tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7097582791935798204.post7131414511711767145..comments2023-08-02T20:59:22.523+02:00Comments on dianoigo: biblical studies, theology, church history and more: Form, Genre, and Historicity of the Wilderness Temptations of Jesus in the Gospels: A Response to Jonathan Burke (Part 4)Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16671380367019506667noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7097582791935798204.post-66509531488310437322015-08-04T15:55:35.481+02:002015-08-04T15:55:35.481+02:00We must return to the core issue, which is this: B...We must return to the core issue, which is this: Burke cites "the consensus of scholars who believe the temptation accounts are not historical narrative, and that the temptation itself was indeed figurative, symbolic, or visionary" and takes this as a justification for <b>summarily dismissing</b> all of the details of the TS which read naturally as objective events within an interpersonal exchange.<br /><br />Of course, there is no consensus that the TS are figurative or symbolic, as the study has shown. They are widely agreed to be part of the narrative and are interpreted fruitfully within the discipline of narrative criticism. If they are partly or entirely visionary, the elements of the vision must still be exegeted.<br /><br />I call on Burke to put forward an interpretation of the TS which pays real attention to every detail in the text. Burke insists that his exegesis is "very specific" with "nothing vague about it" but the statement that follows is very vague and non-specific, referring to "historical events underlying the temptation accounts" without describing what those events were! <br /><br />Burke has yet to offer a word-by-word commentary on the TS which states his position on what actually transpired in the wilderness. Until he does so, he has given scholars no reason to reconsider the long-standing and still-standing consensus that the TS describe an interpersonal encounter between Jesus and a supernatural tempter, the devil.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16671380367019506667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7097582791935798204.post-51371945442815432392015-08-04T15:50:30.830+02:002015-08-04T15:50:30.830+02:00In his reply to the fourth and final part of my se...In his reply to the fourth and final part of my series on the form, genre and historicity of the TS, Burke has some pointed criticism for my musings about the possibility that the TS combine mystical/visionary experiences with physical/literal experiences. <br /><br />Admittedly, my ideas here were mainly of an exploratory nature. Nevertheless, it is unclear why mystical/visionary experiences and physical/literal experiences should be regarded as mutually exclusive. The transfiguration narrative provides another example of just that within the Gospel narrative. Here, some disciples and Jesus are physically present on a mountain (with all of the theological significance that a mountain entails), and atop the mountain they have an experience which involves a (visionary? mystical?) appearance of Moses and Elijah combined with some kind of transformation of Jesus' being. The experience climaxes with a theophanic voice. One would be hard-pressed to describe the whole episode as "straightforward historical narrative" and yet at the same time, there is no doubt that the Evangelists intend us to understand this as an actual, objective event in the life of Jesus and his disciples. I had previously (in part 3) introduced the transfiguration as a potential parallel to the genre of the TS (along with the baptismal theophany story). I would reiterate that suggestion here.<br /><br />Are the TS purely mystical/visionary, purely physical, or do they have elements of both (like the transfiguration story)? I would lean toward the latter because, as I pointed out previously, two of the three temptations require the physical movement of Jesus' body to be meaningful: the temptation to throw himself down from the pinnacle of the temple, and the temptation to prostrate himself before the tempter. Burke has so far not responded to either of these points except to beg the question by first declaring that the TS are non-literal and then declaring this language irrelevant.<br /><br />If we allow for a supernatural worldview, as Burke does, then the only impediment to taking the entire TS in purely physical, literal terms is the lack of a literal mountain from which all the kingdoms of the world can be literally seen with natural powers of vision. This difficulty is by no means insurmountable. One could posit some sort of mystical experience atop a physical mountain, <i>exactly as we find in the transfiguration narrative</i>. This could entail a heavenly journey which departs from the mountain (bearing in mind that "the mountains, especially Mount Zion, are regarded as points of entry into the heavens"[1] in Second Temple apocalyptic), or it could entail supernaturally enhanced vision from atop the mountain - which also seems necessary to explain Moses' physically impossible field of vision in Deut. 34, according to scholarship I cited previously. Alternatively, one could posit that the mountain itself is mystical or heavenly, a way of referring to the heavenly realm (with Orlov).<br /><br />At this point I cannot see a basis for a physical description of the TS that is any more definitive than that which can be given for the transfiguration. At the same time, one has good reason for insisting that the TS describe actual, objective events in the life of Jesus. While healthy debate about the setting can continue, what is clear is that the TS depict Jesus as tempted to (1) turn stones into bread; (2) fling his body off the temple pinnacle; and (3) perform an act of obeisance to <i>ton diabolon</i>.<br /><br />[1] Yeung, M.W. (2002). Faith in Jesus and Paul: A Comparison with Special Reference to 'faith that Can Remove Mountains' and 'your Faith Has Healed/saved You'. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, p. 40.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16671380367019506667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7097582791935798204.post-26394052487432039982015-08-02T17:52:53.891+02:002015-08-02T17:52:53.891+02:00You can find my reply here.
http://berea-portal.c...You can find my reply here.<br /><br />http://berea-portal.com/jesus-temptation-in-the-wilderness/Fortigurnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10877223729405289453noreply@blogger.com