Search:

  Home  ::  Articles  :: Authors  ::  Forum  ::  Calendar  ::  Blogs  ::  Bookstore   ::  Contact Us  
 
View full articles with Premium Content Membership
Password:

Not a member? - Register Now!


Other articles by this author...
  • "Give unto Caesar": Jesus, the Zealots and the Imago Dei
  • Anti-Jewish Tendencies in the Synoptic Gospels
  • Book Review: Robert Lindsey's A Comparative Greek Concordance of the Synoptic Gospels
  • By the Finger of God
  • Can Gentiles Be Saved?
  • Cross and the Jewish People, The
  • Divorce and Remarriage in Historical Perspective
  • First-century Jewish Use of Scripture: Evidence from the Life of Jesus
  • If Your Eye Be Single
  • Jesus' Jewish Command to Love
  • Jesus and the Essene Passover
  • Jesus and the Son of Man
  • Jesus’ Command to “Hate”
  • John's Baptism of Repentance
  • Landmark New Work by Professor David Flusser Explores Jesus' Jewishness
  • Let Him Who Is Without Sin...
  • Let the One Who Has Ears to Hear
  • Man Who Would Be King, The
  • Sabbath Was Made for Man, The
  • Search for Bethsaida, The: Is It Over?
  • Season of Redemption, The
  • Something Greater Than the Temple
  • Teaching of Balaam, The
  • Who Questioned Jesus?
  • Who Questioned Jesus?

    by R. Steven Notley, Member of the Jerusalem School.

    Published: 01-Jan-2004; Revised: 25-Nov-2009


    The question of complicity in the trial and crucifixion of Jesus has been discussed since the early days of the church, and the misapplication of guilt has done much to generate Christian anti-Semitism. In the last twenty years, however, Jewish and Christian scholars have attempted to clarify the historical setting of these events and to correct traditional misunderstandings.

    Lukan Solutions

    The synoptic tradition contains a number of historical and literary problems. In many instances the solution to these problems lies in adopting the theory of Lukan priority, that is, the assumption that the first gospel to be written was Luke’s, which influenced Mark and, through Mark, even Matthew to varying degrees. This is the approach advocated by members of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research.

    The significance of Lukan priority does not concern just the meaning of individual pericopae, but affects our understanding of the entire synoptic relationship. A number of Lukan solutions have been acknowledged within established New Testament scholarship; however, few scholars have realized the full significance of the priority of Luke’s gospel and its importance for establishing the historicity of the events described.

    Most New Testament scholars have assumed that Mark or Matthew were the first of the synoptic gospels to be written. This often has been an obstacle to a clear



    To view the remainder of this article, please log in at the top of this page.
    OR


    OR
    If you are not yet a Premium Content subscriber, please consider this amazing tool for Bible study. Premium Content membership gives you access to hundreds of articles, written by many of the best New Testament scholars in Israel and abroad, which illuminated Jesus' sayings. (Read our free sample articles!)
    New articles are continually being added to this database of knowledge. Articles are searchable by keyword, category or scripture reference.

    Articles published by Jerusalem Perspective Online express the views of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jerusalem Perspective Online, David Bivin or other members of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research.

    Copyright 1987 - 2010  Jerusalem Perspective. All rights reserved.
    Click to find other articles with same subject categories:
  • Anti-Semitism
  • Gospel of Luke
  • Gospel of Mark
  • Gospel of Matthew
  • Historical Jesus
  • Pharisees
  • Priest and Priesthood
  • Sadducees
  • Sayings of Jesus
  • Synoptic Gospels
  • Synoptic Problem

  • All bookstore transactions are secure through encryption and all private information is kept strictly confidential.