5.5 Arrest of Jesus: The Ethiopic Book of the Cock vs the Canonical Gospels (original) (raw)

The Ethiopic Book of the Cock_2024_An English translation

This paper presents an annotated English language translation of the Ethiopic Book of the Cock (Mäṣḥafä Dorho / መጽሐፈ፡ ዶርሆ፡), also known as the Ge'ez Book of the Rooster. The text narrates the events leading up to the Last Supper, the arrest, trial and execution of Jesus. While the text's basic framework is a harmony of the canonical gospels, the Book of the Cock contains many non-canonical narrative features.

La caractérisation du personnage Jésus dans la narration des Actes des Apôtres

2016

Si la théologie lucanienne de la résurrection a largement été étudiée dans le livre des Actes des Apôtres, Jésus n’a jamais été considéré comme personnage principal, à l’inverse des apôtres, de l’Esprit saint ou même de Dieu. Pourtant, le premier verset des Actes laisse entendre que Jésus va continuer de faire et d’enseigner ce qu’il avait commencé dans l’évangile, même si, peu de temps après l’ouverture du récit, il quitte la scène. Pour chercher à comprendre ce paradoxe, une analyse approfondie de la mise en récit du personnage Jésus dans les Actes était nécessaire. Le premier chapitre de cette thèse introduit le sujet, l’état de la question et deux approches méthodologiques empruntées aux experts de la caractérisation narrative. Au chapitre deux, après avoir introduit la difficulté d’identification du personnage qui se trouve derrière le titre Seigneur des Actes, le cadre épistémologique d’Elizabeth Struthers Malbon permet d’observer le comment en classant toutes les péricopes qui participent à la rhétorique de la caractérisation christologique en cinq catégories : (1) la christologie représentée qui montre ce que Jésus fait, (2) la christologie détournée qui permet d’entendre ce que Jésus dit en réponse aux autres personnages, (3) la christologie projetée qui laisse entendre ce que les autres personnages ou le narrateur disent à Jésus et à son sujet, (4) la christologie réfléchie qui montre ce que les autres personnages font en reflétant ce que Jésus a dit et (5) la christologie reflétée qui montre ce que les autres personnages font en reflétant ce que Jésus a fait. Ensuite, avec le chapitre trois, l’approche de John Darr donne à comprendre le pourquoi de la caractérisation par l’observation de quatre activités cognitives du lecteur : (1) l’anticipation et la rétrospection, (2) la recherche de cohérence, (3) l’identification et/ou l’implication et (4) la défamiliarisation. Enfin, au chapitre quatre, les résultats des deux méthodes sont comparés pour proposer une solution au cas de l’ouverture paradoxale des Actes. D’abord les différentes observations de la thèse montrent que le personnage Jésus n’est pas si absent du récit; puis la rhétorique narrative de la caractérisation conduit le lecteur à comprendre que c’est essentiellement au travers des personnages du récit que Jésus est présent en actes et en paroles. Though Luke’s theology of resurrection is widely studied in the Book of Acts, Jesus is never seen as its main character, unlike the apostles, the Holy Spirit or God. However, the first verse of Acts suggests that the Jesus character will continue to do and teach what he began in the Gospel, even if soon after the opening, he leaves the scene. To resolve this paradox, a thorough analysis of Jesus characterization in Acts is needed. The first chapter of this dissertation introduces the subject, what has already been said, and two narrative scholars’ methodologies selected for this study. In chapter two, the difficult identification of the Lord of Acts is discussed. Then, the epistemological framework of Elizabeth Struthers Malbon is considered. It shows how characterization works, by ranking all episodes involving Jesus in five groups : (1) enacted Christology : what Jesus does; (2) deflected Christology : what Jesus says in response to other characters; (3) projected Christology : what other characters and the narrator say to and about Jesus; (4) mirroring Christology : what other characters do that mirrors what Jesus says and (5) reflected Christology : what other characters do that mirrors what Jesus does. Chapter three discusses the method of John Darr which helps us to understand the why by observing four cognitive activities of the reader: (1) anticipation and retrospection; (2) consistency-building; (3) identification and (4) defamiliarization. In the conclusion in chapter four, the results of the two systems are compared to resolve the case of the paradoxical opening of Acts. The main conclusion of the different observations of this thesis shows that Jesus is not so absent from the story. Thus the narrative rhetoric of characterization leads the reader to understand that Jesus is mainly present through the characters of the story in acts and words.

Reinterpretations of the Historical Jesus

1996

In addition to the major historical approaches presented in the last chapter, many have attempted to write more-or-less popular lives of Jesus. These authors often advocate unorthodox interpretations: Jesus never died on the cross; he was connected with the Qumran community; someone else changed his message to fit their own desires; he traveled to various parts of the word during the so called "silent years" or even after the crucifixion. Reinterpretations of the Historical Jesus While such works are given virtually no attention by careful scholars, these attempts are sometimes very popular with those who are unfamiliar with the data behind such questions. Many are bothered by nonfactual or illogical presentations, but are not quite able to locate the problems involved. This is the major reason that these approaches are included in this book. We will investigate several of the most popular recent attempts to present unorthodox pictures of Jesus' life. The Rise of the Swoon Theory Each of the fictitious lives of Jesus surveyed in Chapter 1 taught that Jesus survived death on the cross and was later revived. His "appearances" to his disciples were not miraculous, of course, for he had never died in the first place. The swoon theory, espoused by Heinrich Paulus and others during the heyday of the Liberal naturalistic theories, was quite popular in the first half of the nineteenth century. It was disproven by the facts and indicted by Liberals like David Strauss. Before examining this view, it will be helpful to present an overview of two contemporary attempts to write similar lives of Jesus. Hugh Schonfield's The Passover Plot created quite a sensation when it appeared.(1) However, very few readers were aware of the similarity between this book and earlier fictitious lives of Jesus. For Schonfield, Jesus had carefully planned his career of public ministry in accordance with his belief that he was Israel's Messiah.(2) Accordingly, he plotted events such as his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, on which occasion Lazarus helped him make the appropriate arrangements.(3) Jesus made especially intricate plans concerning his upcoming crucifixion, which required especially accurate timing. On this occasion his chief confidant was Joseph of Arimathea.(4) While Jesus was on the cross, Joseph made arrangements for an unidentified man to give Jesus a drink that had been drugged. As a result, Jesus slipped quickly into a state of unconsciousness, which made him appear dead. Nonetheless, Jesus was in a very serious condition when he was removed from the cross, especially complicated by John's report of the spear wound in his chest.(5) On Saturday, Jesus' body was removed from the tomb, after which he regained consciousness briefly, but died shortly thereafter and was reburied.(6) At this point, Schonfield turns to his proposed reconstruction of events that account for the disciples' belief in Jesus' resurrection. The unidentified man at the cross who administered the drug is the key figure in this reconstruction. He helped carry Jesus to the tomb, then returned on Saturday to rescue him. During Jesus' brief period of consciousness, Jesus asked this man to convey to his disciples that he had risen from the dead. However, Jesus died shortly after and this person helped bury him. It is also this anonymous person who was present in the tomb when the women came early on Sunday morning and was the one mistaken by Mary Magdalene as the gardener. Later this same man visited the disciples on the road to Emmaus, at the seashore and in Galilee. The disciples mistook this stranger for Jesus and proclaimed his resurrection from the dead.(7) It should be obvious to the reasonably impartial reader that this incredible sequence of events, where an unidentified man simply "appears" very conveniently whenever there is a need to explain anything away, is extremely questionable, to say the least. The entire plot closely parallels the fictitious lives of Jesus which are now so outdated and ignored by serious scholars. Indeed, even Schonfield admits that much of his account "is an imaginative reconstruction."(8) Later he explains that "We are nowhere claiming for our reconstruction that it represents what actually happened."(9) According to John A. T. Robinson, The Passover Plot is an example of a popularistic book which is factually groundless enough that, if the public were not so interested in virtually anyone who writes on Christianity, it "would be laughed out of court."(10) Therefore, we assert that there is a very high improbability against Schonfield's reconstruction of Jesus' life. One other example of the swoon theory in popular literature is Donovan Joyce's The Jesus Scroll.(11) The thesis of this book, which contains an even more incredible string of improbabilities than Schonfield's, will be left for a later section of this chapter. However, Joyce's account of the swoon theory is discussed here.

Toward a Documented Biography of Jesus

In our own time, many fine works have endeavored to extricate the “historical” Jesus from the Gospelic context of church image and message. The results have been mostly snippets of insight stitched together to accomplish a patchwork portrait that is always impressionistic, and usually colored by the bias of its author. Recent “historical” theories that Jesus was a political rebel causing social disturbances, or was a religious revisionist discarding Torah law, once again fill the literary ether with intuitive fantasy rather than fact. As remarkable a claim as it may seem, my new book, A Documented Biography of Jesus Before Christianity (anticipated release, summer 2015) now presents a profoundly different Jesus than Christians or Jews have met before, trapped in a drama that should deeply move all of us. On the technical side, my method shares nothing with Bultmann’s two-source critical approach--or with the contrarian criteria establishing Geza Vermes’ “Jewish” Jesus. Rather, it depends on hypothesizing historicity of specific events excavated from beneath strata of Christianizing theology if their occurrence illuminates other hitherto obscure scriptural passages. I have labelled my approach, “The method of precipitous insight.” To wit: If an insight into an event in the Gospels is capable of dramatically clarifying thematic and linguistic uncertainties found elsewhere in the text, the insight, called “precipitous,” is elevated to the level of hypothesis. As hypothesis, it may be “tested” by its predicted consequences. If, for example, it links to other text, creating further pronounced insight, the exponential increase in clarity is likely an advance toward a unified theory. Finding the historical core in the Gospels’ “midrashim” The use of “lesson-legends” to amplify and interpret religious truths was a deeply-rooted literary technique of the ancient rabbis. Such legends embellished and dramatized episodes described in the Torah (giving them an extra aura of divine intention) and authoring them was a standard practice in Jesus’ era. The Hebrew name for them, midrashim, meant made-up stories which interpret the meaning of presumed actual events. In the early centuries of our era, such dramatic, theological enhancement through legends was never created from “whole cloth,” but consisted of fancifully embroidering events considered historical, with their imaginative elaboration built on the supposed actual occurrences. Therefore, one may say, a midrash always had at its core an event regarded by its author as historically true. Christianity’s most famous candidates include: Jesus being born from a virgin, his healing incurable diseases, turning water to wine; Jesus contemplating the adulteress brought before him for judgment, his temptation by satan on the Jerusalem precipice, walking on water, calming the storm, feeding thousands from a small basket of food, and giving Peter the keys to the coming Kingdom of God. Additionally, Jesus’ own words were often cloaked in interpretive “midrashic” embellishment, and they too must be the subject of close scrutiny and re-translation in order to unearth what he actually said, and reach the New Testament’s historical stratum. When, like oysters, the Christianizing shells are opened for inspection, the startling drama of Jesus’ life emerges as the “pearls” of history are strung together. The reader should be aware that midrashic analysis is not the same as searching out a natural explanation for seeming miracles. For example, others have suggested that the “miracle of feeding a multitude from a few loaves” may be explained by a storage facility for baked goods to which Jesus had access. Attempting to reduce the “miracles” to mundane episodes by guessing at “plausible explanations” is a false step obfuscating what actually occurred. To speculate in such a manner is to further gloss and conceal the interconnected sequence of unfolding occurrences, burying the actual history beneath the description. The midrashim, it should be stated, differ from parables--meshalim-- which do not have a historical core. Meshalim--are short stories with a lesson meant to interpret or explain a higher moral truth, generally embodied in a scriptural passage. They are familiar to us as the Gospels’ “parables.”

The Historical Jesus ? T&T Clark, 2008

In conformity with the appropriate method, the study proceeds through four chapters of unequal length. 1. The chosen starting point is the present Eucharist. It is as far as possible from the historical Jesus, but at the same time it is the most real element of Christianity: a presence of Jesus Christ and the formation of a community through the fulfilment of a certain Scripture, here and now. This evidently involves a vision of the human being, which it is necessary to clarify. In addition, it is a matter of an institution, that is to say precisely of a structure or of a model, which brings together by agreement a group of elements in which Scripture holds a privileged place. These elements will subsequently be explained in detail one by one, and then analyzed by going back in time. 2. At the other extremity are found the rather remote Jewish realities that surrounded Jesus in the first century, for which the work of Flavius Josephus constitutes a first-rate source. They are gathered together under two headings: first the sacred library, which was not at all at that time an archive rigidly set for centuries, but a still fluid collection with flexible contours; then Galilee, a small rural province with strong Pharisaic and Babylonian ties, as distrustful of Rome as of Jerusalem. 3. Between the two preceding poles appear the four canonical gospels that effectively resist all attempts at harmonization. In order to gauge the gap between the historical Jesus and the Christ that was later preached, they are first examined from a limited angle, by seeking to determine how the disciples became apostles. The conclusion that emerges is that the Gospel of John is the most Jewish and that of Mark to be the least useful in assessing the original milieu, which makes it necessary to reconsider certain current theories on the formation of the Gospels. 4. After these points as well as some others on the way the New Testament is used, to which other sources can be added, we finally reach the life of Jesus. We begin with the elements essential for the confession of the Christian faith (origin, baptism and passion of Jesus), and deal only at the end with his activity and his teaching, on which the Epistles and the Credo are remarkably silent. The conclusion is very modest, but precise: if we remain hesitant or ignorant in regard to the material details of many of the facts, we see on the contrary very well – and this is the essential – how they escaped being forgotten, that is to say how they have given rise to a word, because they have been understood, memorized and especially transmitted. Taken in a very broad sense, the fulfilment of Scripture has played – and still plays – an essential role. Abraham gives us this to understand in the parable of the rich man and the poor Lazarus (Luke. 16:31): “If they do not listen to Moses or the Prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” There are finally two Appendices. The first proposes a collection of non-biblical texts that help in being more specific about the silhouette of Jesus and of his circle. The second provides elements of a French bibliography; in fact, to lighten the presentation, all annotation has been omitted and the technical discussions have been reduced to a minimum, but most of the considerations and the options presented here have been studied and justified in more detail elsewhere; it is fair to add that many are subject to controversy. The chosen starting point indicates clearly that nothing can be demonstrated more geometrico. It is a matter first of all of reflections of a believer for believers. In regard to non-believers or of “misinformed-believers,” the only really useful Christian apologetic is a mixture of testimony and announcement of the Gospel, which moreover necessarily gives rise to objections. Even if it has long been asserted – and Paul recalls this – that the human being has the natural capacity to know God, it is evident that a positive mind can declare, in good faith and with good arguments, that Christianity is a deception, or at least an illusion. Such a one should congratulate herself/himself, since the Christian language offers its services, like a parable; it honours the demands of reason, but it cannot be imposed for fear of reducing the Gospel to a theorem, namely a cultural fact to master.