The Historical Jesus: A Survey of PositionsRobertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Religion
The Historical Jesus: A Survey of Positions
Robertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Jesus Christ -- Historicity; Jesus Christ -- Rationalistic interpretations
He opposes the voice of his conscience to the tradition of the
doctors. There lies precisely the originality of his teaching,
which, if one recomposed the materials piece by piece, could be
found scattered in the Biblical writings or in the sayings of the
rabbis. Like every man who speaks to men, Jesus takes his ideas
in the common treasure of his environment and his time; but as to
what he makes of it [pour le parti qu'il en tire] one does not
say that it proceeds from any one. This independence results,
probably, at once from his character and from the circumstances
of his education. [186]
Thus, as regards the Sermon on the Mount, the act of collecting a
number of ethical precepts and maxims from the current literature and
lore of one's people and curtly enouncing them, without development,
is a proof of supreme moral originality, and is to be regarded as
opposing the voice of one's conscience to tradition. Had the rabbis,
then, no conscience? Was their ethic a mere tradition, even when they
gave out or originated the maxims of the Sermon on the Mount? Was
Hillel but a mouth-piece of the law? M. Loisy must in justice pardon us
for avowing that so far he has but duplicated a worn-out paralogism,
and that he has evaded the plain documentary fact that the Sermon is
a literary compilation, [187] and not a discourse at all.
And when we turn to specific teachings, his commentary does but compel
us to ask how the teaching which he insists upon taking as genuinely
uttered by the Teacher can be associated with the Messianist he has
been describing. Accepting as genuine the story of the woman taken in
adultery, now bracketed in the English Revised Version as being absent
from the most ancient manuscripts, but presumably found in the lost
Gospel of the Hebrews, [188] he remarks that "the elect of the kingdom
must not use marriage; they were to be as the angels in heaven"; [189]
and at the same time he describes the veto on divorce as "a trait so
personal to the teaching of Christ, and so difficult to comprehend if
one denies all originality to that teaching." [190] That is to say,
the believer in the speedy end of all marriage relations, and the
establishment of a new and angelic life for all who survive, occupied
himself earnestly with the restriction or abolition of divorce!
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account