Monday, April 6, 2015

On The Crucifixion Of Jesus And Its Historicity (Part 2)

AP: Nevertheless, the blocks of information concerning the crucifixion presented in the Gospels is not credible information. They are not at all historical. If you just read Matthew's presentation of the Passion (Matthew 26–27) with a critical eye, then you'll see how much of it is actually adornment, enhancement, interpretation, theology, and embellishment by the evangelist. For that reason, most researchers are of the opinion that the act itself–even more the burial–as presented in the Gospels, especially John's, is but a strong literary dramatization. The fourth Gospel presents the facts in six artificially structured episodes, plus an introduction. The scheme is as follows:
A (19:16b-18) Introduction: The Soldier's Entry and the Crucifixion
    B (19:19-22): The Title of the Cross
      C (19:23-24): The Distribution of Jesus' Clothes
        D (19:25-27): Jesus and the Beloved Disciple: "Behold your mother!"
      C' (19:28-30): The Vinegar to Drink
    B' (19:31-37): The Stabbing of Jesus' Side
A' (19:38-42): The Removal of Jesus from the Cross
This is what is called a "chiasmus" in classical rhetoric. It is doubtful that something like this just happens. In addition, between the episode with Simon the Cyrene and the women purchasing spices to embalm the body of Jesus, the Gospel of John has no less than twenty omissions regarding content found in the Synoptics. The Johannine system elevates (to the max!) the traditional elements already seen in Mark and his immediate followers in Matthew and Luke.

No comments:

Post a Comment