tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3613525030683671127.post6003147960072444390..comments2023-10-12T14:09:33.965-07:00Comments on The Biblia Hebraica Blog: Scripting JesusDouglas Mangumhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15267532075493569019noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3613525030683671127.post-76500224284078509912011-06-04T17:17:28.768-07:002011-06-04T17:17:28.768-07:00BTW, I like your blog. In response to the book &q...BTW, I like your blog. In response to the book "Scripting Jesus," my polite reaction is **sigh**. <br /><br />As scholars of scripture, we need to investigate and study, but as confessing Christians, we need to be aware that the textus receptus has a certain authority of its own, especially the Gospels.<br /><br />I am always interested in listening to a discussion of the sitz im leben of a particular sacred author, but form criticism has its limits. <br /><br />The classic example that I remember from my university days is the differences between Matthew and Mark's account of Jesus walking on water. As I recall, Peter jumps out of the boat in Matthew's account but not in Marks. <br /><br />There is a lot of form critical research on the question as to why Matthew records Peter jumping out of the boat. <br /><br />At the same time, such research is speculation, and at some point form criticism becomes reductionist and strips the Sacred Book of substantive theological meaning. <br /><br />If we are to believe that Christ rose from the dead (which is itself a scientifically preposterous assumption) then we need to be careful about using form criticism to rationalize other accounts in the Gospels.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com