[XTalk] Jesus and the Law (was "Regression to the mean")
- Steve Davies wrote:
>If a Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath, if a Son of Man can
>forgive sins, if a Son of Man can make all foods clean...
>there isn't much authority left in the old Law at all.
If you deduce from this that Jesus rejected the old Law, then I think
your deduction is invalid.
Whilst not denying the truth of the statement quoted above, it is a
testimony to the incomparable skill of the author of Mark's gospel that
this picture of Jesus can sometimes still be accepted as history after
nearly two millenia.
(1) In the earliest written source (the sayings source behind both
Matthew and Luke) the "Son of Man" was not Lord of the Sabbath, did not
forgive sins, did not make all foods clean. The only independent witness
to these claims is Mark's gospel.
(2) In my opinion the phrase "Son of Man" was not used by Jesus of
himself. But even if you think it was so used, the issue is much
disputed. It is therefore somewhat dubious to make deductions about
Jesus from NT statements which use the phrase.
(3) There is abundant evidence that Au_Mark was strongly influenced in
various ways (directly or indirectly) by Paul. It is clear that Paul
viewed all foods as clean (Rom 14:14, 1 Cor 10:25-27). Thus it is
possible, if not likely, that Au_Mark was reflecting Paul's view and not
that of Jesus on this issue.
Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK
Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm