Midrash in the New Testament: John vs. Synoptikoi
This paper deals with prefaces to the gospels of Matthew, Luke and John. From the point of view of their genre, the fi rst two are the midrash, i.e. an interpretation based on written sources and the oral tradition of Judaism. Their aim is to relate the knowledge about Jesus that was obtained from M...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Russian |
| Published: |
St. Tikhon's Orthodox University
2017-12-01
|
| Series: | Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Сериа III. Филология |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://periodical.pstgu.ru/ru/pdf/article/5815 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This paper deals with prefaces to the gospels of Matthew, Luke and John. From
the point of view of their genre, the fi rst two are the midrash, i.e. an interpretation
based on written sources and the oral tradition of Judaism. Their aim is to relate the
knowledge about Jesus that was obtained from Mark to the conception of the Messiah,
in accordance with which these two Evangelists interpret the borrowed data. The
historical and biographical design of both prefaces refl ects the cultural environment of
the Hellenistic epoch, whereas their content and literary form are a traditional response
to exclusively theological inquiries. John, in turn, draws not only on Mark but also on
certain other sources or on his personal experience and goes beyond the conception of
the Messiah, evaluating Jesus as a messenger (shaliah) of God or God Himself (drawing
no diff erence between the one who sends and the one who is sent is characteristic of
ancient cultural traditions). With all its signifi cance, the conception of the Messiah
off ered only limited opportunities for the interpretation of the fi gure of the historical
Jesus in the light of religious gnoseology (which was given much importance by the
Evangelist John), as well as in the light of soteriology, as it came to be evident later,
in the period of the second rebellion and acknowledging Simon bar Kokhba as the
Messiah. The preface to the gospel of John aims to explain the meaning of Creation
and the corresponding anthropology, which was necessary for the formation of the new concept of personal God, and, furthermore, gives an outline of the main issues
of the entire gospel. Another way of development of the early Christian thought from
messiology to theology was liturgical practice and corresponding word usage. In the
fi nal part of the paper, the author points to the inadequacy of the term “Christology”
for the circle of problems that make up the base of the Christian theology. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1991-6485 2409-4897 |