tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post2704483674771068658..comments2024-03-19T00:26:30.753-07:00Comments on The Jesus Blog: Jesus before the Gospels: a serial review (pt. 7)Anthony Le Donnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01282792648606976883noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-61130203632840866892016-06-22T16:32:52.910-07:002016-06-22T16:32:52.910-07:00Gene Stecher
Chambersburg, Pa.
Dr. Ehrman suggest...Gene Stecher<br />Chambersburg, Pa.<br /><br />Dr. Ehrman suggests that, in Mark’s collective memory, John the Baptist was “the forerunner of one who was greater,” and not the “leader” or “teacher” of Jesus (245). It is my position that his account reinforces the gospels’ refraction (bending) of the most primitive memory:<br /><br />Mark 1:1-4, NRSV. 1 “The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ (the Son of God). 2 As it is written in the prophet Isaiah: ‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way (Malachi 3:1a); 3 the voice of one crying out in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight (Isaiah 40:3).’ John the baptizer appeared in the (Judean) wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” <br /><br />This gospel unit is saying: (1) I am telling you the joyous story of Jesus the anointed one. (2) This is a story of the Lord (YHWH) coming to his people. (3) The story begins with Malachi and Isaiah. (4) Their foresight anticipated the “preparer” role of John the Baptist, an Elijah “type.” (cf. Malachi 4:5-6; Mark 9:13, “…Elijah has come, and they did to him whatever they pleased;” cf. Matthew 17:13).<br /><br />Memory Options: (1) Mark, familiar with Jewish culture, invented the story from his imagination and personal memory resources in reaction to the Roman pillage. (2) Mark has a memorial (oral and/or written) knowledge of the Jewish scriptures (cultural memory), and (3) writes down his own and/or his community’s memorialized interpretation of these scriptures (social/ communal memory). (4) He/his community ties the appearance of a preacher/baptizer, named John, to these scriptures (social/communal memory).<br /><br />Other considerations: (1) Among the gospels, only Mark uses the Malachi “prepare the way” quote. (2) Oddly, only Matthew and Luke align with Malachi’s fire imagery (Malachi 3:2, “For he (the “messenger”) is like a refiner’s fire…;” see Matthew 3:11-12, Luke 3:9, 17). (3) Only Matthew and Luke use JBap to proclaim a day of judgment by fire (4) All four gospels use the Isaiah quote. (5) All four use JBap as the one who “prepares” the people for “the one who is coming.” (6) Two gospels think of JBap as the return of Elijah, either implicitly (Mark 9:13) or explicitly (Matthew 17:13). <br /><br />And further: (7) The gospel writers only need ‘approximate description” in the Jewish scriptures to endorse them: (a) Mark changes the “I, my, me” of Malachi to “I, my, you, your;” (b) Matthew and Luke change the image of a purifying fire in Malachi to a destruction image of trees thrown into an unquenchable fire; (c) Curiously, in Malachi “the messenger” has the “fire” purification function of the “coming day,” and Elijah (John the Baptist) acts as the savior mediator “uniting the hearts of parents and children” (4:6) to ward off God’s wrath. To be true to Malachi, Matthew and Luke would need to give JBap the messenger’s function and Jesus Elijah’s function. (d) And all four are telling the story of the human being Jesus but don’t mind using a passage which literally equates Jesus with YHWH.<br /><br />So historical plausibly seems to rest, in this explanation, on three criterion: (1) Total gospel agreement: (a) A country preacher/ baptizer “prepared” for “one to come.” (b) The preparer was not the Elijah “type” in Malachi who unites the hearts of parents and children. (2) Substitution for a clear and obvious choice (which would be [b]): Matthew and Luke instead give the preparer a message which includes judgment fire imagery. (3) Total story consistency: “preparation of the way of the Lord” = John setting an example for Jesus of giving folks direct access to deity without resort to temple practices, cf. Mark 11:27-33 and //s. (contra Ehrman’s inferior “forerunner” image which accepts a severely refracted (bent) memory of “preparer” found in the gospels: Mark 1:7, Matt 3:11, Luke 3:16, John 1:27, “not worthy to untie his sandals.”). <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-52977914226579663882016-06-22T10:13:14.323-07:002016-06-22T10:13:14.323-07:00It also sounds as though the tension in memory stu...It also sounds as though the tension in memory studies is not necessarily one between Christian apologists and those desiring to dismantle the historicity of Christian tradition (an accusation that has been leveled at proponents of social memory theory in the past) so much as it is a debate between two different philosophies regarding historical epistemology. Ehrman clearly holds to a more positivist attitude, hoping to uncover "what really happened," while social memory theorists argue that "what really happened" is never graspable by the historian; only an approximation of what happened via refracted memory is available to us. I suppose this means that social memory theorists would argue for a time of "no quest"?Joshua Paul Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03970879028978093230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-18352784285252903202016-06-22T09:33:15.511-07:002016-06-22T09:33:15.511-07:00From what I've gathered from your reviews so f...From what I've gathered from your reviews so far (which, if I may geek out for a moment, have been an absolute joy to read), it sounds like Ehrman is hammering a square peg into a round hole—sloppily using memory research as a way to arrive at conclusions he's already been arguing for years. I don't want to be uncharitable to Ehrman, but is that the impression you're getting from the book?Joshua Paul Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03970879028978093230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-86560908588089717702016-06-22T06:47:38.343-07:002016-06-22T06:47:38.343-07:00Thank you for this comment, unkleE. It's very ...Thank you for this comment, unkleE. It's very helpful to hear that these posts are helpful to at least someone.<br /><br />Be well!!Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14471888340005683193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-17743475334916717302016-06-22T06:47:06.264-07:002016-06-22T06:47:06.264-07:00Danny: He goes by Rikk, but his name is Rikki E. W...Danny: He goes by Rikk, but his name is Rikki E. Watts. I pay attention to this for two reasons: More broadly, people regularly misspell my name. More narrowly, my sister's name was Rikki (same spelling). ;-)Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14471888340005683193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-40232059163220046472016-06-21T18:28:37.746-07:002016-06-21T18:28:37.746-07:00Thanks so much for these reviews. As a very intere...Thanks so much for these reviews. As a very interested but total layperson, they are teaching me a lot.unkleEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12207729664951716799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8637125351921336084.post-80185930582951655012016-06-21T18:18:11.811-07:002016-06-21T18:18:11.811-07:00Rikk E. Watts, not Rikki Watts :-)Rikk E. Watts, not Rikki Watts :-)Danny Zachariashttp://www.dannyzacharias.netnoreply@blogger.com