The Historical Reliability Of The Gospels

Craig L. Blomberg is Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Denver Seminary. This book is a thoroughly revised and updated edition of the original which first appeared in 1987, taking into account the vast amount of scholarship which has been published over the last twenty years. It is a scholarly work which is also designed to appeal to students, clergy and a wider, if serious, reading public. It is firmly in the conservative mould but not to the extent of partisanship or fundamentalism, and takes academic opinion, in its kaleidoscopic variety, very seriously. Blomberg claims that its conservatism arises from scholarship not from upbringing. It contains extensive footnotes and a huge bibliography. The book traces the history of scholarship from the 18th century, up to which point the Gospels were largely regarded as inerrant and infallible, with wide scale use of harmonisation and allegory. From then, the author outlines the work of Strauss, Baur and Streeter especially the latter’s treatment of the Synoptic Problem with Mark/Q/L & M . He stresses the importance of probability over proof, and the fact that there were many people still alive who had known Jesus when the Gospels were written. Similarly, there is a chapter on Source criticism, Form criticism, Redaction criticism, Midrash criticism and Literary criticism, from which the author emphasises the fundamental importance of Oral Tradition in an age when there was a high level of literacy amongst Jewish males, the short period of time between the events and the Gospels being written down, and the constant reminder that there were even earlier sources, oral and written, and that the Gospels depend in one way or another on Aramaic from which the material has been translated. This in itself could account for the divergencies between the Synoptics in particular, and the book demonstrates many more similarities between them and John than has been customary in modern scholarship. The fluid (not random) nature of Oral Tradition allows for paraphrase(as in many modern translations), rearrangement, explanations and abbreviations, as in Prophetic traditions, Wisdom literature and Rabbinical collective memory. It was quite customary to quote Scripture freely and not always completely accurately, and sometimes adapted for cultural and community reasons. This is a process which continues today.