N. T. Wright
— Bishop of Durham
“The question of whether the Gospels are based on eyewitness accounts has long been controversial. Now Richard Bauckham, in a characteristic tour de force, draws on his unparalleled knowledge of the world of the first Christians to argue not only that the Gospels do indeed contain eyewitness testimony but that their first readers would certainly have recognized them as such. This book is a remarkable piece of detective work, resulting in a fresh and vivid approach to dozens, perhaps hundreds, of well-known problems and passages.”
Graham Stanton
— University of Cambridge
“Richard Bauckham’s latest book shakes the foundations of a century of scholarly study of the Gospels. There are surprises on every page. A wealth of new insights will provoke lively discussion for a long time to come. Readers at all levels will be grateful for detective work that uncovers clues missed by so many.”
James D. G. Dunn
— University of Durham
“Another blockbuster from the productive pen of Richard Bauckham. Stimulated particularly by Samuel Byrskog’s Story as History — History as Story, Bauckham builds an impressive case for recognition of the controlling influence of eyewitness testimony on the formulation and use of the Jesus tradition, which resulted in the Evangelists’ ‘Jesus of testimony.’ Not to be missed!”
Martin Hengel
— University of Tübingen
“A fascinating book! I have not read such a stimulating monograph about Jesus research in a long time. With its high scholarly standards and astute arguments, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses shows new insights and ways of investigation. It will therefore become a pioneer work refuting old and new errors. This book ought to be read by all theologians and historians working in the field of early Christianity. Further, Bauckham’s convincing historical method and broad learning will also help pastors and students to overcome widespread modern Jesus-fantasies.”
Chris Tilling at Chrisendom has interviewed Bauckham about the book, and you can find the first two posts here and here.
1 comment:
Mark mentions the name Bartimaeus and has to tell his readers what it means.
Luke does not mention the name.
Bauckham's conclusion - Mark's readers regarded Bartimaeus as a 'living miracle' (although they struggled with the name), but in between Mark writing and Luke writing, Bartimaeus died and so Luke didn't bother naming him.
Where did Bauckham pull that one from?
What evidence does he give as to the date of death of Bartimaeus?
Nobe, of course. If you make up stuff out of thin air, you won't find evidence for it.
Post a Comment