Senior Sidewalk Pastor Eman Laerton / Sermon on Mark 9.1

p 168 Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet / Dale Allison
The placement of Mark 9:1 before the transfiguration, and the addition of "hereafter" and "from now on" to Matthew 26:64 and Luke 22:69 respectively, are attempts to give eschatological prophecies new applications. Handed on without context, the plain sense of these texts no doubt became, after the passage of time, embarrassing. The kingdom of God did not soon come, and no one saw the Son of man upon the clouds of heaven.

p 166 Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet / Dale Allison
Clearly the sources betray the tacit awareness that Jesus and those around him erroneously hoped for a near end. This fact has far-reaching consequences. Jesus prophecies were not originally construed as metaphors fulfilled in his ministry or in the time thereafter. That came only with subsequent, apologetical exegesis.

One might reject this conclusion by saying, as Luke 19:11, that Jesus' followers did not really grasp his intention. Ethelbert Stauffer took this route. Like others who have offered us a more theologically convenient Jesus, Stauffer asserted that the disciples did not understand their master's message. For they "were wholly children of their time, furiously tossed upon the waves of Jewish political and apocalyptic messianism." This conceit is, however, nothing but unpersuasive apologetics in (the Gospel of) Luke, and nothing less in modern scholars. We can no more admire this white-wash than we can believe the rabbinic texts that tendentiously explain sectarianism by positing that the disciples of Antigonus of Socho and other rabbis misapprehended their master's teaching. We should give credit where credit is due, not exonerate Jesus by blaming his followers. It makes little sense to imagine that Jesus' disciples or those who initially passed on the tradition about him missed the truth but that (the author of) Luke, writing over a generation after the events he describes, found it or that modern scholars, removed by the further distance of two millennia, can nonetheless work around the misunderstandings of Jesus' contemporaries and get back to the facts.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• New
• Testament
• God
• Jesus
• Holy
• Spirit
• Bible
• Christian
• Christianity
• atheist
• atheism
• secular
• humanism
• Bart
• Ehrman
• 2012

[Yatsurim]

May I emphasize the fact that, as you see in the quote below, Dr. Allison has changed his hermeneutical interpretation. Dr. Allison is not an atheist, nor would he condone what is (overall) emphasized in this video: so please, stop using this argument because its developer (i.e. Dr. Allison) no longer agrees with it. [See, The Historical Christ and the Theological Jesus, page 5]

[EmanLaerton]

Mr. Yatsurim, you will be on a long mission to stop the use of Allison's argument. The Apocalyptic Jesus is the dominant view among scholars. Science marches on regardless of who introduced its parts.

Jesus hoped for and expected the end of the world to come in his lifetime. A slight miscalculation by the all-knowing Jesus.

[godloves9]

yea to bad hes talking about the church becoming powerful in the roman empire

[EmanLaerton]

Jesus' prophecies were never intended as future metaphor to be fulfilled by his ministry at a later date. Once his followers realized he had been wrong, then they reworked his prophecies to mean something else entirely. Cause, you know, the all-knowing Jesus could not have been wrong, right?

[godloves9]

what ever you want to believe im praying for you :)

[EmanLaerton]

Cool, and I'll roast red peppers for you.

[Yatsurim]

Of two things only do I feel assured. The first is that, as unchanging things do not grow--rocks remain rocks--informed changes of mind should be welcomed, not feared. The second is this: the unexamined Christ is not worth having.

Dale Allison-

[EmanLaerton]

Jesus meant what he said. The Jewish temple had just been burnt to the ground for a second time. How did Jews reconcile this catastrophe? Apocalypticism. God's return was imminent, he would intercede and establish the Kingdom of God here on earth. The Transfiguration is simple apologetic reworkings of failed prophecy.

If you'd like to gain a minimum understanding of the subject matter, get Bart Ehrman's "The New Testament - a Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings"

[EmanLaerton]

Atheist apologists? Bruce Metzger was a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary & Bible editor on the board of the American Bible Society. A "believer." Ehrman calls himself agnostic.

If you have specifics you'd like to discuss, I welcome that. But, the "he's an atheist and thus he's wrong" stuff won't fly here.

How can theologians conduct actual scholarship when they're allowed only one outcome, that Jesus is god. The facts are shaped to fit the answer, rather than the other way around.