I just finished reading this fascinating book. Bauckham (a Scottish scholar) makes the case that the gospels are eyewitness testimony. He reviews patterns in ancient historiography and personal names, using a recently published first-ever lexicon of 1st century Jewish names he does a careful analysis of the names in the Gospels.
What does this have to do with our study of the gospels? For the last couple of years when I’ve done the Person of Jesus study Lesson 6 on the sinful woman at Simon’s house, I ask the question, “Did Jesus’ rebuke get through to Simon?” There are several clues that it did. The first is that we know Simon’s name which suggests that Simon was the one who told this story to Luke, and was living in the 1st century Jerusalem church. The second clue is that Luke tells us what Simon is thinking. Who else but Simon could have told that? So it was fun to read a book that corroborated what I thought the text suggested.
Here are some of his fascinating tidbits:
- Mark describes the rather strange instructions that Jesus gives “two of his disciples” to “meet a man carrying a jar of water and follow his to a house where they are to prepare the Passover/Last Supper”. It is an odd passage. Bauckham analysis: Judas, at this point, is trying to find an evening local where he can report the location of Jesus and his disciples to the priests. If Jesus tells all the disciples where they are eating the Passover, then Judas will know. So Jesus arranges a clear sign that will direct two of the disciples without alerting Judas as to the location of the supper. It is a distinct sign because a “man carrying a water jar” would really stand out. Men seldom carried water jars in the ancient world. When I was in a remote corner of western Uganda over 20 years ago with a team from World Harvest exploring the Ruwenzori Mountains I was walking down to the steam to get water for us to boil. An old woman came up to me, took the water jar from me and went and filled the water jar. Men just don’t do some things!
- John mentions several eyewitnesses that the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) are strangely silent about. Malchus, the high priest’s servant, Peter—the disciple who cut off his ear, and Mary the sister of Martha, the one who pours perfume on Jesus’ head and feet. Why are the synoptics silent? Bauckham suggests that since they were written while the witnesses were alive, the identity of some of the witnesses had to be kept secret. Peter is an obvious one. He was assaulting someone who was on official Roman business, and actually the object of the assault. Mary’s anointing was exactly what made someone a “Christ” or “Messiah”. The fact that is was spiritual would easily get lost on the Roman government.
What I didn’t like? He makes far too much of Papias (early 2nd century bishop who had known several of the eyewitnesses) comment of “the elder John”. Mainstream scholarship has been making a big deal of “the elder John” trying to say that he was the one who wrote John and not John the disciple. But creating a whole new disciple, a second John who is Jesus’ best friend, that no one anyone, anywhere else even mentioned in antiquity is just odd. The idea has been around for a while and is typical of the herd mentality that is so common in mainstream scholarship.
Modern scholarship has never understood something very basic about being around Jesus. It is this: you can’t see him without it changing you. You can’t be a neutral observor of Jesus. But it is more than that, when you are around him and discover what he is like, you just want to dissappear. You feel like a plain looking girl in a room with a beauty queen. All four gospels writers in their own way, but John especially, want to dissappear. So their names only appear on the front cover and no where else. When you see Jesus, you don’t want to be seen anymore!
Having said that, the book breaks with much of mainstream scholarship by looking at the gospels as eyewitness testimony. It is a brilliant and courageous book.