Are the Gospel-writers collectors of earlier stories, biographers or preachers?

Résumé du document

The Gospels raise a whole series of intriguing questions as we do not know for sure the authorship of these writings, nor the aim, not even the audience to whom it was written for. These three aspects of authorship, purpose and audience of the Gospels implicitly underline the general differences between these texts. Indeed, why are the Gospels different in content and structure and at the same time sharing common elements? The question of the sources is central here and highlights the inherent problematic of copy and independence of the Gospel-writers. Indeed, if one felt at liberty to add or delete some parts of what he was copying, why copy at all? What was the purpose of writing a different and at the same time similar Gospel? Should one therefore agree with Martin Dibelius who said that "the literary understanding of the synopsis begins with the recognition that they are all collection of material? Indeed, were the evangelists simply editors, compilers, or even biographers? Or should we think that the difference between the Gospels underline the will to send a particular message? And if so, to whom was this message addressed? Did the Gospel-writers write for a specific community or for a more generalized one? For centuries scholars have produced one solution after another, always in a hypothetical way.

Extraits

[...] Finally, one can say that the question if whether the Gospel-writers were collectors of earlier stories, biographers or preachers can be asked the same way to the scholars studying the Gospels. Bibliography The Bible, New Revised Standard Version D. Aune, The New Testament in its literary environment, Westminster Richard Bauckmam, The Gospels for All Christians, rethinking he Gospel audience, Cambridge (P.9-49) Richard A. Burridge, Four Gospels, One Jesus? SPCK, London Graham N. Stanton, The Gospels and Jesus, Oxford University Press Graham N. [...]

[...] However, one could think the opposite in the sense that the analysis of the Gospels is still very much at the centre of the missionary preaching's preoccupations. The theory of the Gospels as biographies being abandoned quite suddenly by scholarly opinion is an example of missionary preaching's influence. Indeed, the biographical theory made Jesus seem historical and this totally contradicted with the proclamation of the Risen Christ. Therefore, one cannot make any judgments as to where the analysis of the Gospels is heading; however, it is still interesting to note what these different criticisms reveal about our interests and overall look on the New Testament today. [...]

[...] Are the Gospel-writers collectors of earlier stories, biographers or preachers? The Gospels raise a whole series of intriguing questions as we do not know for sure the authorship of these writings, nor the aim, not even the audience it was written for. These three aspects of authorship, purpose and audience of the Gospels implicitly underline the general differences between these texts. Indeed, why are the Gospels different in content and structure and at the same time sharing common elements? The question of the sources is central here and highlights the inherent problematic of copy and independence of the Gospel-writers. [...]

[...] Stanton's opinion by saying that Gospels can be compared to ancient biographies but only with very considerable qualifications. Other questions on the writings of the Gospels arose from redaction criticism focusing on the sources and what is called “composition criticism”. In other words, it is interesting to ask ourselves why Gospels are different and at the same time similar in content and structure. What were their sources? Is it a simple construction of texts put together, meaning that evangelists were only there to scissors and paste” as R. [...]

[...] Therefore, if we were to compare the Gospels with the genre of the biography, we should not in any case have in mind the modern biographies but of course, Graeco-Roman biographers. In this perspective, one can see some similarities of form and content between Gospels and ancient biographies. In his novel, Four Gospels, one Jesus?, Richard A. Burridge[3] draws a parallel between the Gospels devoting 15 to 20% of the story to the last week of Jesus' life, his death and resurrection, and ancient biographies in which same amounts are given to their subject's death such as Plutarch and Tacitus. [...]