Category: <span>Online Resources</span>

Paul’s Christology of Divine Identity (Bauckham)

In my book God Crucified: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (The Didsbury Lectures for 1996; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999) I set out in broad outline a particular thesis about the rela ionship of early Jewish monotheism and early Christian Christology, which also entails a relatively fresh proposal about the character of the earliest Christology. My purpose in the present paper is to summarize the thesis of the first two chapters of
God Crucified, and then to focus in considerably more detail than I have done hitherto on the Pauline epistles, to show how the thesis is verified and exemplified in Pauline theology.

“The Disciple Jesus Loved”: Witness, Author, Apostle— A Response to Richard Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Andreas J. Köstenberger and Stephen O. Stout (2008)

Richard Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006) makes a persuasive argument that the Gospels display eyewitness testimony and thus renews the quest for the identity of the Beloved Disciple as the author of the Fourth Gospel. While Bauckham attributes this Gospel to “the presbyter John” mentioned by Papias, the authors of this study show that the patristic evidence more likely seems to support the authorship of John the apostle and that the literary device of inclusio in the Fourth Gospel, astutely observed by Bauckham, also favors the authorship of John the son of Zebedee.

The Study of Gospel Traditions Outside the Canonical Gospels: Problems and Prospects (Bauckham, 1985)

The purpose of this concluding chapter is not to sum up all of the important results of all the preceding chapters, though I shall mention or discuss some of them. Rather my intention is to offer some broader reflections on this field of study, its importance for the study of the canonical Gospels and the quest of the historical Jesus, the particular problems it poses and the opportunities it provides for further study. I limit the field to Gospel traditions in Christian literature because this enables me to generalize to some extent, whereas the pagan and Jewish sources, which are also the subject of chapters in this volume, present quite distinct problems and possibilities. I certainly do not mean to devalue their importance.

The Role of the Spirit in the Apocalypse (Bauckham, 1980)

The prominence of the Spirit is one of the characteristics which marks the Apocalypse out from the category of apocalyptic works in which its literary genre places it. The Spirit also plays an important role in the eschatological perspective of the book. The subject therefore merits some detailed study. We shall first consider the refere
nces to the Spirit in each of the three easily distinguishable categories into which they fall: the Spirit of vision, the Spirit of prophecy and the seven Spirits.

The Alleged “Jesus Family Tomb” (Bauckham)

The death and resurrection of Jesus is rarely far from the news. Recently, James Cameron (director of Titanic) produced a documentary claiming, to the amazement of the watching world, that the tomb of Jesus and his family has been unearthed. Is this another Da Vinci Code-style thriller, or a crock of old bones? Leading New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham investigates.

Response to Margaret Mitchell’s Paper “Patristic Counter-Evidence to the Claim that Gospels were written for all Christians” (Bauckham, 2003)

This is a response by Richard Bauckham to Margaret Mitchell’s paper, “Patristic Counter-evidence to the Claim
that The Gospels Were Written for All Christians”, which was presented to the Synoptics Section of the SBL Annual
Meeting, Atlanta, November 2003. Please note that this response is to that paper as previously posted, and not to the forthcoming published version, which may have taken account of several of these points.

Macbride Sermon on the Application of Messianic Prophecy (Bauckham, 2003)

The subject of the Macbride University Sermon is described as “the application of the prophecies in Holy Scripture respecting the Messiah to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” There have been times when Christians have attached great evidential value to the fulfilment by Jesus of Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah. They have wanted to argue not only that Jesus is shown to be the expected Messiah by the exact correspondences between the prophecies and their fulfilment in Jesus, but even that the fulfilment of these prophecies in Jesus is a kind of demonstration of the truth of Christianity. The fulfilment proves at the same time both that the prophecies were inspired by God and that Jesus was the Messiah that God himself sent. This kind of apologetic appeal to messianic prophecy is less often heard today. I think this must be at least partly due to the influence of biblical scholars who have insisted on a historicizing kind of exegesis that tries to read the prophecies as they would have been heard at the time they were written, and very often finds that this differs considerably from the way the writers of the New Testament read them when they interpreted them as referring to Jesus. I sense that New Testament scholars are sometimes a little embarrassed by the gap that seems to open between the historical meaning of the Old Testament texts and the way they were read by New Testament Christians. They explain in a matter-of-fact manner the way New Testament writers interpreted the Old, but they refrain from commenting on its validity.

For Whom were the Gospels Written? (Bauckham, 1999)

My title – For whom were Gospels written? – could be analysed into two distinct questions, only one of which I intend to tackle this morning. One could ask: Were Gospels written for Christians or for non-Christians? This question has sometimes been discussed, particularly in the case of the Gospels of Luke and John, since a minority of scholars have argued that those Gospels were written as apologetic or evangelistic works, not for Christians but for outsiders. On this question I shall go with the general consensus, that all Gospels were intended primarily for Christians, without arguing that point. It does deserve to be argued, but I have another agenda this morning. I will only say that it seems to me that, if any of the evangelists did envisage reaching non-Christian readers, they would have to have envisaged reaching them via Christian readers, who could pass on copies of Gospels to interested outsiders through personal contact. So the Christian audience would in any case remain primary.

The second question one could ask, and the one I invite you to ask this morning is: Were the Gospels written for a specific Christian audience or for a general Christian audience? Was, for example, Matthew written for Matthew’s own church, the so-called Matthean community, or was it written for the purpose of circulating widely around the churches? Are a Gospel’s implied readers a specific Christian community, or are they the members of any and every Christian community of the late first century to which the Gospel might circulate? Whereas my first question has sometimes been discussed, with some substantial arguments deployed in its discussion, this second question is remarkable for having never, so far as I can tell, been discussed. No space remotely approaching even the scope of this lecture this morning has ever been devoted in print to arguing the case one way or the other.