Here's the contents from the latest European Journal of Theology:
Mike Bird, "Bauckham's The Gospel for All Christians Revisited", 5-13.
"Richard Bauckham's hypothesis that the canonical Gospels were written for circulation among Christians in general and not simply for isolated communities has drawn much criticism. This study presents a response to works that have criticized Bauckham's thesis including those by Philip Esler, Joel Marcus, David Sim, and Margaret Mitchell. The subsequent discussion attempts to defend the utility of Bauckham's proposal in light of these criticism."
Rüdiger Fuchs, “Bisher unbeachtet – zum unterschiedlichen Gebrauch von agathos, kalos und kalōs in der Schreiben an Timotheus und Titus”, 15-34.
Gregory J. Laughery and George R. Diepstra, "Scripture, Science and Hermeneutics", 35-49.
6 comments:
Mike,
Certainly looks like an interesting article. In light of your appreciation for Bauckham's proposal, would you say that the Gospels may not be as helpful in understanding the "parting of the ways" as some would suggest? I personally find Watson's essay in that volume very valuable on this point. Blessings.
Mark
But James the problem is (and its the coup de grace) how then did Matthew and Luke BOTH get hold of Mark and did they intend or think that their Gospels would circulate as widely? Esler's common sense approach might also be to others the myth of isolated introspective communities or be romanticizing the idea of "community". In fact, when we say "Matthean community" what on earth are we talking about? A Christian faction of a synagogue, six households meeting in a triclinium of a benefactor, all the house churches of western Asia minor? The very idea of community has to become so plastic and mallable that it becomes almost meaningless.
Jonathan,
Mike Bird, "Bauckham's The Gospel for All Christians Revisited", European Journal of Theology 15.1 (2006): 5-13.
Mike, what is your take on E. Earle Ellis' suggestion that each gospel was associated with a mission under apostolic direction (Matthew: James at Jerusalem; Mark: Peter in Rome; Luke: Paul, wherever I can't recall; John: John in Ephesus)?
When Bauckham's work first came out I got my hands on a copy and read it with delight. We need more people like Bauckham to light fires under ... ah, well ... anyway to throw molotov cocktails.
There are many silly theories about the gospels that have become unquestioned dogma of the mainstream NT studies establishment. Bauckham has blown the whistle on one of them.
Mike -- how about an on-line reproduction of this one? It's not a journal many of us can get to. Cheers, Mark
Post a Comment