Transcript Literary Sources for the Reconstruction of the Life of Jesus

Sources and Method
Inkwell from Qumran
Mt Gerizim in Samaria
Aramaic Fragments of 1 Enoch
from Cave 4 at Qumran
Oil Lamp from the Herodian Period
There are a few references to Jesus outside of the gospels in
Roman and Jewish sources. The Roman historian Tacitus,
writing about 115 CE, reports "Christus ... was put to death by
Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius"
(Annals 15.44). Jospephus, the Jewish historian, gives a brief
description of Jesus in his Antiquities of the Jews (to be
examined later).
The only major literary sources the major literary sources for a
reconstruction of Jesus' life, however, are the four canonical
gospels.
The Synoptic Gospels
The Gospel of Mark
Origin of the Gospel of Mark
Papias on the Gospel of Mark
“And the elder used to say this, Mark became Peter's interpreter
and wrote accurately all that he remembered, not, indeed, in order,
of the things said and done by the Lord. For he had not heard the
Lord, nor had followed him, but later on, followed Peter, who used to
give teaching as necessity demanded but not making, as it were, an
arrangement of the Lord's oracles, so that Mark did nothing wrong in
thus writing down single points as he remembered them. For to one
thing he gave attention, to leave out nothing of what he had heard
and to make no false statements in them.” H.E. 3.39
The Synoptic Gospels
The Gospel of Mark
Origin of the Gospel of Mark
Papias on the Gospel of Mark
Pros tas chreias: “As necessity demanded" or "in the form of chreia“?
Aelius Theon, the Alexandrian sophist, defines a chreia as "a concise
and pointed account of something said or done, attributed to some
particular person" (Progymnasmata 3.2-3).
The Synoptic Gospels
The Gospel of Mark
The existence of three synoptic gospels does not mean
three independent sources for a reconstruction of the
life and teaching of Jesus. Although not accepted by all
scholars, the literary evidence suggests that the authors
of Matthew and Luke used Mark or something very
close to it as a source for their own gospels.
This accounts for the similarity of content and
order of pericopes in the triple tradition (the content
shared by the synoptic gospels).
Matt 12:
9 Departing from there, he went into their
synagogue. 10 And behold a man was
there who had a withered hand. And they
questioned Jesus, asking, “Is it lawful to
heal on the Sabbath?” – in order that they
might accuse him.
11 And he said to them, “What man is there
among you who has a sheep, and if it falls
into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take
hold of it and lift it out? 12 “How much
more valuable then is a man than a sheep!
So that it is lawful to do good on the
Sabbath.”
13 Then he said to the man, “Stretch out
your hand!”
Mark 3
1 He entered again into a synagogue; and a
man was there who had a withered hand. 2
They were watching him to see if he would
heal him on the Sabbath, in order that they
might accuse him. 3 He says to the man
with the withered hand, “Get up and come
forward!”
4 And he says to them, “Is it lawful to do
good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save
a life or to kill?” But they kept silent. 5 After
looking around at them with anger, grieved
at their hardness of heart, he says to the
man, “Stretch out your hand.”
On the assumption of Markan priority, how would you as a historian
explain the differences between Mark and Matthew? How might this
make a difference to the task of historical reconstruction?
The Synoptic Gospels
Double Tradition
Matthew and Luke have a large amount of material in common
(c. 200 verses), the so-called double tradition, absent from Mark;
almost all of this is sayings material as opposed to narrative.
The divergent amount of verbatim agreement and the lack of a
common order suggests that the double tradition did not
originate as a single document. There is no credible explanation
as to why Matthew and/or Luke would use this document in
such an inconsistent manner.
It must be remembered that there is no direct evidence that this
hypothetical document ever existed: no manuscript evidence or
references to it in other text exists.
The Synoptic Gospels
Double Tradition
A less simple explanation than that Matthew and Luke
independently made use of a common written source is
required.
Many of the differences between pericopes of the double
tradition probably result from there being more than one
written or oral sayings collections with different versions of the
same saying and with different, but similar sayings.
Luke 15:3-7
Matthew 18:12-14
3 Then Jesus told them this parable: 4
"Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep
and loses one of them. Does he not leave
the ninety-nine in the open country and go
after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5 And
when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his
shoulders 6 and goes home. Then he calls
his friends and neighbors together and
says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost
sheep.' 7 I tell you that in the same way
there will be more rejoicing in heaven over
one sinner who repents than over ninetynine righteous persons who do not need to
repent.
12 "What do you think? If a man owns a
hundred sheep, and one of them wanders
away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on
the hills and go to look for the one that
wandered off? 13 And if he finds it, I tell you
the truth, he is happier about that one
sheep than about the ninety-nine that did
not wander off. 14 In the same way your
Father in heaven is not willing that any of
these little ones should be lost.
If one assumes that the double tradition originated in a single document
(so-called Q-source) how must one explain the differences between the
Matthean and Lukan accounts of the parable of the lost sheep? If there
was no such source, how else can one explain the differences between
the two?
The Synoptic Gospels
The So-Called Special Lukan and Matthean Sources
Since it was concluded that there was no single document ("Qsource”) to which Matthew and Luke both had access, it makes no
sense to speak of Lukan and Matthean special sources.
Question
How do the synoptic gospels relate to one another literarily?
How does this affect the historian's use of them in the task of
historical reconstruction?
The Gospel Tradition
before the Synoptic Gospels
The Oral Period
Luke 1:1-4: Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the
things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were
handed down to us by those who from the first were
eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I
myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning,
it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you,
most excellent Theophilus, in order that you may know the
certainty of the things you have been taught.
The Gospel Tradition
before the Synoptic Gospels
The Oral Period
1 Corinthians 15:1-7: “Now I make known to you, brethren, the
gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in
which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold
fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in
vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also
received, that Christ died for our sins according to the
Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on
the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared
to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that he appeared to more
than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain
until now, but some have fallen asleep; then he appeared to
James, then to all the apostles.”
The Gospel Tradition
before the Synoptic Gospels
The Oral Period
Papias: “And I shall not hesitate to append to the interpretations
all that I ever learned well from the elders and remember well, for
of their truth I am confident....But if ever anyone came who had
followed the elders, I inquired into the words of the elders, what
Andrew, Peter, Philip, Thomas, James, John or Matthew, or any
other of the Lord's disciples had said, and what Aristion and the
elder John, the Lord's disciples, were saying. For I did not
suppose that information from books would help me so much as
the word of a living and surviving voice.” (H.E. 3.39.3-4)
The Gospel Tradition
before the Synoptic Gospels
The Oral Period
Irenaeus: “For when I was a boy, I saw you in lower Asia with Polycarp….
So that I am able to describe the very place in which the blessed
Polycarp sat as he discoursed, and his goings out and his comings in,
and the manner of his life, and his physical appearance, and his
discourses to the people, and the accounts that he gave of his
interactions with John and with the others who had seen the Lord, how
he remembered their word, and what were the things concerning the Lord
that he had heard from them, concerning his miracles and his teaching,
and how Polycarp received them from eyewitnesses of the word of life [1
John 1:1]. He related all things in harmony with the Scriptures. These
things being told me by the mercy of God, I listened to them attentively,
noting them down, not on paper, but in my heart. And continually, through
God's grace, I recall them faithfully” (H.E. 5.20.5-7)
Questions
How does the fact that the synoptic tradition has its origin
as oral tradition affect the use of the synoptic gospels in
historical reconstruction?
The Gospel of John
The Apostolic Origin of Gospel of John
Internal, Direct Evidence
John 21:20 Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus
loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on his
breast at the supper and said, "Lord, who is the one who betrays
you?" 21 So Peter seeing him said to Jesus, "Lord, and what about
this man?" 22 Jesus said to him, "If I want him to remain until I come,
what is that to you? You follow me." 23 Therefore this saying went
out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did
not say to him that he would not die, but only, "If I want him to
remain until I come, what is that to you?" 24 This is the disciple who
is testifying to these things and wrote these things, and we know that
his testimony is true.
The Gospel of John
The Apostolic Origin of Gospel of John
External Evidence
“But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot
this Word, uttered, the first-born of all creation, not Himself being
emptied of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and
always conversing with his Reason. And hence the holy writings teach
us, and all the spirit-bearing [inspired] men, one of whom, John, says,
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,"
showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in Him.”
(Theophilos of Antioch, Autol. 2. 22)
“Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned
upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence
at Ephesus in Asia.” (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3. 1. 1.)
Question
How should the historian use the Gospel of John in
conjunction with the synoptic gospels in reconstruction the
life of Jesus?