christ as subject is reasonable sinceJustin never elsewhere refers to "Christ's memoirs" but always to"the memoirs of the Apostles".

3) Irenaeus (c180 AD)

Matthew published ... while Peter and Paulwere preaching the Gospel in Rome and founding the church. After their departure (§ξoδoς;death?) Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also handed down to us inwriting the things preached by Peter.

AgainstHeresies3.1.2 (Latin);

Greekin Eusebius, Church History 5.8.2

"Departure" could refer to death(figuratively) or to leaving Rome alive (literally); both constructions arecommon.

4) Clement of Alexandria (c200 AD)

... the Gospel according to Mark had thisoccasion: When Peter had preached the word publicly in Rome and had declaredthe Gospel by the Spirit, those who were present C they were many C besought Mark, sincehe had followed him for a long time and remembered the things that had beenspoken, to write out the things that had been said; and when he had done this,he gave the Gospel to those who had asked him. When Peter learned of it later, he neither obstructed norcommended it.

Outlines; cited in Eusebius6.14.5

Note that Peter is still alive after Gospel iswritten. Peter is not sure what todo with the writing; his puzzlement here somewhat resembles that when the HolySpirit fell on the Gentiles at Cornelius' house.

5) Tertullian (c200 AD)

So then, of Apostles, John and Matthewinstill us with faith; ofApostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it.

AgainstMarcion4.2

Is Tertullian referring to the order of writinghere? It is doubtful. He may only have in mind the strengthof the witnesses re/ their proximity to Jesus.

6) Origen (c225 AD)

... and that secondly there was written theGospel according to Mark, who made it as Peter instructed him, whom also he(Peter) acknowledges as son in the Catholic Epistle in these words saying:AThe church inBabylon, elect together with you, and Mark, my son, salute you@ (1 Peter 5:13).

Commentaryon Matthew;cited in

Eusebius,Church History6.25.5

"Secondly ... Mark" would mostnaturally refer to chronological order, but perhaps (in the context) only tocanonical order. See the beginningof this quotation (page 43 of our notes) with reference to the"ecclesiastical canon."

c. Summary on Authorship.

1) That Mark wrote the Gospel ascribed to himis the unanimous opinion of tradition, as is the belief that he gives usPeter's preaching.

Mark's authorship is supported by extantmanuscript titles. There is lessargument over Mark's authorship as compared to Matthew's or John's. There is, however, considerably more resistance in liberalcircles to the idea that he gives us Peter's preaching.

2) These traditions are consistent with thenature of the Gospel itself in a stronger and more obvious way than was thecase for Matthew.

The linkage to Peter is not explicit in the manuscripts,but is consistent with the tone of the Gospel as seen above under internalevidence (vignette of 14:51-52, personality of Peter).

3) Some see a contradiction in the traditionregarding the date of Mark and the time of its writing relative to Luke.

Irenaeus is interpreted as saying that Markwrote after Peter's death, whereas Clement of Alexandria clearly implies thatMark wrote before his death.

A contradiction is not necessary here, asIrenaeus may be referring to Peter (and Paul) leaving Rome alive (literalexodus) rather than to their death (figurative exodus). It appears that Paul at least did leaveRome after his first imprisonment (Acts 28, tradition).

Another alleged contradiction relates to therelative order of Mark and Luke. Many traditions give the order Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, but Clementsays Gospels with genealogies (Matt, Luke) were written first, i.e., Matthew,Luke, Mark, John.

3. Luke's Authorship

a. Internal Evidence

Except for its title, the Gospel text isanonymous.

However, the prologue of Acts links Acts toLuke, and internal features in Acts suggest that the author of Acts was acompanion of Paul, either Luke or Jesus Justus. The prologues of Luke and Acts both mention Theophilus. Acts’ prologue refers to a previousaccount which is clearly the Gospel we call Luke.

The vocabularies of Luke and Acts are similarand indicate a well‑educated author with an unusual knowledge of medicalterms. See William K. Hobart, TheMedical Language of St. Luke, where this evidence is presented in detail.

b. External Evidence

We have fewer early references than for Matthewand Mark. Perhaps no one saw fitto report Papias' comments on this Gospel, if he made any.

1) Muratorian Canon (late 2nd century) from Italy

The Muratorian Canon is a list of the booksbelonging to the NT, named for its discoverer Muratori (1740). It is a fragment, with end, beginning(and possibly some of the middle) missing. It survives in a single 8th century manuscript "inbarbarous Latin, by a careless and ignorant scribe." It is clearly a translation of a Greekoriginal, which from internal evidence dates back to the late 2nd century andwas written in or near Rome, which it calls "the city."

The Muratorian Canon mentions Hermas, author ofthe Shepherd of Hermas, as the brother of Pius who was apparently bishop ofRome in author's own lifetime.

The Canon begins as follows:

... but he was present among them, and so heput [the facts down in his Gospel]. The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke. Luke, the physician, after theascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him as a companion of histraveling, [and after he had made] an investigation, wrote in his own name C but neither did hesee the Lord in the flesh C and thus, as he was able to investigate, soalso he begins to tell the story [starting] from the nativity of John.

As only Luke begins with the birth of John theBaptist, the correct Gospel is inview: No other known Gospel (including apocryphal ones) begins withJohn's nativity.

The remark about "traveling companion"fits with the testimony of Acts.

2) Irenaeus (c180 AD) from France and Asia Minor

Now Matthew published ... while Peter andPaul were preaching the Gospel in Rome and founding the church. After theirdeparture, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter ... handed down to us inwriting the things preached by Peter. Luke also, the follower of Paul, put down in a book the Gospel preachedby that one. Afterwards John....

AgainstHeresies3.1.1‑2 (Latin)

Greekin Eusebius, Church History 5.8.2

Irenaeus seems to be giving the generalchronological order ofwriting. Notice that he puts Lukethird but doesn't quite say that Luke is written third.

3) Clement of Alexandria (c208 AD) from Egypt

Again in the same books Clement gives atradition of the early presbyters concerning the order of the Gospels inthe following manner: He said thatthose Gospels which contain the genealogies were written first; but the Gospelaccording to Mark had this occasion.... Last of all, John,....

Outlines; cited in Eusebius6.14.5

Note the chronological order seems differentthan Irenaeus' in that Luke precedes Mark.

4) Tertullian (c215 AD) from North Africa

So then, of Apostles, John and Matthewinstill us with faith; of Apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it .... For Luke'sGospel similarly men are used to ascribe to Paul.

AgainstMarcion4.2

5) Origen (c225 AD) from Egypt

... and thirdly, that according to Luke C the Gospel praised by Paul C who made it forthose from the Gentiles whobelieved.

Commentaryon Matthew;cited in

Eusebius,Church History6.25.6

The remark about the "Gospel praised byPaul" is probably referring to 2 Cor 8:18. It is doubtful that this is what Paul had in mind in thatpassage!

6) Eusebius (c330 AD)

Luke, in regard to race being of those ofAntioch, but by profession aphysician, since he had been very much with Paul and had no mean association with the rest of the Apostles,left us examples of the therapy of souls, which he acquired from them, in twoinspired books: the Gospel whichhe testifies that he also wrote according to what those handed down to him whowere eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word, all of whom healso says he had followed even from the beginning; and the Acts of the Apostleswhich he composed from what he had learned, not by hearing but with his eyes.But men say that Paul was accustomed to refer to his Gospel whenever, writingas it were about some Gospel of his own, he said, Aaccording to myGospel.@

Eusebius,Church History3.4.6‑7

Eusebius may be drawing inferences from NTpassages as "my Gospel" probably refers to Paul's message, not to thegospel of Luke. Many of Paul'sreferences to "my Gospel" (e.g., Rom. 2:16, 16:25) probably predatethe writing of Luke.

c. Summary on Authorship

1) That Luke, a follower of Paul and aphysician, wrote the Gospel ascribed to him is the unanimous opinion oftradition, although we have no remarks quite so early as those of Papias onMatthew and Mark.

By c200 AD, we have info from all geographicalareas of early Christianity agreeing that Luke is the author. This implies the title has been on thework a long time, or that early Xns had access to common knowledge.

That the author was a physician who traveledwith Paul is consistent with the internal vocabulary of the 3rd Gospel and withits linkage with Acts. Thus basedon internal evidence Luke is most likely to be the author.

2) The Gospel is frequently mentioned third,perhaps preserving a tradition regarding the order of authorship.

Alternatively, this could be an early binding orcanon order. The Muratorian Canon,Irenaeus, and Origen all cite Luke as third.

If Luke is really written third and afterPeter's death, then Clement is in error and some internal problems developregarding the date of Acts.

B.Dates of the Synoptic Gospels

1. Date of Matthew's Gospel

a. Internal evidence

Internal evidence is of very little helphere. Two remarks suggest that itwas notwritten immediately after the resurrection (i.e. in the 30's):

Matt 27:8 "called the Field of Blood to thisday."

Matt 28:15 "This story was widely spreadamong the Jews to this day."

Both imply a significant time interval betweenthe event and writing, but don=t say how much.

Liberals tend to date Matt after 70 AD, partlyto place it after Mark (which they date just before 70), and partly to"post‑date" Jesus' predictions:

Matt 21:41 ‑Parable of tenant farmers who kill son implies destruction of nation Israel forkilling Jesus, so after 70 AD, story being made up to fit what happened.

Matt 22:7 ‑Wedding Banquet, guests refused to come so king "destroyed thosemurderers, and set their city on fire." (Fits Jerusalem => writtenafter 70).

Matt 23:38 ‑"Your house is being left to you desolate!" (Either Jerusalem ortemple destroyed => after 70).

Matt 24 ‑ OlivetDiscourse describes fall of Jerusalem, so written afterwards.

Liberals say Mark could be written just beforethe fall of Jerusalem since that Gospel does not include these details asclearly.

Obviously this is no problem to believers, sinceall these are in prediction contexts, and Jesus can predict the future.

b. External evidence

Matthew was written before earliest survivingmanuscripts. The papyri p^64,67and p⁷⁷ represent 2 manuscripts from about 200 AD. So written before 200.

Epistle of Pseudo‑Barnabas (probablywritten c132 AD) cites Matt. 22:14 ("many called, few chosen") saying"as the Scripture says," but doesn't name Matthew. Liberals sayMatthew was written by then, but Pseudo‑Barnabas misremembered quote asOT Scripture.

Tradition on authorship would require that it bewritten within Matthew's lifetime, probably no later than 100 AD, possibly muchearlier. This is limited byMatthew's age: Since he was anadult with some authority (tax collector) by c30 AD, it is doubtful he wasliving after 100 AD. Thus thetraditions imply that Matthew was written in the 1st century. Allusions inother Apostolic Fathers, including Clement (c95 AD) would agree with this.

Irenaeus' tradition would date it to c61‑68AD.

Several other traditions make Matthew's Gospelthe first one written, so it might be even earlier.

Luke (see below) was probably written in late50's, so Matthew's date would then be earlier.

c. Various proposals for Matthew's date

These range from 37 AD (Old Scofield Bible) to125 AD (so Robert Kraft, a liberal prof at U. Penn.). 37 AD is probably too early for the "to this day"references. 125 AD is far tooskeptical of historical sources. Does not explain why Christians and even heretics accepted it and usedonly the 4 gospels.

My suggestion for date: Irenaeus slightly mistaken. Matthew wrote a Hebrew Gospel in the40's or 50s before he left Jerusalem (note when Paul visits Jerusalem, he foundonly Peter and John there). Matthew later made a Greek edition in the 60's for wider use. Thus Irenaeus is correct about authorand language, but mistakes its publication in Greek (61‑68 AD) for itsoriginal Hebrew composition in the 40's or early 50's.

Papias's statement implies that for some timeMatthew was the only written Gospel available and was in demand even in itsHebrew form as apparently no Greek translation had been made yet.

This model is proposed to fit (1) the traditionof Matthew being the first Gospel written with (2) the evidence for a pre‑60date of Luke (see below).

2. The Date of Mark's Gospel

a. Internal Evidence

We have nothing direct. Liberals like to date by post‑datingpredictions, so they tend to put it late.

Solution to the Synoptic problem has a bearinghere, depending on whether we see Mark as written before or after Matthew andLuke.

b. External Evidence

See various fathers cited above. Based on a count of survivingmanuscripts and citations by church fathers, Mark was considerably less popularthan Matthew in the early church.

c. Several dating schemes:

1) The concordant(conflict-minimizing) interpretation of the testimony of the church fathersputs the date of Mark in the 60's before the death of Peter.

Clement dates Gospel during Peter's lifetime.

Irenaeus is referring to Peter leaving Rome andnot to his death.

Then we can date Mark between Paul's arrival inRome narrated in Acts (61‑63 AD) and 68 AD (when persecutions ended withNero's death).

2) Some scholars rejectClement of Alexandria's testimony and interpret Irenaeus' "exodus"remark so as to date the Gospel after the death of Peter.

This is the common liberal view, with Mark datedafter 68 AD, perhaps into early 70's. Some extreme liberals date Mark as late as 115 AD!

3) Many conservativesreject all tradition and put Mark back into the 50's, so that Mark can pre‑dateMatthew and Luke.

This view throws out a lot of data in order tomaintain a conservative version of the 2‑document theory. This will be discussed later, under ourtopic "The Synoptic Problem."

d. Summary on Date of Mark

Clearly, people are willing to ignore data sothat their view of the synoptic problem (to be discussed) looks plausible.

The concordant view seems to fit the data thebest, and is favored by me. However,it must reject the two-document theory which puts Mark earlier than Matthew.

3. The Date of Luke's Gospel

a. Internal Evidence.

1) Clearly Acts 1:1presupposes Luke, so the Gospel must be written before Acts.

The prologues are connected, since Acts refersto the "previous account." Luke ends with the ascension, Acts picks up from there and continues.Both are addressed to the same person, Theophilus.

2) Liberals feel thatLuke 21:20 reflects the Jewish war, so they date Luke after 70 AD.

As predicted in Lk 21:20, in 66 AD the city wassurrounded by armies, but the Roman general got scared and retreated. This allowed people to flee the city,as Jesus warned them to do, before the Romans came back the 2nd time (68 AD)and leveled Jerusalem (as in v 24).

Only unbelievers feel a need to post‑dateprophecies. No such approach is warranted for believers, though of course Luke could have been writtenafter 70 if other evidence so indicates (i.e., it is not necessary that Lukewrite before the prophecy was fulfilled).

b. External Evidence

1) Acts (as we discussin course on Acts & Pauline Epistles) seems to date from the end of Paul'sfirst Roman imprisonment, c63‑64 AD.

The date of Acts must precede the Roman fire (64AD) as it reflects no antagonism between Christianity and the Romangovernment. Once Nero pinned theblame for the fire on Xns, Xybecame an illegal cult until after 300 AD. Acts shows no hint that Xy is illegal.

Acts also shows no hint of the death of Paul(c68 AD). Paul has been in Rome for 2 years under house arrest when the book ofActs' narrative ends.

Liberals (to try to explain this away) sayeveryone knew what happened to Paul so there was no need to include hisdeath. But "housearrest" is strange way to end the book if he's dead!

Some (incl some conservatives) suggest Lukeintended to write a 3rd book as a sequel to Acts, but for some reason never wasable to do so. This argument is basedon taking Acts 1:1 "the first account" πρωτov to mean"first of several" and assuming Luke would have usedπρότερov if he meant "first of two." But the word used in Acts 1:1 can mean"first of two" in Hellenistic Greek, even though this was not properin Classical Greek.

If our suggestion 1) is right, then Luke bringsthe reader up to date at the end of Acts, i.e., he is writing just two yearsafter Paul has arrived in Rome.

2) That Luke would bedated slightly earlier than Acts is seen from internal evidence (above),especially if Paul's 2‑year imprisonment in Caesarea gave Luke the opportunity forresearching and writing the Gospel.

Writing the Gospel before voyage to Rome wouldavoid problems with Luke losing his notes in the shipwreck.

In this case, Luke would begin to circulate inthe East about the time of Paul's voyage, c60 AD.

3) A date of c60 ADseems to buck the tradition which puts Mark in the 60's but earlier thanLuke. I suggest that either thetradition is partially mistaken or that both Mark and Luke are nearlysimultaneous and reached different parts of the Empire at different times,i.e., that Mark arrived first in some places, Luke first in others.

Mark is traditionally written in Rome (theWest). Clement, in Egypt (theEast), puts Luke ahead of Mark chronologically.

Irenaeus' testimony looks chronological, butnote above (page 51) that he does not give an explicit time or sequencereference for Luke (like "afterward"). Irenaeus may not be intending to be chronological here,or he may be mistaken because his sources received the two Gospels in adifferent order than Egypt did.

Thus we date Luke 58‑60 AD, before Acts in63‑64 AD.

4. Summary on Dates of theSynoptic Gospels

30 40 50 60 70

|=====================| |===| |=======|

Matthew Luke Mark

30 40 50 60 70

^ ^ ^

Resurrection JerusalemCouncil FallJerusalem

C.Characteristics of the Synoptic Gospels

1. Characteristics of Matthew

a. Matthew the author

He is mentioned by name 7 times in 4 differentbooks of the NT, but these involve only 2 occasions: (1) his conversion and (2)the apostle lists. He is called"Levi of Alpheus" in Mark 2:14, so may have been the son of Alpheusand brother of James the Little (listed as son of Alpheus in Mt 10:3, Mk 3:18,Lk 6:15, Ac 1:13).

Conversion: Matt 9:9, Mark 2:14, Luke 5:27,29 ‑was a tax‑collector, so held a dinner for old friends to meet Jesus. An interesting picture of the reactionof a new convert.

Apostle list: Matt 10:3 (only list using term"publican"), Mark 3:18, Luke 6:15, Acts 1:13. In these lists, the apostles are alwaysgrouped in 3 groups of 4 and are never mixed between groups. Matthew is always in the 2nd group, aseither #7 or #8.

b. Matthew's Original Audience

Matthew's Messianic emphasis is more appropriatefor Jews.

His tendency to assume a knowledge of Jewishpractices (rather than to explain them) suggests principal readers in view areJews and Jewish Christians.

Mt 15:2 ‑"tradition of the elders" about washing hands. Mark gives 3‑4 verses ofexplanation, Matt. doesn't.

Mt 23:5 ‑"they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels (of their garments)." Even the NASB added parentheses toprovide some explanation. Toshow their piety, some Pharisees wore bigger phylacteries and longer tasselsthan the average person.

Mt 23:27 ‑ Scribesand Pharisees "are like whitewashed tombs." Jews would whitewash tombs so people wouldn't accidentlytouch them and become unclean (esp. before festivals).

c. Aim and Structure of Matthew.

1) Aim ‑ no direct statement is made inthe Gospel.

Contents suggest Matthew's purpose is to showJesus as the Messiah who fulfilled OT prophecies. Matthew cites more prophecies and a wider variety of themthan any other Gospel writer.

Matthew appears to draw a subtle parallelbetween the ministry of Jesus and the history of Israel.

2) Internal evidence of structure.

We try to find out how the writer would haveoutlined the material (not making arbitrary guesses); this gives more accurateview of book's structure.

a) 2 possible majortransition passages ‑ both begin with the same phrase: "After thatJesus began ..."

Mt 4:17 "to preach" = begins ministryto multitudes. Transition from thepreparatory narratives to Jesus' public proclamation of the gospel.

Mt 16:21 "to show His disciples" =begins His private ministry to the disciples and outlines the rest of the book: suffer, be killed,rise.

b) Discourses.

Usually 5 are seen (Godet, Introduction tothe NT),ending with the formula: "And it came to pass when Jesus had finished...."

Chapters Formula

(1) Sermon on the Mount 5‑7 7:28

(2) Instructions to the12 10 11:1

(3) Kingdom Parables 13 13:53

(4) Church Discipline 18 19:1

(5) OlivetDiscourse 24‑25 26:1

Some say Matthew models his Gospel around thePentateuch, so have 5 discourses = 5 books. Sermon on Mount would fit Exodus, but what of Genesis?

Some see further (but non‑chronological)parallels of: Genealogy = Book of the generations. Wilderness temptation = Wanderings.

But there are 2 other discourses in Matthew, notjust 5:

Mt 23: "Woes toPharisees" ‑ doesn't end with formula. Could link it with Mt 24‑25, but topic is different.

Mt 3: Discourse of John the Baptist.

It appears that Matthew is giving topicalsamples of Jesus' preaching relevant to who Jesus is. Attempts to get these samples to fit the Pentateuchseem rather stretched.

c) Is Matthew involved in shifting materials?

Some suggest that Matthew gathered materials bytheme rather than ordering them chronologically.

His discourses are admittedly by topic. His miracles are mainly concentratedin chs. 8‑9.

Matthew's order of events is different from thatof Mark and Luke in a few places.

But we find no solid evidence of chronologicalliberty between the Gospels (i.e., the same events explicitly said to havehappened in a different order). All the Gospels have a chronological structure, but with different purposesand emphases.

As an itinerant preacher, Jesus doubtlessrepeated the same/similar teaching material on different occasions.

Different cultures have different literaryprocedures. Quotations must followa specific accuracy and style for an academic thesis, but the requirementsfor a newspaper article are not as formal. Of course, to invent dialogue which never occurred is bad inany culture.

When condensing a long speech or narrative, awriter might either use key sentences from a discourse, simplify the action orsummarize it in his own words. Either approach would be acceptable so long as it tells us what actuallytook place. [He need not tell us what he is doing, however.]

d. Characteristic phrases in Matthew

1) "That it mightbe fulfilled" is very common in Matthew.

Some of these fulfillments are also noted inother Gospels, but not so many as in Matthew. Some liberals have suggested that a book of testimonies (acompilation of OT prooftexts about the Messiah) was used in the early church. This may be so, but it is more likely(cp. Luke 24:27) that these go back to Jesus' own explanation of Messianicprophecy after his resurrection.

2) "Kingdom of Heaven" occurs over 30times.

This is apparently synonymous with "kingdomof God" in Mark and Luke. Infact, Matt 19:23‑24 uses both terms in parallel. In Rabbinic sources"heaven" was a common substitution for "God," as they werereluctant to write or speak the name of God because of its holiness.

e. Other Materials Unique to Matthew

1) Matthew refers tovarious Jewish customs and usages not especially interesting to Gentiles.

2) Matthew's birth material is distinctive.

Both Matt and Luke narrate Jesus' birth; bothare clear on the virgin birth. Butotherwise, they do not overlap much.

Matt notes the Wise men coming, Herod's attemptto kill Jesus, and the flight to Egypt.

Matt appears to give Joseph's perspective (seehim wondering, worrying, acting), while Luke gives Mary's viewpoint.

3) Peter and the Church ‑Matt 16, and Church Discipline ‑ Matt 18.

Only Matthew discusses the Church, even thoughit is the most Jewish Gospel. Thisraises some problems for that dispensational view which makes such an absolutedistinction between the Church and Israel and also sees Matthew as the "JewishGospel" in the sense that it is "not for thisdispensation." Note that ¦κκλησίαis LXX term for "congregation."

4) Great Commission ‑ Matt. 28.

A commission also appears in Mark (but in questionabletext), Luke, Acts and John, each (except Matt & Mark) in a differentcontext than the others. Jesus sawthe spread of the Gospel as sufficiently important to repeat his instructionson several occasions.

Liberals don't like the implications of "goto all the nations," "be with you through the ages," and theTrinitarian formula, so they deny this goes back to Jesus. They also question Matthew'sauthenticity and date because of perceived conflicts with Acts: (1) command togo vs. early reluctance of apostles; (2) Trinity vs. early baptism "in thename of Christ."

None of these is very serious if Xy istrue. If Jesus is who the Bibleclaims he is, then his atoning death and resurrection are certainly news ofearth-shaking importance (Psalm 22 says as much, and it was certainly writtenbefore the rise of Xy). If Jesusis God and there is only one God, then He is present everywhere and shares"the Name" with the Father. The Acts' problems relate to emphasis: (1) the early disciples were apparently waiting for furtherinstructions on how to go about this, and did not at first realize thatGentiles would become Xns as Gentiles without converting to Judaism; (2) weprobably misread both Matthew and Acts in taking the phrases "in the nameof the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" and "in the name of JesusChrist" as instructions on the exact wording to be used in a ceremony.

f. Sketch Outline of Matthew. (| = about one chapter)

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑1:1

| Genealogy

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑1:18

| Birth and Infancy

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑3:1

| Preparation for Ministry

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑4:12 (17)

| Public

| Galilean

| Ministry

| ‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑13:1

| Limited

| ‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑16:21

| Private

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑19:1

| Journey to Jerusalem

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑21:1

| Last Week

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑26:1

| Betrayal, Trial, Crucifixion

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑28:1

| Resurrection

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑

2. Characteristics of Mark

a. The Man John Mark

1) Mark mentioned in the NT 10 or 11 times

6 times in Acts: 12:12,25; 13:5,13; 15:37,39

3 times in Paul: Col 4:10, Phm 24, 2 Tim 4:11

once in 1 Peter 5:13

perhaps in Mark 14:51‑52.

2) Tracing his life:

Mark was a cousin (•vεψιός)of Barnabas (Col 4:10).

Mark's mother was Mary, who owned a house inJerusalem (Acts 12:12). His fatheris not mentioned; perhaps he was dead or an unbeliever.

Mark may have been present at Jesus' arrest(Mark 14:51‑52). This is a speculation. Possible story: The last supper was held at Mary's house. The mob comes to the house to arrest Jesus; Mark awakens andfollows the mob at a distance (wrapped in a sheet) to Gethsemane. He watchesthe arrest from the bushes and almost gets caught himself.

Mark was living in Jerusalem (Acts 12:12) withhis mother during the persecution in which James (son of Zedebee) was killedand Peter was imprisoned (c44 AD; dated from Josephus' remarks about death ofHerod Agrippa).

Barnabas and Paul take Mark with them to Antioch(Acts 12:25). Mark then goes alongwith Paul and Barnabas on the first missionary journey (Acts 13:5) as theirassistant (ßπηρέτης). Word originally meant a slave rower,but had been generalized by NT times to servant or assistant. As Mark had little training in the Wordcp w/ Paul and Barnabas, he probably looked after housing, food, etc.

Mark abandons them when they go into Asia Minor(Acts 13:13; c47‑48 AD). Whatever his reason was, Paul does not think it was a good one. Some possibilities:

a) Switch in leadershipfrom Barnabas to Paul occurred on Cyprus. Mark was irritated by it.

b) Going into Asia Minorwas a change of plan and Mark did not want to be gone that long.

c) Mark opposed theaggressive evangelization of the Gentiles.

d) He became fearful ofthe dangers, disillusioned, or homesick.

After the Jerusalem council, Paul and Barnabasplan a second missionary journey to visit the churches they established (Acts15:37,39). Barnabas wants to giveMark a second chance but Paul does not. So they split up: Mark and Barnabas go to Cyprus, Paul and Silas (amature Christian) head for Asia Minor (c50 AD).

Hear nothing more of Mark until later in theEpistles, since Acts mainly follows Paul.

About 10 years later (61‑63 AD), Mark isback in the good graces of Paul (Col 4:10, Philemon 24). Mark is apparently being sent on amission by Paul and is commended to the Colossian church. He is now a fellow‑worker withPaul.

Still later, Mark is near Ephesus and iscommended as being useful to Paul (2 Tim. 4:11; 64‑68 AD). Timothy is to bring him when he comesfrom Ephesus.

1 Pet 5:13 may predate 2 Tim reference. Peter is still alive but Romanpersecution has apparently begun (c64 AD or later); Peter is warning Asianchurches about it. Mark is withPeter "in Babylon" and sends his greetings. Peter calls him "my son",presumably in the spiritual sense.

Where is Babylon? Possibilites:

a) Literal: The area in Mesopotamia around wherethe city of Babylon had been, where there was still a large Jewish community.

b) Egypt: City near modern Cairo was calledBabylon; also had a large Jewish community.

c) Rome: Is called "Babylon" inRevelation; may be a code to throw off authorities if letter intercepted.

Tradition says that Mark later went down toAlexandria in Egypt and became a leader of the church there.

b. Mark's Audience

Pretty clearly Gentile, possibly Roman.

1) Aramaic phrases (aremany in Mk; see below) are generally translated. Thus readerswere not expected to know Aramaic.

2) Jewish practices areexplained (cleansing hands, etc.). For any Jew, this would be unnecessary.

Thus Mark is writing to a non‑Jewishaudience which is unfamiliar with the languages and culture of Palestine. Such people are clearly Gentiles. From tradition (and perhaps Latinisms,below) we may also infer that they were Romans.

3) Several Latinisms(the use of Latin terms in Greek) occur in Mark:

"φραγελλόω"(Mark 15:15) from Latin 'flagello'.

This term also appears in 2 other Gospels (John2 and Matt 11), so it may only show that Latin military and governmental termswere picked up in Palestine during 100 years of Roman rule.

"κεvτυρίωv"(Mark 15:39,44,45) from Latin centurion.

Matthew, Luke and Acts use the Greek equivalent,literally "ruler of a 100" (©κατovτάρχης).

Doubt that we should put much weight on theLatinisms when it comes to guessing the audience.

c. The Aim of Mark.

No direct statement is given in the Gospel.

More difficult to infer an aim for Mark than forMatthew. Author does not say he is intending to"preserve the traditions of Peter."

The opening line (Mark 1:1) may state theaim. While Mark does preserve"the good news about Christ" (1:1), this is the general aim of allthe Gospels.

Perhaps Mark is aimed especially at the Romanmentality, which tended to be practical, action-oriented, organized. Peter himself had such a practicaltemperament so he probably fit well with the Romans in this. Thus there may have been a high demandfor his material among the Romans as tradition says.

d. Characteristics of Mark:

1) Vividness

Mark is full of graphic and picturesque detailswhich are not required for the action, but add color and depth to the narrative(e.g., the 5000 reclined on the green grass).

Mark notes Jesus' emotions, and he useshistorical present frequently to add life to the narrative.

2) Detail

Mark often reports incidents with more detailthan do Matt or Luke. Names ofpeople involved, time of day, surrounding crowds are noted, which arefrequently not found in the others.

Yet Mark is the shortest Gospel. This shortness is obtained by omittinglong discourses and reporting fewer events.

3) Activity

The action in Jesus' ministry isemphasized. "εÛθύς"is used over 40 times, tending to give the narrative a rushed, breathlessquality.

Mark stresses Jesus' actions more than hiswords. Mark does not usually givelong discourses of Jesus. Mark 13(the Olivet discourse) is much the longest speech of Jesus in Mark.

Mark is packed with miracles: 18 are recorded (though only 2 areunique to Mark).

4) Aramaic

Many Aramaic words are recorded, and usuallytranslated into Greek.

a) Aramaic words unique to Mark:

Boanerges (3:17): epithet of the2 sons of Zebedee, meaning "sons of thunder".

Talitha Cum[i] (5:41): command toJarius' daughter, "Little girl, arise!"

Ephphatha (7:34): command to deaf‑mute:"Be opened!"

Bartimaus (10:46) Name of the blind man, meaning "son of Timaus".

That Mark even translates the Aramaic name"Bartimaus" suggests that his audience had no feel for Aramaicwhatsoever.

Abba (14:36) Jesus addressing God, meaning "Father".

This term occurs in Paul (Rom, Gal) but not inthe other Gospels

b) Aramaic words which are also found in otherGospels.

Corban (7:11): "Gift tothe temple"; is not translated in Matt 27:6.

Golgotha (15:22): "Place ofa skull"; both Matthew and John use this and both translate it.

Eloi, Eloi, ..., (15:34): "My God, My God, ...." Matthew uses and translates.

Rabbi, Rabboni used a number of timesin Mark (4x), Matt (4x), and John (9x); only translated once and that by John.

Mark probably used the Aramaic for vividness.

These quotations do not tell us that Jesus only spoke Aramaic. His conversations with the Syro‑Phoenicianwoman and Pilate imply that he had a knowledge of Greek.

e. A Sketch outline of Mark.

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑1:1

| Preparation for Ministry

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑1:14

| Galilean Ministry

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑10:1

| Journey to Jerusalem

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑11:1

| Last Week

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑14:10

| Betrayal, Trial, Crucifixion

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑16:1

| Resurrection

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑

3. Characteristics of Luke

a. Luke the Physician

1) Luke is mentioned by name only 3 times in theNT:

Col 4:14; Philemon 24; 2 Tim 4:11

From these sparse references, we infer that:

a) Luke was a physician,loved by Paul (Col. 4:14).

b) He was a faithfulcompanion of Paul, even to the very end in Rome (2 Tim 4:11, but seen in all 3passages).

c) He was apparentlyGentile rather than Jewish (Col 4:14).

Strong but indirect evidence here. Col 4:10‑14 is a series ofgreetings from friends which Paul breaks into 2 groups: the circumcised anduncircumcised. Luke is in thelatter group.

2) In addition, the"We‑passages" in Acts indicate the author sometimes traveledwith Paul.

The author in these cases writes in the 1stperson plural, including himself in the action. Implies he was with Paul then.

Three textually certain occurrences of this:

a) Acts 16:10‑17. 2nd Missionary Journey.

"After Paul received the vision to go toMacedonia, we .... us ...." and so on throughout the passage.

The group consists of Paul, Silas, Timothy, andauthor. Use of "we"starts in v.10, ends in v.17. Geographically this would imply that the author joined them at Troas andleft them at Philippi.

b) Acts 20:5 ‑ 21:18. 3rd Missionary Journey.

Spotty usage throughout this section. Note that "we" begins in Philippiand ends in Jerusalem. Perhaps theauthor is a delegate for the Philippian church in taking gift money toJerusalem, but he does not name himself in the list of delegates. This also suggests that Luke was leftin Philippi during the 2nd missionary journey to help build the church thereand is now picked up.

c) Acts 27:1 ‑ 28:16. Voyage to Rome.

Now 2 years later. "We" picks up in Caesarea and ends in Rome. This suggests perhaps Luke remained inPalestine for the 2 years between the 3rd and 4th journey, perhaps using thistime to research the Gospel materials.

One passage of uncertain text.

d) Acts 11:28. At Antioch before 1st journey[variant].

Only appears in Codex Bezae (D) and late mss ofancient versions. Passage refersto Agabus the prophet in Antioch.

The "we" here may reflect an earlytradition that Luke was originally from Antioch (see Eusebius and Jerome).

Liberals try to discount force of these passagesby saying that the author of Acts (not Luke) used a diary and extracted the"we" passages as direct quotes. This is not the most natural interpretation ofthe phenomenon.

3) Luke as a Greek Physician.

Given his use of medical terminology, Luke wasprobably trained in the Greek medical traditions.

The two most famous Greek physicians ofso-called Hippocratic school:

Hippocrates (4th cen BC)

Galen (2nd cent AD). [after Luke's time]

Some of the writings of the Hippocratic schoolare available today which give us their general procedures. These men (and their associates) werenoted for:

a) Diagnosis byobservation and deduction (rather than by divination).

b) Careful collection ofcase reports.

This list of symptoms and treatments helped tobuild experience or (at least) showed what not to do.

c) Simple treatments.

Some herbal drugs, diet, rest, etc. Nothing exotic like magic, dung onpuncture wounds, chicken teeth, etc. (cp McMillen, None of These Diseases).

d)High standards of hygiene.

Luke probably had this background; seems to haveinterviewed people whom Jesus had healed in a case-report style.

There were other medical people associated withtemples (plus plenty of quacks, of course), but the AGreek school@ was the best of itstime.

4) Some other suggestions about Luke.

a) Hometown.

Eusebius and Jerome said that Luke was a nativeof Syrian Antioch (which fits the variant in Codex D). We presume that this is a tradition;manuscript D is unlikely to have the original text here.

Luke's use of the term "Hellenists" inActs 11:20 apparently refers to pagans, not Jews. Luke means by "Hellenist" someone who was notGreek racially but who had adopted Greek culture.

Ramsay thinks Luke was from Philippi, as thiswas where Luke is left and later picked up. Luke was the "cause" of Paul's Macedonianvision. This idea seems unlikely,though Luke does appear "suddenly" in the narrative at Troas. Perhaps Luke is from Antioch and heeither meets Paul accidently in Troas or was sent by the Antioch church to findand help Paul.

b) Luke is the brother of Titus.

Alexander Souter bases this on 2 Cor. 8:18,where "the brother" could be translated as "hisbrother".

Souter notes that Titus is significant in Paul'sepistles, but strangely is never mentioned in Acts. Similarly, in the Gospel of John, the author never mentionshimself or his brother James. Souter suggests that Luke, like John, minimizes all references tohimself and his brother Titus in Acts.

Thisis rather speculative, since Paul often refers to other men as"brothers", frequently using the term spiritually.

b. The Aim and Method of Luke.

1) Aim: To allow Theophilus to know thecertainty or reliability (ασφαλεια) ofthe things he had been taught.

Luke's aim is given in his prologue to theGospel (1:1-4), written in Greek of an even more classicized, carefulHellenistic style than his usual writing. His prologue is compressed in comparison with that of other histories ofthe time, but his Gospel is also shorter than the typical history. The prologue gives the same informationas such prologues, serving as a dedication and explaining how and why the workwas undertaken.

Liberals are nervous about the term"reliable" as it implies that someone tried to write as accurate ahistory of Jesus as was possible in c60 AD. If Luke succeeded, liberal theology is down the drain!

"Most excellent" [Theophilus] is atitle given to governmental officials; such usage is seen in Acts. It is alsoused in several ancient Greek book dedications, e.g., Galen and the Epistle to Diognetus.

Theophilus may or may not be a Christian. AGod-bearing@ names like his were common in the Greek and Jewishcultures. Cannot well argue thatthis person is imaginary merely on basis of etymology of his name (lover ofGod)..

Presumably Luke had a wider circulation in mindfor this Gospel, probably his intended wider audience is educated Gentiles.

2) Luke's Method

a) Luke was aware of thestatus of his subject at the time of writing.

"Inasmuch as many have undertaken ..."

Luke knew that many others had written about Jesus. However, he is probably not referringto other canonical Gospels here, as only 1 or 2 (at the most) had been writtenat this point.

Probably many Christians were interested inputting together the materials heard from the Apostles, but most did not havetime or opportunity to carefully research their materials.

b) Luke studied allrelated matters carefully himself.

"From the beginning" is probably areference to the subject matter. Luke does start with the earliest earthlyevents. Could alternatively meanthe beginning place (Palestine) or that Luke himself was a disciple from thebeginning, though the tradition does not support this last suggestion.

One can construct a history either by livingthrough the events or by carefully studying the available data later (the usualhistorical method). Luke is apparentlydoing the latter.

c) Luke used materialsdelivered by a group designated as "eyewitnesses and ministers of theword."

These people would include the Apostles andother full-time workers (the 70, etc.) who were also eye‑witnesses. The use of a single definite articlefor the two terms indicates that the group is viewed as a unity having bothqualifications.

Luke probably interviewed many people who werehealed or present at the occasions he narrates..

Luke may have interviewed Mary, since the Lukanbirth material has Mary's perspective. It is possible she was still alive in the 50's, being perhaps 70-80years old.

d) Luke wrote up anorderly, sequential, accurate account.

Obviously, all such claims as the above makeliberals rather nervous! ThisGospel, we are told, is written in Greek by a trained intellectual Gentile whohad personally investigated the accounts of eye-witnesses.

c. Characteristics of Luke

1) Emphases of Luke's Gospel

a) Universalism, i.e.,the Gospel is for all kinds of people.

Luke has an unusual emphasis on both Jews andGentiles, rich and poor, men and women, respectable people and outcasts.

b) Jesus' graciousattitude towards outcasts of society:

Sinners, lepers, Samaritans, harlots, taxcollectors, etc.

c) Prayer

More of Jesus' prayers and parables on prayerare included in Luke than in the other Gospels.

d) Social Relationships

especially an interest in wealth and poverty

Why did Luke stress these relationships? Perhaps because these would appeal tohis audience. Greek philosophersof the NT period were highly concerned with ethics. Many cultured Greeks of the period were also interested inethics and unhappy with the debauchery of Rome.

2) Material Unique to Luke.

a) Luke preserves Semitic Praise Psalms.

These are very Semitic, though otherwise theGospel of Luke is the least Semitic of the four. The Latin names given below (taken from first word(s) oftheir Latin texts) indicate their long usage in the liturgy of the Westernchurch.

(1) Magnificat (Lk 1:46‑55) ‑Mary is concerned about how she will be received at Elizabeth's house. Praises God at outcome.

(2) Benedictus (Lk 1:68‑79) ‑Zachariah praises God after John's birth.

(3) Gloria (Lk 2:14) ‑ Wordsof the angels at Jesus' birth. Notsure if this is technically a psalm.

(4) Nunc Dimittis (Lk 2:29‑32) ‑Simeon's prayer upon seeing Jesus. Title means "now let depart."

b) Parables.

All Gospels contain some parables (even John).

There are 2 general types:

(1) Story Parables are Aearthly stories with aheavenly meaning.@

Example: The Wheat and Tares is typical: anearthly agricultural story conveys information on the progress of the Gospel.

(2) Illustrative parables: also called"example parables" or "paradigms"

This type is unique to Luke or nearly so (Matt12:43-45?; 1 Kings 20:35-43?). These do not transfer meaning from physical tospiritual, but instead they picture an example of spiritual truth in operationand we are to generalize the principle.

Examples:

(a) Good Samaritan ‑Question: "Who is my neighbor?"

Answer: "Anyone in need."

Principle: You do likewise.

(b) Rich Man and Lazarus‑ A sample of what happens after death.

JW's want this to be a story (translation) parableso they can get rid of the idea of hell.

(d) Rich Fool ‑ Asample of people who make no preparation for the next life.

(e) Banquet Seats (Luke14:7‑11) ‑ A sample of the result of selfishness: Forced tosit in a lower place.

(f) Banquet Host (Luke14:16‑24) ‑ A sample of hospitality re/ who to invite: the poor.

Whyis this type of parable unique to Luke?

Don't know. Liberals say various circles of tradition invented differenttypes of materials, but this doesn't solve the problem. There is no reason to believe in suchisolated groups in the early church. Perhaps a better model is that Jesus was inventive and used differentstyles for different audiences. Luke apparently emphasized this material because he especiallyappreciated it. Perhaps otherauthors left them out when compressing accounts.

c) Miracles

The miracles unique to Luke are usually relatedto women: e.g.,

Jesus raises son of the widow of Nain;

Heals woman bowed down with infirmity.

d) Narrative of the Perean Ministry.

Perea is a largely Jewish region East of theJordan

d. Sketch Outline of Luke.

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑

| Preface

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑1:4

| Birth and Infancy (Johnincluded)

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑3:1

| Preparation and Genealogy

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑4:14

| Galilean Ministry

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑9:51

| Journey to Jerusalem

| and Perean Ministry

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑19:28

| Last week

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑22:1

| Betrayal, Trial, Crucifixion

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑24:1

| Resurrection

|‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑

V.Exegeting Jesus' Parables

A.Some Definitions relevant to Parables

Someconfusion can arise about exactly what a parable is, since the definition usedin English literature is not quite the same as the range of usage of the wordπαραβoλή in the New Testament. On top of that, NT parable studies havebeen messed up for about a century because commentators unwisely followedJülicher=s claim that parableswere quite different from allegories and always made only a single point.

1. Dictionary definition: "Aparable is a short, fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or areligious principle."

Not bad. Of course, a parable doesn=t have to be fictitious; we have no way 2000 yearslater to tell whether any or all of Jesus' parables are. That a parable is a fictitious story,however, casts no shadow on the biblical teaching of inerrancy.

2. Literary definition: "Aparable is an extended simile, whereas an allegory is an extendedmetaphor."

This definition gets us into technical questionsof what a simile is, and how it differs from a metaphor. On top of that, it makes a distinctionthat Jesus and the NT writers do not. The word "parable" as used in the NT includes allegories and anumber of other figurative genres.

For your information (but not for any of ourtests), we give the following definitions of simile, metaphor, etc.

Simile: explicit comparison employing words"as, like"; e.g., "God is like a king."

Metaphor: implicitcomparison, not employing words "as, like"; e.g., "God is aking."

Parable: simile is expanded into a story showinghow some item, person, etc., is like the story or like some element in thestory.

Allegory: story picturing concepts, etc. by meansof persons or elements in the story named for the concepts. E.g, character names in Pilgrim’sProgress.

3. New Testament usage: "A rather broadgenre of illustration, including parable (narrow definition), allegory,similitude, and sample parable, as well as proverb and paradox."

We've already defined "parable" and"allegory" as used in this sentence in #2, above. What do the other terms here mean?

Similitude: longer than a single simile, but not really long enough tobe a story, e.g., the woman who puts leaven in dough until all is leavened.

Sample parable: a story which illustrates some spiritual truth by giving asample of it, rather than by giving "an earthly story with a heavenlymeaning" as parables more commonly do. The parable of the sower and the soils is an earthly story(about planting seed) with a heavenly meaning (about the varied reception ofthe Gospel). A sample parable, bycontrast, is the Good Samaritan, which gives a sample of what it means to be aneighbor.

B.How Parables Function

1. Parables are Stories. They are designed artistically by theircreator to be interesting by using the standard devices of storytelling (see A.N. Wilder, Semeia2[1974]: 138-40):

brief

unified

limited number of actors (rule of two)

direct discourse

serial development

rule of three

repetition

binary opposition (black vs white)

end-stress

often resolution by reversal

usually two-level

2. Parables are Analogies (JohnSider, Interpreting the Parables [Zondervan, 1995], 254).

A verbal comparison that combines a tenor, a vehicle, and one or more pointsof resemblancein a structure of logic specially suited to serve as illustration orargument.

Almost all of Jesus' parables are analogies ofequation, sometimes worded as simile and sometimes as metaphor, but structuredas proportions, as in mathematics A:B = a:b (i.e, A is to B as a is to b).

a. An example from Shakespeare (King Lear, 4.1.37):

"As flies to wanton boys are we to thegods, C they kill us for theirsport."

Shakespeare's character is saying somethingabout the relationship (as he sees it) between humans and the gods. This is the subject or tenor of his remark.

Tenor: relation of gods to humans

He is using the relationship between flies and(wanton) human boys as a means to illustrate this subject.

Vehicle: relation of boys to flies

The point of resemblance which the character hasin mind is here explicitly stated, "they kill us for their sport."

Point of resemblance: in respect of how(mis)treated.

This can be diagramed as a proportion:

tenor vehicle

we: gods = flies:(wanton) boys

with respect to how theymistreat us

point of resemblance

b. An example from Jesus' parables (Wheat &Weeds, Matt 13):

Story: A man sows good seed in his field, hisenemy sows weeds on top of them. When discovered, the man's slaves want to remedy the situation rightaway, but the owner has them wait until the harvest.

Tenor: "The kingdom of heaven islike..." Jesus' subject isthe kingdom of heaven. He istelling us about certain features of its (future) history, apparently.

Vehicle: The story above is the vehicle. Jesus is telling us about the kingdomof heaven (heavenly subject) by means of an earthly agricultural story of anenemy's attempt to spite his neighbor by ruining his crop with weeds.

Point ofResemblance: Jesus' story has anumber of points of resemblance, not just one, though one of them may well bethe main point. What kinds ofanalogies and points of resemblance can we find?

C.Parables in the Synoptics (and John)

1.Christological parables

Strong Man Defeated Mt12:29; Mk 3:27; Lk 11:21-22

Rejected Stone Mt21:42-44

Door of the Sheep Jn10:1-9

Good Shepherd Jn10:1-5, 11-16

Father the Vinedresser Jn15:1-2

2.Parables of lost & found

Lost Sheep Mt 18:12-14; Lk15:3-7

Lost Coin Lk15:8-10

Lost Son Lk15:11-32

3.Parables of forgiveness & mercy

Unmerciful Servant Mt18:21-35

Day Laborers Mt20:1-6

Two Debtors Lk7:36-50

Unprofitable Servants Lk17:7-10

4.Parables on prayer

Son Asking Bread Mt 7:9-12;Lk 11:11-13

Friend at Midnight Lk 11:5-8

Unjust Judge Lk18:1-8

5.Parables of transformation

New Patch Mt 9:16; Mk2:21; Lk 5:36

New Wine Mt 9:17; Mk2:22; Lk 5:37-39

6.Parables of stewardship

Lamp & Bushel Mt5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16; 11:33

Crooked Business Manager Lk 16:1-9

Unfaithful Upper Servant Mt24:45-51; Lk 12:42-46

Talents Mt25:14-30

Pounds Lk19:11-27

Day Laborers Mt20:1-16

Vineyard Workers Mt21:33-46; Mk 12:1-12; Lk 20:9-19

7.Parables of invitation & rejection

Children in Market Place Mt11:16-19

Two Sons Mt21:28-32

The Great Supper Lk14:15-24

Marriage of the King'sSon Mt 22:1-14

8.Parables of the second coming

Vultures & Carcass Mt24:28; Lk 17:37

Fig Tree Heralds Summer Mt24:32-33; Mk 13:28-29; Lk 21:29-31

Householder & Thief Mt24:42-44; Lk 12:39

Porter Mk13:34-36

Waiting Servants Lk12:35-38

Wise & FoolishVirgins Mt25:1-13

9.Parables of warning & judgment

Axe at Roots Mt3:10

Fan in Hand Mt3:12

Tasteless Salt Mt5:13; Mk 9:50; Lk 14:34-35

Fire, Salt & Peace Mk9:49-50

Settle out of Court Mt5:25-26; Lk 12:57-59

Eye Light of Body Mt6:22-23; Lk 11:34-35

Blind Leading Blind Mk4:24; Lk 6:39

Speck & Log Mt7:3-5; Lk 7:41-42

Wise & FoolishBuilders Mt7:24-27; Lk 6:47-49

Empty House Mt12:43-45; Lk 11:24-26

Every Plant not Planted Mt15:13

Barren Fig Tree Lk13:6-9

Tower Builder Lk14:28-30

King at War Lk14:31-33

Wicked Tenants Mt21:33-45; Mk 12:1-12; Lk 20:9-19

Sheep & Goats Mt25:31-46

10.Parables of the kingdom

Sower Mt13:3-8; Mk 4:4-8; Lk 8:5-8

Tares Mt13:24-30

Growing Seed Mk4:26-29

Mustard Seed Mt13:31-32; Mk 4:30-32; Lk 13:18-19

Leaven Mt13:33; Lk 13:20-21

Treasure Mt13:44

Pearl Mt13:45-46

Dragnet Mt13:47-50

New & Old Mt13:52

11.Illustrative (example) parables

Good Samaritan Lk10:30-37

Rich Fool Lk12:16-21

Lowest Seats Lk14:7-11

Dinner Invitations Lk14:12-14

Rich Man & Lazarus Lk16:19-31

Pharisee & TaxCollector Lk18:9-14

12.Acted parables

Cursing the Fig Tree Mt 21:18-22; Mk 11:12-14, 20-24

Cleansing the Temple Jn 2:13-22; Mt 21:12-17; Mk 11:15-19; Lk19:45-48

Jesus at 12 in Temple Lk 2:41-50

Jesus' Baptism Mt3:13-17; Mk 1:9-11; Lk 3:21-22; Jn 1:29-34

Healing on Sabbath e.g., Mk 3:1-6

Healing with Clay Jn 9:1-7

Writing on Ground Jn 7:53-8:11

Triumphal Entry Mt21; Mk 11; Lk 19; Jn 12

Anointing Jesus Mt26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9; Jn 12:1-8

Foot-Washing Jn13:1-11

VI.The Gospels as Literary Works

A.Their Literary Form

What is the literary form or overall genre ofthe Gospels? A number of differentsuggestions have been made.

1. Biography?

Obviously the Gospels are presenting informationabout Jesus, a person who actually lived in history, so they are certainlybiographical in some sense.

a. Not biography in modern scholarly sense

B not written by uninvolved observer withdetached attitude

B not trying to give all the important dates andfacts

B not primarily personal reminiscences andcharacter studies

b. More like biography in ancient popular sense

B written by author with practical concerns,exhortation, etc.

B acquainting reader with a historical person

B giving some account of this person=s deeds, words

B some resemblance to ancient biographies about:

Socrates, Epictetus, Apollonius

B but Gospels concentrate on Jesus= death, and on reactionsof people to him

2. Propaganda, PR, Sales Pitch,Hype?

The Gospels are seeking to convincetheir readers that Jesus is vitally important and to move them to respondproperly to him.

a. Propaganda, as name implies, seeks topropagate certain ideas or attitudes

B commonly a dirty wordtoday, because it so often involves playing fast and loose with the truth, givingthe events a particular spin

B usually involves working on fears, prejudices,trying to excite emotions, etc.

b. Gospel writers are trying to invite areader response

B but not mainly response of interest oradmiration, though these involved

B primarily response of faith or trust in Jesus

c. Gospel writers are surprising in that they:

B restrain their post-Easter faith in telling thestory

B let the events of Jesus= ministry tell their ownstory

3. Dramatic history?

The Gospels are telling a dramatic story of theperson, actions and impact of Jesus, a real figure in history. They do in some ways look more likeplays than modern narratives.

a. Roland Frye thinksthe Gospels should be classed as dramatic histories, resembling the historicalplays of William Shakespeare and George Bernard Shaw.

b. Characteristics of dramatic history:

B essentially fair representation of events

B directed to a broad, general audience

B condensation important to attract and holdaudience

B key practice is to userepresentative (sample) persons, incidents, actions to give accurate picturewhile keeping length within bounds

4. Collections of Stories?

The Gospels are most striking (in contrast tomodern biographies) in being a collection of stories B incidents, speeches andsayings of Jesus.

a. Action packed

using numerous brief stories allows more actionthan a single connected narrative

b. Centered on Jesus

B his person and work

B explain and celebrate Jesus

B use narrative to show:

B his actions

B his words

B responses of others to him

c. Varied materials

B probably used independently before beingcompiled

B form critics say these materials circulatedindependently

B I would suggest theywere used by apostles and other eyewitnesses as separate anecdotes

B various categories of brief narratives (seeRyken=s list in III-E above,pp. 39-40)

B sketched events

B detailed events

B dialogues

B words of Jesus

B brief sayings

B extended discourse

B parables

B.Their Techniques

1. Restraint and Objectivity

Gospels are unusual, and unlike even ancientbiographies in this. Authors letJesus speak, and do not try to persuade or influence the reader by evaluativecomments. Selection of incident isthe only technique used to make the impression desired.

2. Concise, Compressed Accounts

In the synoptic Gospels especially, mostincidents are a single scene, with a couple of actors (often a group acting asa unit), and they are told with a very economical use of words. John=s Gospel tends to work with fewer accounts, butlonger, more detailed.

3. Very Concrete Narration

Since brief accounts can very easily becomebland, general summaries, this danger is avoided by the presentation ofspecific incidents, using short, vivid description (like an artist=s sketch), and directdiscourse, with characterization provided by the actor=s words or actions inthat particular incident, rather than by specific statements.

4. Selection of Materials

The author selects which incident from Jesus= ministry he willrecount, and how he will tell it. Without actually using evaluative words, the author can communicate hisemphasis by the amount of space he devotes to a particular incident or item init, whether he chooses to use dialog or summary, and what expectations heraises in the reader=s mind.

5. Variety

The author groups his materials in various ways,perhaps alternating Jesus= actions with his words,miracles with controversies, followers with opponents. This helps keep the attention of thereader or (if read aloud) of the audience.

6. Sampling

The Gospel writers apparently give us samples ofJesus= speech and actions,rather than trying to give a full report. These are typically samples of the types of miracles Jesus did, thevarious kinds of people he interacted with, the sorts of opposition he faced,and the kind of speeches he gave on various occasions.

VII.Mid-Term Exam

No, this is not the exam. But we will try to give you someinformation on what to study and how. This material is especially designed for the NT 550 Synoptics mid-term,but should be helpful for the final exam as well (with suitable modifications),and more generally for studying other courses.

A.How to Study

The following is a list of items which, if youdo them, will surely improve your grade in this or any course. They are taken from the October 1994issue of The Teaching Professor. Even if (due to other responsibilities) you don't have time to do all ofthese, there are some that take no extra time (## 3-7) and will pay realdividends.

1. Iread the assigned reading before we cover that material in class.

2. Iallow enough time for reading the assigned material so that I can read itslowly and thoughtfully.

3. Iread to understand, because I really want to know the subject we are studying.

4. Iattend class regularly and am rarely or never late.

5. I sitnear the front of class, so that I feel like a participant, not merely anobserver.

6. Itake notes on virtually everything said or discussed in class.

7. Iask questions in class until the subject being covered is clear in mymind.

8. I gettogether with several others in the course to review readings and lecture notes2 or 3 days prior to the exam.

9. Iget a good night's sleep (7 or 8 hours) prior to the day of the exam.

B.What to Study

1. Studythe "Contents & Outline" pages in the front of the printednotes. They were especiallydesigned to give you an overview of the course.

2. Studythe headings in the notebook below the level of those in the "Contents& Outline" above. Theywill help to fill in some detail on the framework provided by the outline.

VIII.The Synoptic Problem

A.What is "the Synoptic Problem"?

1. The problem

Synoptic means "lookingtogether." The first threeGospels are very similar to one another, as though looking at the life of Jesusfrom the same perspective, especially when compared with the Gospel ofJohn. Yet they also have a numberof puzzling differences.

The problem: What is the relationship among the first three Gospels thatwill explain what makes them sosimilar and yet significantly different?

We expect reports concerning historical eventsto be similar, but the histories of Jesus are unusual:

-- In over 3 years ofministry involving many long speeches, only a few hours are recorded;

-- While hundreds werehealed, only a few healings are recorded individually; the same ones aregenerally mentioned in the various Gospels.

Those who reject the inspiration of the Gospelssay:

-- Similarities are due to copying;

-- Differences are dueto changes made intentionally or because authors were unaware of each other.

2. The Phenomena of the Problem

a. Verbal Agreements and Differences.

Consider the Parable of the Sower:

Matthew	Mark	Luke

Æδo× ¦ξλθεv Ò σπείρωv τoØ σπείρειv	Æδo× ¦ξλθεv Ò σπείρωv σπεÃραι	¦ξλθεv Ò σπείρωv τoØ σπεÃραι τÎv σπόρov αÛτoØ

καÂ ¦v τè σπείρειv αÛτÎv	καÂ ¦γέvετo ¦v τè σπείρειv	καÂ ¦v τè σπείρειv αÛτÎv

καÂ ¦λθόvτα τ πετειv κατέφαγεv αÛτά	καÂ µλθεv τ πετειv καÂ κατέφαγεv αÛτό	καÂ τ πετειvα τoØ oÛραvoØ κατέφαγεv αÛτό

–λλα δ¥ §πεσεv ¦πÂ τ πετρώδη Ôπoυ oÛκ εÉχεv γv πoλλήv	καÂ –λλo §πεσεv ¦πÂ τÎ πετρ¢δες Ôπoυ oÛκ εÉχεv γv πoλλήv	καÂ ªτερov κατέπεσεv ¦πÂ τ¬v πέτραv

καÂ εÛθέως ¦ξαvέτειλεv δι τÎ μ¬ §χειv βάθoς γς	καÂ εÛθ×ς ¦ξαvέτειλεv δι τÎ μ¬ §χειv βάθoς γς	καÂ φυ¥v

ºλίoυ δ¥ •vατείλαvτoς ¦καυματίσθη καÂ δι τÎ μ¬ §χειv ρίζαv ¦ζηράvθη	καÂ Ôτε •vέτειλεv Ò »λιoς ¦καυματίσθη καÂ δι τÎ μ¬ §χειv ρίζαv ¦ζηράvθη	¦ζηράvθη δι τÎ μ¬ §χειv Æκμάδα

–λλα δ¥ §πεσεv ¦πÂ τς •κάvθας καÂ •vέβησαv αÊ –καvθαι καÂ •πέπvιξαv αÛτά	καÂ –λλo §πεσεv εÆς τς •κάvθας καÂ •vέβησαv αÊ –καvθαι καÂ συvέπvιξαv αÛτό καÂ καρπÎv oÛκ §δωκεv	καÂ ªτερov §πεσεv ¦v μέσå τ¢v •καvθ¢v καÂ συμφυεÃσαι αÊ –καvθαι •πέπvιξαv αÛτό

–λλα δ¥ §πεσεv ¦πÂ τ¬v γv τ¬v καλ¬v καÂ ¦δίδoυ καρπόv	καÂ –λλα §πεσεv εÆς τ¬v γv τ¬v καλ¬v καÂ ¦δίδoυ καρπόv•vαβαίvovτα καÂ αÛξαvόμεvα καÂ §φερεv	καÂ ªτερov §πεσεv εÆς τ¬v γv τ¬v •γαθ¬v καÂ φυ¥v ¦πoίησεv καρπόv

Ô μ¥v ©κατόv Ô δ¥ ©ξήκovτα Ô δ¥ τριάκovτα	εÆς τριάκovτα καÂ ¦v ©ξήκovτα καÂ ¦v ©κατόv	©κατovταπλασίovα

Ò §χωv ìτα •κoυέτω	καÂ §λεγεv Ôς §χει ìτα •κoύειv •κoυέτω	ταØτα λέγωv ¦φώvει Ò §χωv ìτα •κoύειv •κoυέτω

HenryAlford well summarizes the phenomena as follows:

"The phenomena presented will be much asfollows: first, perhaps, we shall have three, five or more [words] identical,then as many wholly distinct, then two clauses or more, expressed in the samewords but differing order; then a clause contained in one or two and not in thethird [Gospel]; then several words identical; then a clause not onlywholly distinct but apparently inconsistent; and so forth; with recurrences ofthe same arbitrary and anomalous alterations, coincidences, andtranspositions."

GreekTestament,1:5

We can try to convert this merely anecdotalevidence to numbers by giving statistics on verbal variations within theSynoptic materials only in those sections where they overlap, noting the frequencyof identical and different wording (agreement for verbs means they havethe same tense, not merely the same root). Taken from Schaff, Church History, vol.1.

Book

% unique words

% agreement w/ 2

% agreement w/ 1

Mark

Martthew

Luke

b. Differences in the Order of Events.

The order of events in the Synoptics is mainlythe same, as can be observed in a harmony of the Gospels like Robertson's. Yetsome differences do occur, e.g.,

Healing of Peter'smother‑in‑law (Robertson ' 43)

Mt 8:14; Mk 1:29; Lk 4:38

Healing of a Leper (Robertson ' 45).

Mt 8:2-4; Mk 1:40; Lk 5:12

Which did Jesus really do first? Mark and Luke have the above order, butMatthew the reverse. Presumably one or the others are not chronological here.

Within the narrative of a given incident we willsometimes find differences:

Temptation of Jesus in the wilderness

Matt and Luke vary on 2nd and 3rd tests

Lord's Supper: Was the cup given first in Luke?

(There is a textual problem here)

Some problems which arise in questions of order:

B If textual variants, which is correct text?

B Are 2 similar sectionsreally describing the same event or 2 different events that were similar?

Is Sermon on the Mountin Matt. the same as the Sermon on the Plain in Luke? I.e., are these twodifferent reports of the same occasion or similar sermons on two differentoccasions?

More radical interpreters say the 2 cleansingsof the temple are the same event and thus one of the gospels is wrong in itsplacement of that event.

Agreements in order of events of Matt and Lukeagainst Mark are very rare compared with other combinations, and this is usedto argue for certain solutions to the synoptic problem.

c. Overlap and Uniqueness of Content.

Nothow words or orders differ, but whether or not an incident occurs in thevarious gospels.

1) By verses, asindicated in chart at left, from J. B. Tyson, Study of Early Christianity, p.184‑185.

Allan Barr, A Diagram of SynopticRelationships,shows details of distribution.

2) By the sections used for the Eusebian Canons (Lists).

Canon

Content

# Entries

All 4

3 Synoptics

111

Mt/Lk/Jn

Mt/Mk/Jn

Mt/Lk

Mt/Mk

Mt/Jn

Lk/Mk

Lk/Jn

10a

Matthew

10b

Mark

10c

Luke

10d

John

Eusebiansections are often rather small. The books are divided into the following number of sections each:Matthew (155), Mark (233), Luke (342), John (232).

TheEusebian Canons are 13 lists designed to help one find parallel passages in theother Gospels. They can be found in the front of the various editions of theNestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece.

Letus look at some phenomena of overlap and uniqueness of content for all fourGospels as revealed by a careful look at the canon table above.

2possible combinations do not actually appear in these lists:

(1) Mk/Lk/Jn. One set of 3 is missing because thereis no passage in Mk, Lk and Jn which is not also in Matthew.

(2) Mk/Jn. If a passage occurs in Mk and Jn, italso occurs in Matt or Luke.

Notecanons 2-4, passages which occur in exactly three Gospels. By comparison of the number of entriesin each, we can see reason for name "synoptic" for Mt, Mk, Lk.

Notecanons 5-9, passages which occur in exactly two Gospels. By comparison, see Mt/Lk dominates andMt/Mk is second.

3) Summary of overlap.

(a) Almost all of Markis found in either Matt. or Luke.

(b) Matt. and Luke havemuch common material not in Mark.

This is Q in the 2‑document theory.

This is mainly discourse material, with only 1narrative (temptation of Jesus).

3. A Sketch History of theSynoptic Problem.

Something of the problem was recognized as soonas the second Gospel began to circulate, probably in the 60's.

Opponents of Xy used the Gospels against eachother to attack Christianity, e.g., Celsus' True Account.

Heretical attacks motivated Christians to tryand solve the synoptic problem. Herewe sketch some such attempts:

a. Tatian's Diatessaron (c170)

Tatian prepared a "woven" harmony,taking all the accounts and editing them into a single narrative.

b. The Canons of Eusebius (before 340)

Eusebius used Ammonius' divisions to make thelists (canons) noted above. Thetables index parallel accounts, making study of these accounts mucheasier.

c. Augustine, Harmony of the Evangelists (c400)

Augustine made the first attempt to go incident-by-incidentthrough the Gospels and suggest how to harmonize them.

He is also the first to suggest a theory on howsynoptics arose, a version of the successive dependence theory (on which morelater), in which Matt was written first, Mark condensed it, and Luke used bothin writing his Gospel.

Augustine's theory: Mt ==> Mk ==> L

===========>

About this time military & economic disasterstruck the Roman Empire. Literacyfell drastically (from perhaps 80% to 5%) between 300 to 500. This type of study was not resumeduntil the Reformation.

d. Reformation Harmonies

With the resumption of academic biblical studiesin the Renaissance and Reformation, attempts to harmonize resumed,rethinking the sort of work Augustine had done. The problem was faced of how to decide when to treat twosimilar events as the same or different, with widely divergent solutions.

We continue with more recent theories, from the1780's to present.

e. The Urevangelium (primitive Gospel)

Proposed independently by Lessing and Eichhorn