tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post7824714650541378548..comments2023-06-15T09:41:19.355-05:00Comments on NT/History Blog: Gorman vs. GormanBill Heromanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-1279334471620529222010-04-23T07:00:35.338-05:002010-04-23T07:00:35.338-05:00I understand. Thanks again.
I'm still sensin...I understand. Thanks again.<br /><br />I'm still sensing an imbalance of caution, from Christian scholars at large, about this issue.<br /><br />Maybe the real problem isn't that "5th gospels" MUST (automatically) supplant the cannonical four, but that so many have purposely attempted to.<br /><br />Last question: <br /><br />Is it possible, in your thought, to write a Christian History based on the Gospels which does NOT supplant them?Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-43253524910094512902010-04-22T23:04:59.185-05:002010-04-22T23:04:59.185-05:00It's late, and I was not precise: "The fo...It's late, and I was not precise: "The four gospels should never be supplanted." Not that they can't be, but they shouldn't be.Michael J. Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07728724414982091999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-54907439237436526332010-04-22T22:40:13.885-05:002010-04-22T22:40:13.885-05:00Michael, I was hoping you'd comment. Thanks s...Michael, I was hoping you'd comment. Thanks so much. To your points:<br /><br />1. True. Still, your phrase "the Christian tradition more generally" sounded fairly all-encompassing. "the"?<br /><br />2. It could be interesting to discuss whether tradition does or does not ever "supplant" the Gospels and/or their interpretation... but I've no specific thoughts on that at the moment.<br /><br />What does still confuse me is this. You say "the supplanting of the [Gospels] with an [historical narrative]", but then you say, "the four gospels can never be supplanted".<br /><br />Which is it?<br /><br />If the four gospels are in no danger of being supplanted, then why all the concern against History?<br /><br />PS: I do plan to analyze Hays' presentation some more, as regarding his use of the term "History". Hopefully soon...Bill Heromanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283809456471966882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12543231.post-27692439691973836852010-04-22T21:38:53.285-05:002010-04-22T21:38:53.285-05:00Thanks for drawing attention to my blog.
Two quic...Thanks for drawing attention to my blog.<br /><br />Two quick points:<br /><br />1. I never said "all" Christian tradition.<br /><br />2. I don't think there's a contradiction. Tradition supplements, and helps guide the interpretation of, the four gospels. It does not supplant them. The concern in the first comment is with the supplanting of the four gospels' narratives with an allegedly historically reconstructed narrative that muffles the distinctive contributions of each gospel. When history does not do that, it has a legitimate role, as Hays also made clear in his lecture. I would contend that the four gospels can never be supplanted, neither by history nor by tradition.Michael J. Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07728724414982091999noreply@blogger.com