JW:
This Thread is uninspired by a recent article by Bart Ehrman concluding that the genre of the Gospels is Greco-Roman Biography:
The (Ancient) Genre of the Gospels
I think that Ehrman is the foremost Textual Criticism authority that the world has ever known. Based on that authority, personally I think he must also be an authority on Christian history (he concludes many times that he is and no one has directly disputed that on his site). This Thread though, disagrees.
CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) including Ehrman generally claims that the genre of the Christian Bible is Greco-Roman Biography. This claim is often made in the context of historical witness for the Gospel Jesus. The argument is that the genre of biography is evidence of intent on the part of the authors to present some historical witness and expectation on the part of the audience to expect that some historical witness is being presented.
Ehrman's summary of his reason for a GRB (Greco-Roman Biography) conclusion is here:
Allowing Ehrman Christian grace for not formally presenting criteria for determination of genre in a short article probably written in a day I get the following major criteria from it:If we were to attempt a definition, then, of the Greco-Roman biography, it might be something like this: ancient biography was a prose narrative recounting an individual’s life, often within a chronological framework, employing numerous subgenres (such as sayings, speeches, anecdotes, and conflict stories) so as to reflect important aspects of his or her character, principally for purposes of instruction (to inform about what kind of person he or she was), exhortation (to urge others to act similarly), and / or propaganda (to show his or her superiority to rivals).
- 1) Summary of an individual's life
2) Illustration of the subject's character
3) Presentation of the subject's character as model for others
4) Demonstration of the superiority of subject to rivals
1) Summary of an individual's life
- GMark gives something less than a year in the life of its Jesus so there is no parallel here unless possibly Jesus had that rare aging disease which made him look like 50 when he actually was much younger (which potentially could explain a lot). GMark looks like a presentation of Jesus' mission (so to speak) rather than his life. Maybe a mission could be a "sub-genre" of GRB. It just doesn't parallel the criterion Ehrman picked here. The subsequent Gospels do try to e-x-p-a-n-d the Jesus presentation in the direction of from his mission to his life. But not to apply the criteria to individual Gospels like CBS/Ehrman have done is, as spin would say, naughty.
- A good match here. A few significant complications here though, as usual/always especially in GMark:
1 - Jesus' character is completely changed by receiving the spirit of God at the beginning of the mission and there is an implication that it is likewise changed at the end when Jesus loses the spirit of God.
2 - The first half of the Gospel presents Jesus as a man of action. The second half presents Jesus as a man of inaction.
Again, overall a righteous match. But if there are significant complications (especially if they are rarer than Gordon Gecko's interest in Annacott Steel for the claimed genre or even otherwise unknown) they should be noted.
- Another good match but more pesky complications:
1 - Jesus is presented as a role model but there is also a significant theme that Jesus is in a category by himself.
2 - The emphasis of GMark is more about modeling behavior after disciples rather than Jesus. Additionally, most of the examples are of negative disciple behavior.
Also a match. One group of Jesus' rivals are shown as the Jewish leaders. More complication though:
- 1 - Jesus is shown as superior to everyone. Not really much of a neutral audience to Jesus. Multiple groups are shown as rivals.
2 - Strangely Jesus is shown as superior primarily compared to his own disciples rather than the Jewish leaders. That GMark's main rival to Jesus is shown as his own disciples seems to be a major overall theme.
CBS/Ehrman's out card for complications like this is generally that the Gospels are a "sub-genre" of GRB. Based on the above though, all they have done is proof-text for evidence of GRB genre. Select characteristics of GRB, compare to characteristics of the Gospels, claim parallels and conclude GRB. What is missing is an attempt to develop characteristics of other genres and than develop criteria which help distinguish between genres.
The purpose of this Thread will be to consider the parallels between GMark and the genre of Greek Tragedy.
Joseph
GRAMMAR, n.
A system of pitfalls thoughtfully prepared for the feet for the self-made man, along the path by which he advances to distinction.
ErrancyWiki