Orality is No Dead-End
Paul Foster has recently argued that ‘orality’ (along with memory and the Fourth Gospel) is one of three ‘dead-ends’ in historical Jesus scholarship, and that it is more appropriate to continue to use traditional methods such as form criticism. While some of Foster’s criticisms are valid, he does ju...
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo di documento: | Elettronico Articolo |
| Lingua: | Inglese |
| Verificare la disponibilità: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Pubblicazione: |
2015
|
| In: |
Journal for the study of the historical Jesus
Anno: 2015, Volume: 13, Fascicolo: 1, Pagine: 3-23 |
| Notazioni IxTheo: | HC Nuovo Testamento TK Età contemporanea |
| Altre parole chiave: | B
Orality
form criticism
memory
historical Jesus
gospel traditions
|
| Accesso online: |
Volltext (Publisher) |
| Edizione parallela: | Non elettronico
|
| Riepilogo: | Paul Foster has recently argued that ‘orality’ (along with memory and the Fourth Gospel) is one of three ‘dead-ends’ in historical Jesus scholarship, and that it is more appropriate to continue to use traditional methods such as form criticism. While some of Foster’s criticisms are valid, he does justice neither to the particular scholars he addresses nor to the wider implications of orality studies for New Testament and Historical Jesus scholarship. It is in any case inconsistent to advocate form criticism while denying the usefulness of orality studies. nt scholarship needs to embrace newer approaches to ancient media studies, not spurn them as ‘dead-ends’. |
|---|---|
| Descrizione fisica: | Online-Ressource |
| ISSN: | 1745-5197 |
| Comprende: | In: Journal for the study of the historical Jesus
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/17455197-01301001 |
