Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
112 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
In what two ways has the church understood the historical Jesus over the last 400 years?
|
1) glean life of Christ from gospels
2) glean life by using modern historical standards |
|
|
Name the English deism figures.
|
John Locke, Lord Herbert, Thomas Wolston, David Hume
|
|
|
What was English deism?
|
Promoted reason as the arbitrator of all revelation (educated have the inner sense of what is sensical)
|
|
|
According to English deism, what is the filter for determining revelation? What does this mean?
|
Reason is the filter; episodes that do not seem reasonable are thrown aside, transcended (creeds--using the same words with different meanings)
|
|
|
Names the empiricism figures.
|
Conyers, Leslie Steven, Hume
|
|
|
What was empiricism?
|
Epistemology grounded in the scientific method; namely, that only things observed and experienced can be believed.
|
|
|
Why do Miracles violate nature's law, according to Humes?
|
1) Without a large # of educated people to vouch for them
2) often exaggerations 3) in remote places and in the distant past 4) for every testimony for Christianity, there is one against it |
|
|
Who were the players of philosophical idealism?
|
Kant, Hegel, Goethe (Germany)
|
|
|
What was the basis of philosophical idealism?
|
Based on transcedence, thought, religion, feeing; our minds cannot go beyond the realm of immediate experience to give expression to who God is
|
|
|
According to philosophical idealism, why is God necessary? Christ?
|
God is the founder of religion, but only ethics in the bound of reason exists (no revelation) and Christ is is the incarnation of the categorial imperative (Act only according to the maxim that you can will that it should become a universal law)
|
|
|
According to Goethe, what is more important than our conceptual thoughts?
|
Feeling for the intimate--we can honor Christ but must reject the church
|
|
|
Who pioneered the movement of religious awareness? What was its focus?
|
Schleiermarcher; focsed on feeling and self consciousness above one's duty, to express Christianity in a way valued by modern man
|
|
|
How did FDES keep orthodox vocabulary but change its meaning?
|
Christ unique because of dependence on God (not sonship)
Sin is from lack of consciousness (not breaking the law) |
|
|
How does the movement of religious awareness (FDES) contrast to reformed orthodoxy?
|
Focuses on feeling and transcendance, not preaching and cleaving to doctrine
|
|
|
What three characteristics characterized 1778-1860?
|
1) scientific truth as the model of truth
2) contemporary world is very different from the world of revelation 3) anti-dogmatic AND anti-orthodox philosophical climate |
|
|
Who was A. Reimarus? His contribution to the quest?
|
Wrote works skeptical of Christianity; essays separating what Christ taught and the disciples did/developed
|
|
|
Who was G.E. Lessing? Contribution to the quest?
|
Published Reimarus' manuscripts and recognized a difference in Christ's teachings (morality) and disciples (Christ's teachings distorted with OT/messianic ideas). He saw the gospel accounts were inconsistent (resurrection) and that Christ died broken and disillusioned with God.
|
|
|
What was Lessing's background and his influence?
|
Son of a Moravian pastor, influenced by deism; tried to separate history and revelation ("ugly ditch")
|
|
|
Who was B.D. Strauss? Contribution?
|
Admired Hegel, FDES
Theology dominated by philosophy |
|
|
Describe Strauss' "Life of Jesus Critically Acclaimed," and its effects.
|
Lost him job at Tubigen
Examination of gospel pericopies by rejecting the supernatural, interpreting Christian origins within the category of myth |
|
|
What DID Strauss believe about Christ?
|
Grew up in Nazareth, baptized by John, gathered disciples, crucified due to the hatred of the Pharisees--all else was an embellishment by his followers
|
|
|
Who was C.W. Wrede? His contribution?
|
Discussed Mark's messianic secret--a play invited by Mark to explain why, only after Easter, the church recognized Christ's messiahship. Explains earlier failures to understand Christ as Messiah and sees the gospel as theological fiction
|
|
|
Who was D.A Schweitzer? His contribution?
|
Physician, wrote "The Quest for the Historical Jesus," critiquing Reimarus, Wrede
|
|
|
What three arguments did Schweitzer give in "The Quest for the Historical Jesus?"
|
Place Christ in his first century context.
Not a moralist figure but a Jewish apocalyptic figure who would usher in the end of the world. Argued that a lot could be known about the historical Jesus. |
|
|
What criticisms of the first quest did Padilla give?
|
That the reason for the quest was to find a Christ who was NOT the one of orthodoxy; many of these critics never got out of their German towns to see the world and tried to keep but demythologize the Bible.
|
|
|
What were the effects of Schweitzer, after the first quest?
|
Put a moratorium on more quest work for half a century
Showed Jesus was not a political/moral figure of modernity Showed objective historians were not doing history at all |
|
|
What is the nickname of the second quest? Why?
|
Called the "no quest" because it produced no works that were super important or super original
|
|
|
What did Bultmann believe about revelation? What does this mean?
|
That philosophically and theologically it could not be found in the historical realm; God's revelation could not be communicated throughout history. Thus, historical details of Jesus's life are not useful for faith.
|
|
|
According to Bultmann, what can learn of the historical Jesus? What was the focus of the early church?
|
We can learn very little--the early church was interested in the raised Jesus.
|
|
|
According to Bultmann, why do we have four gospels?
|
Because the early church had prophets inspired by God and these inspired words were put into the mouth of Jesus (works inspired by the risen X put into the mouth of the historical X)
|
|
|
According to Bultmann, what is more important than knowing the historical X?
|
Kerygma, the preaching of the inspired prophets (not the inspired accounts)
|
|
|
What did Bultmann say we could know about the historical Jesus?
|
He was a preacher of decision and that NT preaching points you to a timeless message about needing God in your life, not one based on history
|
|
|
Describe Bultmann's demythologization.
|
Since we no longer live in a three-level universe, we must take the wrappings of ANE mythology off and bring the essence of the NT to our age. When you do that, you find X was a preacher of decision, teaching the people that they were utterly dependent on God.
|
|
|
What does "the risen Lord" mean for Bultmann?
|
it does not mean the historically raised Jesus (or that he was physically resurrected) but the raised Jesus in proclamation of the church.
|
|
|
How does Padilla criticize Bultmann's view on history and X?
|
The early church was concerned about the historical Jesus, which is the reason for four gospels!
|
|
|
What were the effects of Schweitzer, after the first quest?
|
Put a moratorium on more quest work for half a century
Showed Jesus was not a political/moral figure of modernity Showed objective historians were not doing history at all |
|
|
What is the nickname of the second quest? Why?
|
Called the "no quest" because it produced no works that were super important or super original
|
|
|
What did Bultmann believe about revelation? What does this mean?
|
That philosophically and theologically it could not be found in the historical realm; God's revelation could not be communicated throughout history. Thus, historical details of Jesus's life are not useful for faith.
|
|
|
According to Bultmann, what can learn of the historical Jesus? What was the focus of the early church?
|
We can learn very little--the early church was interested in the raised Jesus.
|
|
|
According to Bultmann, why do we have four gospels?
|
Because the early church had prophets inspired by God and these inspired words were put into the mouth of Jesus (works inspired by the risen X put into the mouth of the historical X)
|
|
|
According to Bultmann, what is more important than knowing the historical X?
|
Kerygma, the preaching of the inspired prophets (not the inspired accounts)
|
|
|
What did Bultmann say we could know about the historical Jesus?
|
He was a preacher of decision and that NT preaching points you to a timeless message about needing God in your life, not one based on history
|
|
|
Describe Bultmann's demythologization.
|
Since we no longer live in a three-level universe, we must take the wrappings of ANE mythology off and bring the essence of the NT to our age. When you do that, you find X was a preacher of decision, teaching the people that they were utterly dependent on God.
|
|
|
What does "the risen Lord" mean for Bultmann?
|
it does not mean the historically raised Jesus (or that he was physically resurrected) but the raised Jesus in proclamation of the church.
|
|
|
How does Padilla criticize Bultmann's view on history and X?
|
The early church was concerned about the historical Jesus, which is the reason for four gospels!
|
|
|
Who was Kasamann? What did he say contra Bultmann?
|
Bultmann's disciple, but claiemd that Bultmann was a docetist and that we must know the life of Jesus. He essentially re-opened the quest.
|
|
|
According to Kasamann, what did the new quest recognize?
|
That the sources were not just plain fact; knowledge of the resurrection preconditioned how the gospel writers wrote about Jesus. Instead, their aim would be to identify the continuity between Jesus and the kerygma (teaching between historical Jesus and preaching of early church)
|
|
|
Who was J. Jeromias? Background?
|
Son of German Lutheran minister, raised in Palestine. Understood Palestinian culture and was the premiere Aramaic phellogist of the period.
|
|
|
What was Jeromias' contributions?
|
Read gospels in Greek and tried to get back to Jesus' Aramaic (sometimes conclusion were different) and used knowledge of Palestine to take a moderately critical approach to researching gospels. Concentrated on phyology, archaeology, Jewish sources.
|
|
|
What was the result of Jeromias' work?
|
Massive amount of work on the historical Jesus that was orthodox. He didn't seek to find an orthodox Jesus or do apologetics but, from his research, discovered that the historical Jesus was very similar to the one proclaimed by the church.
|
|
|
According to Jeromias, what was the central message of the gospel and NT?
|
Fatherhood of God through X--that we could become children of God through X's death/resurrection
|
|
|
What is the Jesus seminar?
|
Founded in 1985 by Robert Funk; move of research from Europe to NA. Panel voting on whether or not sayings of X were authentic (using beads)
|
|
|
What are some defining characteristics of the Jesus seminar?
|
Anti-established church, using canonical materials, saw X as a political/liberal figure (more of a 1960s hippie)
|
|
|
What was Padilla's criticism of the Jesus of the Jesus seminars?
|
Using noncanonical gospels means their Jesus will look very different from the Jesus of the NT.
|
|
|
What are some traits of the third questers?
|
Want to go back to primary sources (Josephus, DSS), focus on acts AND words of Jesus, explain how the early church arose from the work, comprehensiveness (study X in baptism to resurrection), include Wright, Keener, Charlesworth, Vermez
|
|
|
Describe Wright's views in "Jesus and the Victory of God."
|
Place X's words/deeds in Israel's metanarrative (flow of OT)
Biggest event is the exodus, followed by exile in fifth century--the God who delivers in the exile. Most Jews believed the exile had not ended and were waiting for a new exodus--understand X in THIS context. |
|
|
According to Wright, how does X help redefine reality for Israel?
|
Understanding Satan, not Rome, as the enemy
Understanding the main problem is spiritual rebellion, not politics Shows how the promises of the OT happen in his ministry |
|
|
What are some general traits of third questers?
|
More cautious, more sophisticated about history (is not objective, contains a fictive level), the historical X must be seen in how he is narrated in and plotted from the gospels (main goal)
|
|
|
What is source criticism?
|
Looking for sources behind the text (earlier traditions in a writer's text).
There are embedded sources in the NT that are clearly seen/visible. |
|
|
Why do evangelicals sometimes have a negative rxn to source criticism?
|
They have a simplistic view of inspiration and do not realize that Biblical writings use the language, mind, sources of the writer (including their outside sources, like the Colossian hymn to Christ)
|
|
|
What is the synoptic problem?
|
That there are striking simliarities and yet differences in the synoptic gospels.
|
|
|
What is the traditional solution of the synoptic problem?
|
Augustine--Mark borrowed from Matthew, Luke borrowed from Mark and Matthew
|
|
|
What is the two-gospel hypothesis? Who upheld it?
|
Griesbach--Matthew first written, then Luke, then Mark depending on Matthew and Luke (yet Mark leaves things out and is so brief!)
|
|
|
What is the two-source hypothesis, as articulated by Holtzmann?
|
Mark was the first gospel, used by Matthew and Luke to pen their gospels (along with Quelle)
|
|
|
How did BH Streeter modify the two-source hypothesis?
|
He added two sources, L and M, that Luke and Matthew also used respectively, working independently of one another
|
|
|
What are some arguments for the two-source hypothesis?
|
Most Markan material is found in Matthew, Luke
If Mark weren't first, he'd have gaping omissions. Issue of chronology: Matthew and Luke never agree against Mark when it comes tot he chronology of the life of Christ. Mark's greek is rough and Semitic, "cleaned up" by Luke and Matthew. Mark's theology is more primitive. |
|
|
What must we keep in mind when we are discussing the synoptic problem?
|
Importance of being an eyewitnesses (who deliver things slightly different), immaculate preservation in the rabbinic tradition, Jesus as an itinerate preacher who might give variations on stories.
|
|
|
What is form criticism?
|
Studying forms in the gospels to shed light on how the traditions of Jesus were used pre-gospels (development of Jesus traditions in between in his life and the writings of the gospels)
|
|
|
What does form criticism attempt to do?
|
Get behind the gospels and use them as windows into the early Christian communities, focusing on small units and dissecting them.
|
|
|
What are the convictions of form criticism?
|
That pericopies were independent until the gospel writers stringed them together, and that the form of each unit is a window into situations of different communities (seitz in leben).
Understanding the form helps you understand the situation in the community giving rise to the form. |
|
|
Who are some notable form critics?
|
Bultmann, Dibelius, Vincent Taylor
|
|
|
What is the goal of pure form criticism?
|
To label types of stories and see what they tell us about what is happening in that community
|
|
|
What are the four different types of stories?
|
Prounouncement (punchlines, illustrations for sermons that first century preachers might use)
Miracle (for propoganda/apologetics pre-gospels) Legend (exalts a saintly man, propoganda) Sayings (proverbial, prophetic, apocalyptic, legal--catechism) |
|
|
What is the plus of form criticism? The minus?
|
Can be helpful but began to be used as criteria to distinguish between pre/post Easter material (what is read back into Jesus by the early church)
|
|
|
According to form critics, what were some criteria for pre-Easter material?
|
Dissimiliarity with church, Jewish traditions
Coherence with authentic material Multiple attestations Jewish context (Aramaic language patterns) |
|
|
What are some arguments for the two-source hypothesis?
|
Most Markan material is found in Matthew, Luke
If Mark weren't first, he'd have gaping omissions. Issue of chronology: Matthew and Luke never agree against Mark when it comes tot he chronology of the life of Christ. Mark's greek is rough and Semitic, "cleaned up" by Luke and Matthew. Mark's theology is more primitive. |
|
|
What must we keep in mind when we are discussing the synoptic problem?
|
Importance of being an eyewitnesses (who deliver things slightly different), immaculate preservation in the rabbinic tradition, Jesus as an itinerate preacher who might give variations on stories.
|
|
|
What is form criticism?
|
Studying forms in the gospels to shed light on how the traditions of Jesus were used pre-gospels (development of Jesus traditions in between in his life and the writings of the gospels)
|
|
|
What does form criticism attempt to do?
|
Get behind the gospels and use them as windows into the early Christian communities, focusing on small units and dissecting them.
|
|
|
What are the convictions of form criticism?
|
That pericopies were independent until the gospel writers stringed them together, and that the form of each unit is a window into situations of different communities (seitz in leben).
Understanding the form helps you understand the situation in the community giving rise to the form. |
|
|
Who are some notable form critics?
|
Bultmann, Dibelius, Vincent Taylor
|
|
|
What is the goal of pure form criticism?
|
To label types of stories and see what they tell us about what is happening in that community
|
|
|
What are the four different types of stories?
|
Prounouncement (punchlines, illustrations for sermons that first century preachers might use)
Miracle (for propoganda/apologetics pre-gospels) Legend (exalts a saintly man, propoganda) Sayings (proverbial, prophetic, apocalyptic, legal--catechism) |
|
|
What is the plus of form criticism? The minus?
|
Can be helpful but began to be used as criteria to distinguish between pre/post Easter material (what is read back into Jesus by the early church)
|
|
|
According to form critics, what were some criteria for pre-Easter material?
|
Dissimiliarity with church, Jewish traditions
Coherence with authentic material Multiple attestations Jewish context (Aramaic language patterns) The Cross (statements that could get X crucified) Criterion of embarrasment |
|
|
What is the attempt of redaction criticism?
|
Saw evangelists as authors in their own right (contra source/form criticism); focuses on WHY changes and omissions have been made, and how these influence the evangelists' theologies (Matthew, Luke are most helpful)
|
|
|
Who are some of the originators of the redaction criticism movement?
|
Conzelmann, Bornkam, Marxamm
|
|
|
What are positive remarks to redaction criticism?
|
Focuses on final text, recognizes evangelists as theologians
|
|
|
What are some weaknesses to redaction criticism?
|
Depends on your support of the two-source hypothesis. Some redaction critics capitalize on rdxn and say that extra material may not be biblical, if it's not found in all the Synoptics.
|
|
|
How does Padilla distinguish between the ipsissimo verba and the ipsissimo vox?
|
The very words versus the voice of Jesus--most of the time, we have faithful summaries of what Christ said, mixed in with his actual words (accurate reporting not always about having word-for-word accounts). Supports verbal differences in his words in the synoptics and gospels.
|
|
|
What is narrative criticism? Where did it come from?
|
From American formalism, "the new criticism," whcih came from literary criticism.
Looks at the final form of the text to glean a message of the author. |
|
|
What is the communication model of narrative criticism?
|
Narratives include the real author and real audience, as well as the implied author and the implied audience, as well as a gap between the narrator and the narratee. Literary criticism recognizes that knowledge of the implied author/audience is highly beneficial to help us undersatnd the text.
|
|
|
What are the two types of settings, according to narrative criticism?
|
Spatial (action takes place), and social
|
|
|
According to narrative criticism, how are characters presented?
|
Either by telling or showing (through actions)
|
|
|
What is the quinary model of narrative criticism?
|
Pyramid type model with the "peak" being a transformative action followed by liquidation of the tension and the final situation (synoptics SOMETIMES follow this)
|
|
|
According to narrative criticism, what is the significance of conflict?
|
When you can pinpoint the central conflict of a passage, you can pinpoint the passage.
|
|
|
What are some of the narrative techniques used by narrative criticism?
|
Irony, repetition
|
|
|
What are some positive criticisms of narrative criticism?
|
Focuses on the final form of a text and is an excellent source to draw out the theology of the gospel writers
|
|
|
What is the negative criticism of narrative criticism?
|
It can become a-historical...Judaism/Christianity/ events of the gospels are reported to be historical.
|
|
|
What is the traditional opinion regarding the authorship of Luke?
|
Written by Luke, a companion of Paul and a physician (Papyrus 75, Muratorian Canon, Anti-Marcionite Prologue, Irenaeus)
|
|
|
What is the oldest evidence that we have that Luke actually wrote the gospel?
|
Papyrus 75's inscription of "kata Lukan" (150-200 AD)
|
|
|
What does the Muratorian canon say about Luke?
|
(170 AD) that the third gospel was written by an individual named Luke, a physician and companion of Paul who did not see the Lord in the flesh
|
|
|
What does the Anti-Marcionite prologue tell us about the authorship of Luke?
|
A prologue opposed to Marcion originally written in the Greek; that Luke was a physician from Antioch/Syria, disciple of Paul and the other apostles, and composed his gospel after Matthew and Mark, guided by the Holy Spirit.
|
|
|
What does Irenaeus have to say about Luke as the author of the third gospel?
|
(180 AD) That he was a companion of Paul and a disciple of the apostles.
|
|
|
Why has the traditional authorship of Luke been challenged?
|
Possibility of reading Irenaeus's claim into p75 and Muratorian canon (diverging instead of converging traditions)
Tradition pieced together from the text |
|
|
What does Padilla say about the authorship of Luke?
|
Although it is not a matter of orthodoxy, we should not so easily reject the instincts of the early church (apostolicity as a req'd for canonocity), because there is a reason these Scriptures were put into the canon.
|
|
|
What are the three possibilities for the dating of Luke?
|
Second-century
60-65 AD 70-90 AD |
|
|
What is the support for the dating of Luke around the second century?
|
1. Bauer, Knox, Thysen
Luke enlarges Marcian's gospel (yet it's more likely that Marcian had a copy of Luke's gospel and deleted Luke 1-2...too Jewish) 2. Luke may serve as a bridge to tie the Judiazer and Hellenistic strands of Christianity. |
|
|
What is the support for dating Luke around 60-65 AD?
|
Harnack, Bruce
Luke doesn't mention the temple destruction (87 AD), or the deaths of Josephus, James, Paul However, these are arguments of silence--Luke maybe just didn't include these events. |
|
|
What is the support for dating Luke around 70-90 AD?
|
Majority view:
Language of Luke 21 appears to betray knowledge of the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD Theology appears to be catholic Theology is different from Paul's--indicates a difference in time. However--these words on the siege were very brief, Luke is different from the true Catholic writings, and one can have different theological emphases without chronological differences. |
|
|
What is Padilla's conclusion for the dating of Luke?
|
Around 70-90 AD, though it is influential that the temple destruction was not mentioned, given Luke's emphasis on the temple.
|
|
|
Who is the recipient of the gospel?
|
Theophilius, a Greek name which is possibly for a Roman official (Kratistos), patron, or an esteemed individual. He was probably an insider to the Christian faith and, as Luke's patron, probably published his work. Theophilius may have had a church meeting in his home.
|
