Chapter 2 Critiqued:
- Earl Doherty wrote the following regarding an argument from silence: “If that unexpected silence extends to many different writers and many documents, indeed to all writers and documents available from that period, if it extends to a multitude of elements on the subject, the greater becomes the evidential force of that silence. If the silence covers virtually every single element, the conclusions to be drawn become compelling” (TJP:24).
-
Interestingly, an argument from silence also argues powerfully for earlier dates for historical records of Jesus. One could easily argue that the majority, if not all, of the New Testament writings were composed prior to the year 70 C.E., providing much earlier testimony to the existence of Jesus than the view Doherty and most New Testament critics adhere to today using this very same reasoning. For example, since no New Testament writer, including Paul, refers to the destruction of the temple, none of the New Testament documents should be dated any later than 70 C.E. The destruction of the Jewish Temple was such a major event, and was also predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures, that the New Testament writers surely would have at least displayed an awareness of the event.
- Doherty also wrote: “The reasons scholars have put forward to explain the silence on the part of Paul about the human Jesus are several: he felt no interest in the man and his career, he had no use for any aspect of Jesus’ earthly life (See below) in his cosmic theology about the risen Christ, he was in competition with the Jerusalem apostles and so chose to downplay the advantages they enjoyed as followers of Jesus on earth, and so on. Regardless of the credibility of such explanations—and they will be considered as we go along—we can list other factors which should have been in play to counter this deliberate ignoring of the human man by such as Paul” (TJP:24).
- The Paul scholar Jerome Murphy O’Connor wrote the following regarding Paul's knowledge of the historical Jesus:
- "Recent studies, moreover, suggest that Paul knew not just the dominical saying but the context in which it appears in the synoptic tradition….The meagerness of this result and the obscurity of the allusions have led many to deny that Paul had any detailed knowledge of the gospel tradition. They argue that had Paul known any more about the historical Jesus, he would have used it. This argument from silence only looks strong. It is meaningless without the improvable and unwarranted assumption that Paul would have reacted in the same way as we would, if we had access to first-hand information about the historical Jesus" (PACL:91-93).
- Further, the contents of Paul’s epistles indicate that Paul clearly perceived Jesus to have been a human being, regardless of the amount of knowledge Paul displayed about Jesus’ life.
- Some Examples Include:
- Romans 1:1-6: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for the sake of his name, including yourselves who are called to belong to Jesus Christ…”
- Romans 8:3-4: “For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and to deal with sin, he condemned sin in the flesh.”
- Romans 9:4-5: “They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”
- 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 (an aspect of Jesus' earthly life): “For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”
- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4: “For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures…”
- Galatians 1:18-19: “Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days; but I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother.”
- Galatians 4:4-5: “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons."
|
|
