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

Davies point #3

Expand Messages
  • Michael Grondin
    On 27 July, Andrew Smith quoted a 5-point note from Steve Davies back in ... It surprises me that no one has challenged this particular part of Steve s
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 6, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      On 27 July, Andrew Smith quoted a 5-point note from Steve Davies back in
      October that included the following:

      > 3. The presentation of Jesus as a man concerned with the Judean
      > Law in a postitive sense changes in a remarkably straight-line
      > way from the earliest sources, which advocate freedom from the
      > Law (Paul), to intermediate sources that by no means give Jesus
      > anything like a clear positive pro-Torah stance (Mark), to later
      > sources that do in fact present Jesus as a Torah teaching pharisaic
      > Judean (Matthew).

      It surprises me that no one has challenged this particular part of Steve's
      argument, since it seems to me to be quite transparently flimsy. For it
      purports to suggest a trajectory in Christian thinking on the basis of the
      written record alone. Even if we knew nothing of Xian history, this would
      be suspect. One would first have to establish that the written record was
      reflective of majority thinking and not, for example, the reflection of a
      situation wherein the voices of a minority few expressed themselves in
      writing in opposition to a majority who felt no need to thus express
      themselves. But the case is even worse here, since we know that the voice
      of Paul was not only not the "official" voice of Xianity at the time that
      he wrote his letters, but was in opposition to it. Therefore, his letters
      do not represent the earliest strand of Xianity. In addition to that,
      however, Steve conveniently leaves later writers (Luke & John) out of the
      picture. When those are considered, the full flimsiness of the hypothesis
      becomes apparent. Thus, evidence both considered (Paul) and not considered
      (Luke & John) indicate that this "trajectory" is a mirage.

      Mike
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.