Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] Re: Tomb Essay - Comments?

Expand Messages
  • Peter Kirby
    ... Like I said, I attach low value to the argument from the silence of Paul and Clement on the empty tomb, unlike some people (e.g. Uta Ranke-Heinemann) who
    Message 1 of 14 , Jan 20, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      On Monday 20 January 2003 05:11 am, "mwgrondin wrote:
      > --- Peter Kirby wrote:
      > > I do not assume that the author of First Clement had ever
      > > encountered a synoptic gospel. Helmut Koester argues that the
      > > author is dependent on oral tradition, and the author himself
      > > lays an emphasis on the remembrance of sayings that have been
      > > stored up in the heart. Of course, this does not prove ignorance
      > > of the gospels (as Papias indicates preference for oral
      > > tradition also), but it does make such ignorance plausible.
      > >
      > > Perhaps, though, I should not have left the impression that I
      > > give strong weight to this argument. The main value of the
      > > observation of silence, I think, is in preparing the way for the
      > > viability of the thesis that the story is Mark's invention. As
      > > positive evidence, it is at best a 1 on a 0 to 5 scale.
      >
      > If I might press you a bit on this point, Peter: it's not just
      > Clement, of course, but _every_ writer up to Justin - a period of,
      > say, 50-80 years _after_ the writing of the gospels in which
      > _nobody_ mentions the tomb story. In fact, they fail to mention a
      > host of _other_ important details of not only the passion story, but
      > the pre-passion biography as well - details which _must_ have been
      > familiar to them, ex hypothesi. Unless the number and character of
      > extant writings in the lengthy post-gospel, pre-Justin period is
      > such that we can account for this oversight on the part of _those_
      > writers in a way that's not _also_ applicable to the pre-gospel
      > writers, I don't see why the silence of the later writers shouldn't
      > make us suspicious of assigning any positive value whatsoever to the
      > argument from pre-gospel silence.

      Like I said, I attach low value to the argument from the silence of Paul and
      Clement on the empty tomb, unlike some people (e.g. Uta Ranke-Heinemann) who
      make such silence their whole argument. One important thing to keep in mind
      when making an argument from silence is the presumption that a factoid would
      be mentioned if believed. In this respect, certain documents give a much
      greater presumption that they would mention the empty tomb than that they
      would mention a story out of the ministry. However, since I already discount
      the argument myself, I would be willing to yield the point to you.

      --
      Peter Kirby (Student at Fullerton College, CA)
      10:31am up 1:10, Mandrake Linux 9.0, kernel 2.4.19-16mdk on AMD Athlon 750
      Web Site: http://www.outofprintbooksearch.com/
      Web Site: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.