Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Articles by Francis Watson

Prof. Francis Watson at Aberdeen University has produced several notable studies, especially on Paul and hermeneutics. I really enjoyed his article entitled “Not the New Perspective” where Watson does an about turn on his view of the NPP. On his web page at Aberdeen Uni he has several unpublished papers available on-line including:

The resurrection and the identity of Jesus
Christ and Reality in Ephesians
Jesus of History Christ of Faith
Pauline Perspectives
Constructing a Hermeneutic: A Rereading of Romans 1-4
Scripture in Pauline Theology Theological exegesis of Genesis 18-19

In particular I recommend the article on the “Jesus of History, Christ of Faith” to all HJ researchers. The question of continuity between the historical Jesus and the representation of Jesus as he appears in the Gospels is something that I have been labouring over for some time. In sum, Watson contends that, “the theologically significant Jesus (the Christ of faith) is the Jesus whose reception by his first followers is definitively articulated in the fourfold gospel narrative.” I wish I had read this article two months ago – it would have come in handy.


David Baird said...

I'm sorry, but it is late: I can't seem to locate the reference to Dr Watson's article you mentioned "Not the New Perspective" on his web page you linked to. Could you please provide either a link, or a bibliographic entry.



Michael F. Bird said...

David, go the link called "The Paul Page" on the side bar of Euangelion and it is on that site. If you still can't find it email me!

David Baird said...


Got it. Thanks.


Scot McKnight said...

If you like Watson's statement, I think you'll like my long introduction in my forthcoming Jesus and his Death (Baylor, November), where I contend (through postmodernist historiography) for the same thing: anything other than what is found in the gospels is not a Christian finding (when it comes to historical Jesus depictions). This chap, which introduces a historical Jesus study, actually establishes the reason why the last part of the book moves into early Christian understandings of Jesus' death as atoning.

What I find interesting is that many of us, and I find myself here, have made presentations of Jesus that end up functioning as an alternative to the Gospels themselves. Some modify or complement; but others are totally different (Crossan, Borg). What I find interesting is that so many think historical research can't be the foundation for faith: I see it constantly in historical Jesus books.