Search results
Sep 12, 2014 · There is little evidence the disciples were “scribal literate” (to use Chris Keith’s phrase) and no physical evidence for such notebooks exists. While 2 Tim 4:13 could be read as a reference to such a notebook, it is not certain and some will object 2 Timothy is apocryphal and late.
Thus, it is highly probable that notebooks were used by Jesus’ own disciples and by later adherents in the early church to assist in memory retention by functioning as an aide-mémoire.
- Securing The Gospel Traditions: The ‘Write’ stuff?
- So What Are Scholars Saying About Early Written Jesus Traditions?
- Is There Scriptural Evidence For Notebooks (of Sorts) and For Writing?
- Are These Early Possible Notes and Notebooks Proto-Gospels?
- Do You Have Any Examples of Early Writings That Feed Into The Synoptics?
- Do Written Traditions Mean That Oral Traditions Never existed?
- What Does All of This Mean For The Historical Reliability of The Synoptics?
- How Does This Information Compare with The Gnostic texts?
- So What Does All of This Mean to The Church of All Denominations?
- References and Further Reading
This is a question that must be explored. The three previous articles analyzed how the traditions about Jesus were handled and handed on during this gap: Jesus’ Ministry | | Written Gospels This article explores a possible way the traditions were treasured during Jesus’ ministry, with a glance at afterwards, during the gap. Were at least some of th...
Here are some representative scholars, whose publications have been numbered for clarity. They are placed in chronological order of their publication. (1) Edgar J. Goodspeed uses analogies in the larger Greco-Roman world and the Jewish environment in Israel to compare to Matthew’s Gospel. Goodspeed says that Matthew the tax collector may have writt...
Yes, some direct pieces of evidence, others indirect, based on our knowledge of the historical context. We already noted in the previous Q and A and the section on Bauckham that Paul used parchment notebooks (2 Tim. 4:13). Next, Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, called for a small tablet to write down his son’s name (Luke 1:63). The tablet was...
No. Bauckham is on target when he writes: “Such notebooks would not be a wholly new factor in the process of transmission through memorization . . . They would simply have reinforced the capacity of oral transmission itself to preserve the traditions carefully. They should not be imagined as proto-Gospels” . . . (p. 289). Thus, they were used only ...
The orality and literality of the traditions interpenetrated so deeply that we may not be able to uncover or distinguish the differences, in general (Bauckham, p. 289). But this scholar says: If we take seriously the possibility that Jesus traditions were transmitted both orally and in written form, then an explanation [for the variations between p...
Not in the slightest. Each of these scholars clearly affirms the reality of oral traditions. Parts Five, Six, and Seven already discussed how they were handed on – very carefully and scrupulously. The truth is, both written and oral traditions existed, but orality is the most common way that the traditions were handed on.
With the practice of writing described in this article, we are very close to the historical Jesus, even during his lifetime. Writing secures the traditions before they were included in the synoptic Gospels. Security implies reliability and stability in the transmission process. However, if no disciple jotted things down during Jesus' ministry, then...
The closer we get to the origins, the more we achieve accuracy as to what Jesus really said and did. Proximity to the source, among honest conveyers of information about it, implies reliability. On the other hand, the farther one strays from the source, the more likely it is that one lurches into error. Coming late (except for some passages that ob...
For many decades (from about 1920), hyper-skepticism has dominated the academic world in New Testament studies. To this day, it permeates many seminaries and churches. It leads to the conclusions, for example, that the words and deeds of Jesus were transformed or invented freely according to the needs of the later church. His words and deeds could ...
I recommend the books that have been linked, but they are for the advanced. Richard Bauckham. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. Eerdmans, 2006. Samuel Byrskog. Story as History, History as Story: the Gospel Tradition in the Context of Ancient Oral History. Brill, 2000. Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd. The Jesus L...
Sep 26, 2016 · Read Helmut Koester’s article “Recovering the Original Meaning of Matthew’s Parables” as it originally appeared in Bible Review, June 1993. Koester suggests that the parables of Jesus did not communicate a hidden meaning when they were told by Jesus—the parables of Jesus could be understood by all.
The parchments were different from these, and were perhaps notebooks, in which the apostle had, from time to time, written what he had observed and wished to preserve as specially worthy of remembrance, facts which he had gathered in his study of the Old Testament or of other books.
Feb 22, 2021 · The word translated “books” refers to fragile papyrus documents, and the “parchments” were valuable leather scrolls. It is interesting how our reading materials have changed over time. The earliest documents, like the Ten Commandments, were chiseled in stone.
People also ask
Did the disciples keep notebooks?
Did the disciples have scribal notebooks?
What did the Apostle write on a parchment?
Did the disciples take notes on what Jesus said?
Did Jesus write anything?
Did Jesus write anything down?
Jul 20, 2012 · C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): Paul had a few books which were left, perhaps wrapped up in the cloak, and Timothy was to be careful to bring them…We do not know what the books were about, and we can only form some guess as to what the parchments were.
