Previous events

100:11:12.490 --> 00:11:14.170<v Prof Helen Bond>Well, good morning, everybody.

200:11:14.170 --> 00:11:18.070<v Prof Helen Bond>And a very warm welcome to this year's first event,

300:11:18.070 --> 00:11:20.830<v Prof Helen Bond>brought to you by the Centre for the Study of

400:11:20.830 --> 00:11:22.300<v Prof Helen Bond>Christian Origins.

500:11:22.540 --> 00:11:25.180<v Prof Helen Bond>Or CSCO, as we call ourselves.

600:11:25.180 --> 00:11:26.980<v Prof Helen Bond>It does sound a bit like a sort of a

700:11:26.980 --> 00:11:30.700<v Prof Helen Bond>computer system that that's the acronym we have to live

800:11:30.700 --> 00:11:31.210<v Prof Helen Bond>with.

900:11:31.240 --> 00:11:35.770<v Prof Helen Bond>So I'm Professor Helen Bond, and I'm co-director of CSCO

1000:11:35.770 --> 00:11:40.090<v Prof Helen Bond>along with my colleague, Doctor Philippa Townsend.

1100:11:40.300 --> 00:11:42.610<v Prof Helen Bond>I should say at the start that this lecture is

1200:11:42.610 --> 00:11:43.540<v Prof Helen Bond>being recorded.

1300:11:43.540 --> 00:11:46.000<v Prof Helen Bond>So hello to everybody on the recording.

1400:11:46.000 --> 00:11:48.610<v Prof Helen Bond>And if you don't want, it's just being recorded from

1500:11:48.610 --> 00:11:49.060<v Prof Helen Bond>over there,

1600:11:49.060 --> 00:11:51.520<v Prof Helen Bond>so if you don't want to be on the I

1700:11:51.520 --> 00:11:53.800<v Prof Helen Bond>mean, you shouldn't be on the recording, but if, if

1800:11:53.800 --> 00:11:56.020<v Prof Helen Bond>for some reason you don't want to be here, you

1900:11:56.020 --> 00:11:57.430<v Prof Helen Bond>know, keep, keep over there.

2000:11:58.030 --> 00:11:59.740<v Prof Helen Bond>And there's also two handouts.

2100:11:59.740 --> 00:12:03.340<v Prof Helen Bond>The one over there has, uh, English translations.

2200:12:03.340 --> 00:12:07.600<v Prof Helen Bond>The one over here is just Greek, so nobody's watching

2300:12:07.600 --> 00:12:08.770<v Prof Helen Bond>which one you go for.

2400:12:10.120 --> 00:12:14.530<v Prof Helen Bond>So the purpose of CSCO is to encourage research beyond

2500:12:14.530 --> 00:12:19.450<v Prof Helen Bond>the traditional borders of New Testament patristic books and classics.

2600:12:19.930 --> 00:12:22.120<v Prof Helen Bond>So we look at the emergence of what we now

2700:12:22.120 --> 00:12:28.060<v Prof Helen Bond>call Christianity in both its Jewish and Graeco-Roman contexts, from

2800:12:28.060 --> 00:12:31.120<v Prof Helen Bond>sort of first century BCE up to around about the

2900:12:31.120 --> 00:12:33.040<v Prof Helen Bond>early fourth century.

3000:12:33.460 --> 00:12:36.430<v Prof Helen Bond>CSCO, as many of you will know, was founded by

3100:12:36.430 --> 00:12:39.010<v Prof Helen Bond>the magnificent Larry Hurtado.

3200:12:39.580 --> 00:12:43.540<v Prof Helen Bond>Um, and it's almost 30 years old, so watch out

3300:12:43.540 --> 00:12:47.290<v Prof Helen Bond>in a couple of years for our 30th anniversary activities.

3400:12:48.220 --> 00:12:51.760<v Prof Helen Bond>The Kennedy Wright opening lecture, which is what we're sitting

3500:12:51.760 --> 00:12:55.690<v Prof Helen Bond>in now, has been running for around about a decade,

3600:12:55.810 --> 00:13:00.940<v Prof Helen Bond>and it commemorates two great New College professors who, between

3700:13:00.940 --> 00:13:06.160<v Prof Helen Bond>them, encapsulate many of the interests covered by CSCO Professor

3800:13:06.160 --> 00:13:11.410<v Prof Helen Bond>H. H., sorry, H. A. A. Kennedy was a Scot born

3900:13:11.410 --> 00:13:15.070<v Prof Helen Bond>in the mid-19th century, and he held the chair of

4000:13:15.070 --> 00:13:22.270<v Prof Helen Bond>New Testament Language, Literature and Theology from 1909 to 1925.

4100:13:22.690 --> 00:13:27.640<v Prof Helen Bond>He published on Koine Greek, Paul's Eschatology, Paul and the

4200:13:27.640 --> 00:13:32.050<v Prof Helen Bond>Mystery Religions, and works on Philo and much else.

4300:13:33.100 --> 00:13:37.030<v Prof Helen Bond>Professor David Wright was much more recent, taking up a

4400:13:37.030 --> 00:13:42.610<v Prof Helen Bond>lectureship in church history here in 1964 and staying a

4500:13:42.610 --> 00:13:48.010<v Prof Helen Bond>phenomenal 40 years, by which time he was the chair

4600:13:48.010 --> 00:13:49.840<v Prof Helen Bond>of Ecclesiastical History.

4700:13:50.800 --> 00:13:54.250<v Prof Helen Bond>Although he worked on the Reformation, he was equally interested

4800:13:54.250 --> 00:13:59.710<v Prof Helen Bond>in patristic, particularly the Latin Church Fathers and Augustine, Marian

4900:13:59.710 --> 00:14:01.540<v Prof Helen Bond>devotion and baptism.

5000:14:02.170 --> 00:14:04.720<v Prof Helen Bond>So I'm sure it's a tribute to the memory of

5100:14:04.720 --> 00:14:09.010<v Prof Helen Bond>these two great scholars that the Kennedy Wright opening lecture

5200:14:09.010 --> 00:14:14.260<v Prof Helen Bond>has been given every year by a firmament of internationally

5300:14:14.260 --> 00:14:17.110<v Prof Helen Bond>renowned scholars, and you can see their names on our

5400:14:17.110 --> 00:14:17.860<v Prof Helen Bond>website.

5500:14:18.430 --> 00:14:21.100<v Prof Helen Bond>And today, of course, is no exception.

5600:14:21.370 --> 00:14:25.240<v Prof Helen Bond>I've known Mark Goodacre for around about 30 years.

5700:14:25.300 --> 00:14:28.660<v Prof Helen Bond>We met at a job interview in Birmingham.

5800:14:28.660 --> 00:14:32.290<v Prof Helen Bond>Those used to be really good times for meeting colleagues.

5900:14:32.800 --> 00:14:35.290<v Prof Helen Bond>Needless to say, Mark got the job.

6000:14:35.680 --> 00:14:39.040<v Prof Helen Bond>From Birmingham, he moved to Duke University.

6100:14:39.040 --> 00:14:42.010<v Prof Helen Bond>I was about to say Duke, Duke University in the

6200:14:42.010 --> 00:14:44.890<v Prof Helen Bond>US and he's been there ever since.

6300:14:45.280 --> 00:14:48.580<v Prof Helen Bond>So many of you will be familiar with Mark from

6400:14:48.580 --> 00:14:53.530<v Prof Helen Bond>his many contributions to TV and radio programs, and he's

6500:14:53.530 --> 00:14:57.610<v Prof Helen Bond>acted as historical consultant on many of them, too, not

6600:14:57.610 --> 00:15:00.850<v Prof Helen Bond>least BBC's Son of God and The Passion.

6700:15:01.780 --> 00:15:04.000<v Prof Helen Bond>He was well ahead of the rest of us with

6800:15:04.000 --> 00:15:07.690<v Prof Helen Bond>a blog and podcast, before many of us even knew

6900:15:07.690 --> 00:15:09.010<v Prof Helen Bond>that terminology.

7000:15:09.010 --> 00:15:11.740<v Prof Helen Bond>I certainly had no idea what a blog was when

7100:15:11.740 --> 00:15:15.730<v Prof Helen Bond>I heard that that Mark was was presenting one.

7200:15:16.390 --> 00:15:19.930<v Prof Helen Bond>And to say that Mark is Mr. Gospels is an

7300:15:19.930 --> 00:15:20.920<v Prof Helen Bond>understatement.

7400:15:20.920 --> 00:15:25.360<v Prof Helen Bond>He seems to know every corner of the Gospels intimately,

7500:15:25.360 --> 00:15:28.720<v Prof Helen Bond>both those in the canon and those outside.

7600:15:29.140 --> 00:15:31.870<v Prof Helen Bond>He's well known for his work, in particular on the

7700:15:31.870 --> 00:15:37.030<v Prof Helen Bond>synoptic problem and his advocacy of the fairer hypothesis, which,

7800:15:37.060 --> 00:15:40.000<v Prof Helen Bond>of course, dispense with the hypothetical document

7900:15:40.000 --> 00:15:40.750<v Prof Helen Bond>Q.

8000:15:41.560 --> 00:15:45.400<v Prof Helen Bond>More recently, his work on the Gospel of Thomas demonstrated

8100:15:45.400 --> 00:15:48.670<v Prof Helen Bond>that it was a second century work, not the earlier

8200:15:48.670 --> 00:15:50.470<v Prof Helen Bond>source that some had hoped.

8300:15:51.040 --> 00:15:53.770<v Prof Helen Bond>And over the past few years, he's turned his attention

8400:15:53.770 --> 00:15:59.110<v Prof Helen Bond>to John's gospel and the Synoptics, looking at the connections

8500:15:59.110 --> 00:15:59.950<v Prof Helen Bond>between them.

8600:16:00.580 --> 00:16:04.330<v Prof Helen Bond>Today's lecture comes out of this research, which I hear

8700:16:04.330 --> 00:16:06.820<v Prof Helen Bond>is going to be published as a monograph, I think

8800:16:06.820 --> 00:16:09.910<v Prof Helen Bond>hopefully fairly in the next year or so.

8900:16:09.910 --> 00:16:13.780<v Prof Helen Bond>So we look very much forward to what he's got

9000:16:13.780 --> 00:16:16.180<v Prof Helen Bond>to say on the fourth Synoptic Gospel.

9100:16:16.180 --> 00:16:18.070<v Prof Helen Bond>And can we welcome Mark.

9200:16:26.410 --> 00:16:27.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Ghosh, thanks.

9300:16:27.310 --> 00:16:32.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Thanks so much, Helen, for that lovely introduction and thanks

9400:16:32.350 --> 00:16:32.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>this lovely.

9500:16:32.710 --> 00:16:34.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>welcome to Back to Edinburgh.

9600:16:34.930 --> 00:16:36.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's so nice to be here.

9700:16:36.460 --> 00:16:39.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I had a lovely experience on the train coming up.

9800:16:39.580 --> 00:16:45.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I met Nick Tate, uh, who is, um, Alan Carter

9900:16:45.040 --> 00:16:46.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in Space: 1999.

10000:16:46.810 --> 00:16:48.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Happened to be on the same train as me, and

10100:16:48.610 --> 00:16:49.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I helped him with his luggage.

10200:16:49.660 --> 00:16:53.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So my weekend's already made and everything else is a

10300:16:53.860 --> 00:16:54.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>bonus after that.

10400:16:55.360 --> 00:16:59.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The title of this is deliberately provocative.

10500:16:59.740 --> 00:17:02.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I actually find it difficult to say I'm provoked by

10600:17:02.440 --> 00:17:07.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it myself, because Fourth Synoptic Gospel doesn't go together.

10700:17:07.300 --> 00:17:10.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've got the Synoptic Gospels and you've got John.

10800:17:11.410 --> 00:17:14.589<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We've got the Synoptic Gospels, we've got the Fourth Gospel.

10900:17:14.589 --> 00:17:18.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So saying Four Synoptic Gospel, it's like a contradiction in

11000:17:18.160 --> 00:17:18.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>terms.

11100:17:19.360 --> 00:17:21.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The chapter of the book, this is the second chapter

11200:17:21.970 --> 00:17:22.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of my book.

11300:17:22.750 --> 00:17:28.199<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The chapter was originally called Where John is Synoptic, and

11400:17:28.199 --> 00:17:31.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I laid out various places where John looks like one

11500:17:31.860 --> 00:17:32.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of the Synoptic Gospels.

11600:17:33.570 --> 00:17:35.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Then I thought, that's too weak,

11700:17:35.370 --> 00:17:37.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>so I changed it to 'Is John Synoptic'.

11800:17:37.740 --> 00:17:40.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But then that sounded like the Tubeway.

11900:17:40.050 --> 00:17:43.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Army 'Are "Friends" Electric' a song title.

12000:17:43.920 --> 00:17:45.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then one night I just thought, let's just call

12100:17:45.780 --> 00:17:48.000<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it the Fourth Synoptic Gospel and shock people.

12200:17:48.150 --> 00:17:51.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So that's the that's the basic idea of it.

12300:17:51.540 --> 00:17:54.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I will I will talk and read, if that's okay.

12400:17:54.240 --> 00:17:57.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I normally like to talk as if I'm talking easier

12500:17:57.300 --> 00:18:01.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>than writing or reading, but I've tortured these words onto

12600:18:01.410 --> 00:18:03.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>paper and I'm quite pleased with some of them,

12700:18:03.600 --> 00:18:04.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>not all of them.

12800:18:04.680 --> 00:18:07.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I'd largely like to see how they sound when

12900:18:07.650 --> 00:18:09.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I say them out loud, which I've not done before.

13000:18:10.230 --> 00:18:13.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So some I'll read, but mostly I'll talk, if that's

13100:18:13.350 --> 00:18:13.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>okay.

13200:18:14.550 --> 00:18:18.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Uh, the two handouts is, as Helen mentioned.

13300:18:18.930 --> 00:18:21.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They're both basically the same, but one's got translations in

13400:18:21.990 --> 00:18:22.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This –

13500:18:22.680 --> 00:18:24.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>A massive handout like this is what's known in the

13600:18:24.600 --> 00:18:28.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>trade as a George van Kooten, where basically where basically

13700:18:28.710 --> 00:18:31.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the handout is practically as long as the paper itself.

13800:18:32.670 --> 00:18:35.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Everyone who's done serious academic work on the New Testament

13900:18:35.940 --> 00:18:39.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>knows that there are three synoptic Gospels Matthew, Mark, and

14000:18:39.150 --> 00:18:39.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Luke.

14100:18:40.170 --> 00:18:41.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then there is John.

14200:18:41.940 --> 00:18:42.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John.

14300:18:43.980 --> 00:18:45.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John is on his own.

14400:18:45.840 --> 00:18:48.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Students learn to erect a firewall between the between the

14500:18:48.840 --> 00:18:52.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>moment when the synoptic Jesus departs from the disciples at

14600:18:52.290 --> 00:18:56.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the end of Luke 24, and the Johannine word made

14700:18:56.070 --> 00:18:59.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>flesh moves on to the cosmic stage on the next

14800:18:59.370 --> 00:19:01.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>page in John one.

14900:19:02.070 --> 00:19:05.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a complete reset, not even to the start of

15000:19:05.880 --> 00:19:11.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the New Testament with Mark's Isaiahnic prophecy, Matthew's Abrahamic genealogy, or

15100:19:11.460 --> 00:19:13.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Luke's temple epiphany.

15200:19:13.110 --> 00:19:16.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But at the very beginning of the Old Testament, before

15300:19:16.500 --> 00:19:21.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Genesis narrative in the beginning, this Johannine firewall is

15400:19:21.540 --> 00:19:25.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>there because students need to know just how similar the

15500:19:25.740 --> 00:19:28.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Synoptics are to one another, and just how different John

15600:19:28.860 --> 00:19:30.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is from all three.

15700:19:31.110 --> 00:19:35.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John has no baptism of Jesus, no transfiguration, no Gethsemane,

15800:19:35.130 --> 00:19:38.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>no parables, no exorcisms, and no Eucharist.

15900:19:38.970 --> 00:19:43.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Unknown characters like Nathaniel, Nicodemus, Lazarus, the blind man, the

16000:19:43.230 --> 00:19:44.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Samaritan woman,

16100:19:44.280 --> 00:19:47.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>they roam the pages of the Fourth Gospel, and Jesus

16200:19:47.520 --> 00:19:50.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is larger than life with an unambiguous confidence about his

16300:19:50.850 --> 00:19:51.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>own identity.

16400:19:52.440 --> 00:19:54.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The kingdom of God was at Synoptics.

16500:19:54.990 --> 00:19:57.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Eternal life is now present in John.

16600:19:58.290 --> 00:19:59.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>For much of the time

16700:19:59.280 --> 00:20:03.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John tells different stories, longer, richer narratives with more dialogue

16800:20:03.930 --> 00:20:06.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in a work that's structured differently, with a lot more

16900:20:06.270 --> 00:20:09.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>time spent in Jerusalem than in Galilee, where there are

17000:20:09.960 --> 00:20:12.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>similar stories, they are told in different language.

17100:20:13.140 --> 00:20:17.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The coolest Simon Peter is mediated through his brother Andrew,

17200:20:17.520 --> 00:20:21.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the centurion in Capernaum becomes a royal official in Cana.

17300:20:22.290 --> 00:20:24.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And in the feeding of the 5000, even the words

17400:20:24.630 --> 00:20:27.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>for bread and fish are different.

17500:20:27.810 --> 00:20:30.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>All of these things and more like them

17600:20:30.750 --> 00:20:32.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we have learned and we have taught.

17700:20:33.720 --> 00:20:37.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The clear differences between John and the other canonical demonstrate

17800:20:37.020 --> 00:20:42.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>one essential insight that John is not synoptic. Matthew, Mark,

17900:20:42.270 --> 00:20:42.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and Luke.

18000:20:42.930 --> 00:20:45.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>are synoptic because they're not John.

18100:20:45.930 --> 00:20:49.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John is not synoptic because it's not Matthew, Mark and

18200:20:49.050 --> 00:20:49.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Luke.

18300:20:50.490 --> 00:20:52.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is what I mean about reading stuff out loud,

18400:20:52.200 --> 00:20:52.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you realise,

18500:20:52.890 --> 00:20:54.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>'Is this a bit repetitive?'

18600:20:54.960 --> 00:20:57.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>but but you'll probably understand the rhetoric.

18700:20:57.810 --> 00:20:59.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'm about to turn a corner.

18800:21:00.000 --> 00:21:03.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We have echoed it in books, articles, blog posts,

18900:21:03.330 --> 00:21:06.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>thanks for the mention of the blog, blog posts, podcasts

19000:21:06.210 --> 00:21:09.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and videos to the point where it is a received

19100:21:09.150 --> 00:21:09.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>truth.

19200:21:09.930 --> 00:21:12.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The best kind of well-known fact.

19300:21:12.810 --> 00:21:15.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We have repeated it so many times that we never

19400:21:15.450 --> 00:21:16.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think to question it.

19500:21:16.650 --> 00:21:18.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If our students grasp the point,

19600:21:18.600 --> 00:21:22.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we congratulate ourselves that we have laid a successful foundation

19700:21:22.290 --> 00:21:24.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and we can move on to the next step.

19800:21:25.260 --> 00:21:28.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And yet, it's not true.

19900:21:29.160 --> 00:21:30.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I would like to explain why.

20000:21:33.540 --> 00:21:36.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In spite of what we tell our students, the Synoptic

20100:21:36.030 --> 00:21:38.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Gospels are not labelled differently from John because they are

20200:21:38.790 --> 00:21:39.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>just so different.

20300:21:40.680 --> 00:21:42.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's true, of course, that they are different.

20400:21:42.420 --> 00:21:47.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We've already talked about that, but difference is a question

20500:21:47.220 --> 00:21:48.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of degree.

20600:21:48.270 --> 00:21:50.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's not a difference in kind.

20700:21:50.310 --> 00:21:53.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Remember that Luke is very different from Matthew.

20800:21:53.670 --> 00:21:55.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew is very different from Mark.

20900:21:55.740 --> 00:21:57.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There are degrees of difference.

21000:22:01.680 --> 00:22:04.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The reason that John is said not to be synoptic

21100:22:04.500 --> 00:22:08.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>technically, is that it cannot be laid side by side

21200:22:08.730 --> 00:22:11.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in a synopsis with the other three Gospels.

21300:22:12.000 --> 00:22:15.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I say this myself in my introduction to the Synoptic

21400:22:15.750 --> 00:22:17.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>problem, which I wrote in 2001.

21500:22:17.940 --> 00:22:21.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And we do the helpful bit of etymology where we

21600:22:21.090 --> 00:22:24.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>say that synoptic means syn alongside optic.

21700:22:24.510 --> 00:22:26.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, look at, you know, I was when I

21800:22:26.040 --> 00:22:28.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>teach this to undergraduates, you get a little look of

21900:22:28.230 --> 00:22:28.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>recognition.

22000:22:28.770 --> 00:22:29.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They think, oh yeah, optic.

22100:22:29.880 --> 00:22:30.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yes.

22200:22:30.090 --> 00:22:30.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>syn-optic.

22300:22:30.660 --> 00:22:30.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

22400:22:31.230 --> 00:22:33.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, so you get that as a sort of,

22500:22:33.900 --> 00:22:38.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>um, foundation in, in talking about this.

22600:22:40.080 --> 00:22:41.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But that's the problem.

22700:22:41.970 --> 00:22:42.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Therein lies the problem.

22800:22:42.810 --> 00:22:44.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is a very synoptic problem.

22900:22:44.970 --> 00:22:48.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's literally a synoptic problem because John can be laid

23000:22:48.450 --> 00:22:51.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and is laid alongside the synoptics frequently.

23100:22:52.050 --> 00:22:55.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>First example of this comes right at the beginning of

23200:22:55.200 --> 00:22:58.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's gospel, the story of John the Baptist, which is

23300:22:58.020 --> 00:22:59.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the first example on the handout.

23400:22:59.430 --> 00:23:06.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So 1A. John the Baptist essentially gives his prophecy

23500:23:06.180 --> 00:23:11.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about who Jesus is, and I've underlined the words on

23600:23:11.190 --> 00:23:14.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the handout that are common between John and one or

23700:23:14.250 --> 00:23:15.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>more of the Synoptics.

23800:23:15.720 --> 00:23:19.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a remarkable 20 out of John's 31 words here.

23900:23:19.560 --> 00:23:20.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Two thirds.

24000:23:20.700 --> 00:23:23.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's just the kind of reason that when we're looking

24100:23:23.280 --> 00:23:24.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>at Matthew, Mark and Luke, that's just the kind of

24200:23:24.990 --> 00:23:29.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>reason that we hold up for the Synoptics being literarily

24300:23:29.040 --> 00:23:30.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>dependent on one another.

24400:23:30.390 --> 00:23:32.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's a literary relationship going on.

24500:23:32.130 --> 00:23:34.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And here we have the same thing in John.

24600:23:34.170 --> 00:23:37.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And always with these things, you might say, well, maybe

24700:23:37.080 --> 00:23:38.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>these are just the kind of common things that you

24800:23:38.730 --> 00:23:40.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>get in oral tradition.

24900:23:40.320 --> 00:23:43.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, look at the specificity here.

25000:23:43.620 --> 00:23:47.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You even have this line about untying the strap of

25100:23:47.310 --> 00:23:49.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>his sandal, loosing the strap of his sandal.

25200:23:49.470 --> 00:23:52.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is very specific terminology.

25300:24:00.180 --> 00:24:04.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Percival Gardner-Smith in 1938 suggested for the first and

25400:24:04.980 --> 00:24:10.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>really kind of major moment in English speaking scholarship that

25500:24:10.020 --> 00:24:13.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John was separate from the synoptics, that John wasn't didn't

25600:24:13.970 --> 00:24:15.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>use the Synoptics.

25700:24:15.080 --> 00:24:18.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He said, here there is nothing in this very passage.

25800:24:18.920 --> 00:24:21.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There is nothing here that implies a literary connection.

25900:24:22.160 --> 00:24:25.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What Gardner-Smith does is he basically sets the bar

26000:24:25.520 --> 00:24:26.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>just way too high.

26100:24:26.600 --> 00:24:28.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And one of the things he does throughout his book,

26200:24:28.400 --> 00:24:31.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>which scholars after him have done too, is they'll compare

26300:24:31.280 --> 00:24:33.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John only with Mark, and they'll forget to look at

26400:24:33.530 --> 00:24:34.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew and Luke.

26500:24:34.100 --> 00:24:37.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And you'll see from this synopsis John's agreements here, not

26600:24:37.100 --> 00:24:40.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>just with Mark, they're also with Matthew and with Luke.

26700:24:41.330 --> 00:24:42.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But there are similar examples.

26800:24:42.980 --> 00:24:44.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I've not just picked out one special one.

26900:24:45.440 --> 00:24:47.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Another example is the second one on the handout, the

27000:24:47.690 --> 00:24:49.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>high priests slave's ear.

27100:24:51.530 --> 00:24:55.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is my favourite example to use in introductory lectures

27200:24:55.940 --> 00:25:00.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>on the New Testament, because you can give students this

27300:25:00.170 --> 00:25:03.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>piece and you can just say, have a look at

27400:25:03.620 --> 00:25:06.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it, spend 5 or 10 minutes looking at it and

27500:25:06.500 --> 00:25:09.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>tell me what's unique in Matthew, what's unique in Luke

27600:25:09.650 --> 00:25:11.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and what's unique in John, and they start finding it

27700:25:11.600 --> 00:25:14.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>quite interesting to notice that in Luke and John it's

27800:25:14.960 --> 00:25:15.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the right ear.

27900:25:16.310 --> 00:25:19.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In Luke alone, the ear gets healed.

28000:25:19.490 --> 00:25:22.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In Matthew alone, you get the great line.

28100:25:22.940 --> 00:25:25.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, the one that lives by the sword shall die

28200:25:25.070 --> 00:25:25.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>by the sword.

28300:25:25.910 --> 00:25:27.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's a typical Matthewn rhythm.

28400:25:27.800 --> 00:25:29.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Michael Gold calls a Macayric rhythm.

28500:25:29.840 --> 00:25:31.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You get all the time in Matthew's gospel.

28600:25:31.730 --> 00:25:32.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Just the kind of thing Matthew has.

28700:25:32.690 --> 00:25:34.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But lovely Matthewn poetry.

28800:25:34.250 --> 00:25:37.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then in John's gospel, you get them named, typical

28900:25:37.400 --> 00:25:37.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of John.

29000:25:37.820 --> 00:25:40.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the high priest slave, instead of being anonymous, is

29100:25:40.190 --> 00:25:41.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>now called Malchus.

29200:25:41.390 --> 00:25:44.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The one of the disciples is named as Peter.

29300:25:45.410 --> 00:25:46.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John does this all the time.

29400:25:46.580 --> 00:25:49.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You have characters named in the feeding of the 5000.

29500:25:49.610 --> 00:25:50.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You have,

29600:25:50.690 --> 00:25:53.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>at the end of both Matthew and Luke, the disciples

29700:25:53.210 --> 00:25:56.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>doubt Jesus, but in John's gospel this becomes a particular

29800:25:56.330 --> 00:25:56.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>person,

29900:25:56.780 --> 00:25:57.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Thomas.

30000:25:57.770 --> 00:26:01.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And in the anointing story in Matthew 26 and in

30100:26:01.130 --> 00:26:04.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark 14, it's an anonymous woman, but in John 12

30200:26:04.100 --> 00:26:05.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it becomes Mary.

30300:26:05.240 --> 00:26:06.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you get this all the way through.

30400:26:06.500 --> 00:26:08.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And in that same story, Judas, as we'll see in

30500:26:08.660 --> 00:26:09.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a moment,

30600:26:09.590 --> 00:26:12.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Judas is named as one of the the person who

30700:26:12.890 --> 00:26:14.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>did the criticism of Mary.

30800:26:17.300 --> 00:26:19.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's kind of fun that it's the right here, by

30900:26:19.280 --> 00:26:19.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the way.

31000:26:19.970 --> 00:26:23.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, you know, this is back in the day, one

31100:26:23.210 --> 00:26:26.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of my favourite, but sadly, I think wrong theories.

31200:26:26.690 --> 00:26:29.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But one of my favourite old romantic theories about the

31300:26:29.150 --> 00:26:31.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>New Testament was that Luke was a doctor, and one

31400:26:31.940 --> 00:26:34.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of the reasons that people used to give is that

31500:26:34.130 --> 00:26:36.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he's always very precise about the anatomy.

31600:26:36.380 --> 00:26:38.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you need to know it's the right here.

31700:26:38.210 --> 00:26:40.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The same with the man with the withered hand.

31800:26:40.520 --> 00:26:43.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He he says his right arm, whereas Mark just says

31900:26:43.670 --> 00:26:44.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's his arm.

32000:26:44.240 --> 00:26:45.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So Luke always wants to know these things.

32100:26:45.830 --> 00:26:48.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I love the fact that John repeats that detail.

32200:26:48.920 --> 00:26:51.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I have in my chapter three of the book,

32300:26:51.380 --> 00:26:54.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>lots of examples like that, where John picks up little

32400:26:54.170 --> 00:26:56.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>details that Matthew and Luke add to to Mark.

32500:26:58.430 --> 00:27:01.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But it's also not just this piece the high priest

32600:27:01.940 --> 00:27:02.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>slave's ear.

32700:27:03.230 --> 00:27:06.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If you look at the anointing in John 12, which

32800:27:06.080 --> 00:27:07.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I've already introduced,

32900:27:08.330 --> 00:27:13.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we have something which is so close that it's really

33000:27:13.280 --> 00:27:15.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>interesting to put them side by side in synopsis.

33100:27:15.950 --> 00:27:19.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Here we've got three columns because Luke's anointing is so

33200:27:19.250 --> 00:27:20.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>very different.

33300:27:20.210 --> 00:27:23.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So Luke has an anointing in 736 to 50 much

33400:27:23.330 --> 00:27:24.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>earlier in the gospel.

33500:27:24.890 --> 00:27:27.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It seems to be the same basic story.

33600:27:27.620 --> 00:27:30.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's in a man called Simon's house and an anointing

33700:27:30.500 --> 00:27:31.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>happens.

33800:27:31.670 --> 00:27:33.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Some people think, though it's so different it must be

33900:27:33.950 --> 00:27:35.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a different event.

34000:27:35.510 --> 00:27:38.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But that really illustrates the point that John's is so

34100:27:38.600 --> 00:27:39.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>similar.

34200:27:39.440 --> 00:27:41.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Nobody says that this is a different event from the

34300:27:41.600 --> 00:27:42.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>one that's in Matthew and Mark.

34400:27:42.680 --> 00:27:47.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So here, to be clear, John is closer, significantly closer

34500:27:48.410 --> 00:27:51.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to Matthew and Mark than Luke is.

34600:27:51.110 --> 00:27:53.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So here if you got the four Luke is like

34700:27:53.900 --> 00:27:55.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>third, sorry.

34800:27:55.220 --> 00:27:57.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John is like third occupying the position

34900:27:57.560 --> 00:28:00.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you would normally think that Luke would. Look at the

35000:28:00.200 --> 00:28:01.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>way that the thing is structured.

35100:28:01.700 --> 00:28:05.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The incident in Matthew, Mark and John happens in Bethany.

35200:28:05.480 --> 00:28:07.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It happens just before Passover.

35300:28:07.580 --> 00:28:09.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It happens at a dinner where a woman has a

35400:28:09.710 --> 00:28:11.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>jar of very expensive perfume.

35500:28:11.600 --> 00:28:13.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>She uses it to anoint Jesus.

35600:28:13.850 --> 00:28:16.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There are then complaints about the about the cost of

35700:28:16.580 --> 00:28:19.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the perfume, which could have been given to the poor.

35800:28:19.790 --> 00:28:22.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus says, leave her the poor you will have with

35900:28:22.700 --> 00:28:25.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you always, but you will not always have me.

36000:28:25.430 --> 00:28:29.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And Jesus interprets this in line with his death.

36100:28:29.930 --> 00:28:32.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So looking at the gospel synopsis here and I, because

36200:28:32.930 --> 00:28:34.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the handouts are already so long, I've tried,

36300:28:34.820 --> 00:28:36.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I didn't put the whole lot there, but I put

36400:28:36.890 --> 00:28:40.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the really significant, significant agreements there between Matthew, Mark and

36500:28:40.490 --> 00:28:40.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John.

36600:28:40.790 --> 00:28:45.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And again, I've underlined things which are parallel in one

36700:28:45.110 --> 00:28:47.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>or more.

36800:28:47.570 --> 00:28:50.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I haven't underlined agreements between Matthew and Mark, but

36900:28:50.270 --> 00:28:53.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I've underlined agreements between John and Mark and John and

37000:28:53.510 --> 00:28:53.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew.

37100:28:59.150 --> 00:29:01.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>On the the English translations for this, they've got the

37200:29:01.460 --> 00:29:02.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>English translations.

37300:29:02.450 --> 00:29:08.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They're mine not using the NRSV updated edition.

37400:29:08.750 --> 00:29:12.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And one of the things that Bible translations always fail

37500:29:12.350 --> 00:29:14.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to do is check synoptic parallels.

37600:29:14.060 --> 00:29:17.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So they'll translate the same Greek word differently in the

37700:29:17.930 --> 00:29:18.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>parallels

37800:29:18.350 --> 00:29:20.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and it drives me absolutely nuts.

37900:29:20.240 --> 00:29:21.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It really does.

38000:29:21.380 --> 00:29:24.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I was actually the book editor for the NRSV

38100:29:24.590 --> 00:29:28.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>updated edition of Matthew, and in my notes I

38200:29:28.220 --> 00:29:32.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>consistently said, please cross check Mark and Matthew cross-check John.

38300:29:32.120 --> 00:29:35.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I shouldn't be saying cut this from the air,

38400:29:36.320 --> 00:29:41.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>but unfortunately you get you get exactly the same word

38500:29:41.240 --> 00:29:44.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>translated differently just because you've got different book editors working

38600:29:44.750 --> 00:29:45.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>on it.

38700:29:45.530 --> 00:29:47.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So anyway, the translations are mine.

38800:29:48.170 --> 00:29:49.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Just flip over the handout.

38900:29:49.340 --> 00:29:51.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Just make sure that I'm following along with you all.

39000:29:52.520 --> 00:29:58.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, so these are really, really similar accounts. As always

39100:29:58.070 --> 00:29:59.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in John's gospel,

39200:29:59.660 --> 00:30:02.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>what happens is, if you have something that's very close,

39300:30:03.890 --> 00:30:07.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>people like me will say, oh, look, it's really close.

39400:30:07.610 --> 00:30:10.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think that John knows the Synoptics.

39500:30:11.420 --> 00:30:15.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What happens in answer to that is people say, well,

39600:30:15.920 --> 00:30:18.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>these kind of details could have been held in oral

39700:30:18.080 --> 00:30:18.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>tradition.

39800:30:19.220 --> 00:30:23.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So one of the details here is this amazing line

39900:30:23.750 --> 00:30:27.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about apistic nard, this costly perfume.

40000:30:28.400 --> 00:30:34.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now Helen kindly mentioned that that like her, I sometimes

40100:30:34.070 --> 00:30:35.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>do TV appearances.

40200:30:35.630 --> 00:30:37.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And on two occasions I've been on TV with Ben

40300:30:37.970 --> 00:30:40.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Witherington, the third, who, when he talks about this piece,

40400:30:40.880 --> 00:30:44.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he says apistic nard was the Chanel number nine of

40500:30:44.780 --> 00:30:45.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>its day.

40600:30:45.710 --> 00:30:46.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Right.

40700:30:46.610 --> 00:30:49.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I listen to that and I think, ah, you

40800:30:49.190 --> 00:30:50.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>know, and I actually think I kind of bought that.

40900:30:50.750 --> 00:30:50.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well.

41000:30:50.990 --> 00:30:53.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So one day I actually looked looked up the phrase,

41100:30:53.390 --> 00:30:54.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>there's this wonderful thing.

41200:30:54.410 --> 00:30:56.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Some of you will know it called TLG, where you

41300:30:56.450 --> 00:30:58.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>can look at all of Greek literature that we know

41400:30:58.360 --> 00:30:58.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of.

41500:30:59.200 --> 00:31:01.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Do you know when the first occurrence of this expression

41600:31:01.450 --> 00:31:02.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is in all Greek literature?

41700:31:02.350 --> 00:31:05.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's here in Mark's Gospel and John's Gospel.

41800:31:05.260 --> 00:31:08.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I think maybe it was Chanel number nine of

41900:31:08.200 --> 00:31:10.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>this day, but there's no other references to it.

42000:31:11.410 --> 00:31:15.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, equally, both Mark and John say that it was

42100:31:15.700 --> 00:31:17.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>worth 300 denari.

42200:31:17.620 --> 00:31:19.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They both mentioned 300 denarii.

42300:31:19.660 --> 00:31:22.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, oral tradition people, they say this is just the

42400:31:22.960 --> 00:31:26.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>kind of detail that you remember in oral tradition. In

42500:31:26.290 --> 00:31:28.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>oral tradition scholarship,

42600:31:28.450 --> 00:31:30.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>there's always heads I win tells you lose.

42700:31:30.550 --> 00:31:35.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So whenever things are different, they say, aha, it's so

42800:31:35.500 --> 00:31:35.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>different,

42900:31:35.860 --> 00:31:37.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it must be oral tradition.

43000:31:37.330 --> 00:31:40.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But you go, but this is exactly the same.

43100:31:40.180 --> 00:31:42.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's because it's so memorable.

43200:31:43.990 --> 00:31:46.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now there are ways of testing it.

43300:31:46.720 --> 00:31:50.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Did people in the first century go around talking about

43400:31:50.200 --> 00:31:51.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>300 denari?

43500:31:51.760 --> 00:31:53.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Is it the kind of thing like, you know, we'll

43600:31:53.200 --> 00:31:57.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>say, um, gazillions of dollars or, you know, or hundreds

43700:31:57.220 --> 00:31:58.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of millions of pounds, you know.

43800:31:58.510 --> 00:32:00.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Is 300 denari.

43900:32:00.100 --> 00:32:02.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a classic first century way of saying a lot of

44000:32:02.410 --> 00:32:02.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>money?

44100:32:03.370 --> 00:32:04.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>No it's not.

44200:32:04.690 --> 00:32:06.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Do you know the first reference, you go to TLG,

44300:32:06.700 --> 00:32:11.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>first reference in Greek literature, anywhere to 300 denari is

44400:32:11.020 --> 00:32:15.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>here in Mark's Gospel and in John. There's another denarii amount

44500:32:15.670 --> 00:32:16.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in Mark and John that's parallel.

44600:32:16.960 --> 00:32:18.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's in the feeding of the 5000.

44700:32:19.090 --> 00:32:23.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They say 200 denarii would not buy enough food for

44800:32:23.620 --> 00:32:24.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>all of these people.

44900:32:24.520 --> 00:32:26.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And it clearly means a lot of money.

45000:32:26.290 --> 00:32:30.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>200 it must be a lot. Guess, when

45100:32:30.310 --> 00:32:32.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the first occurrence of 200 denarii is in all of

45200:32:32.860 --> 00:32:34.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Greek literature, according to the TLG?

45300:32:34.510 --> 00:32:35.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's here in Mark's Gospel and

45400:32:35.980 --> 00:32:39.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in John's Gospel. This is even more odd when you

45500:32:39.190 --> 00:32:44.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>remember that denarius is not a kind of coin that

45600:32:44.740 --> 00:32:46.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you find in Galilee or Judea.

45700:32:46.840 --> 00:32:49.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Do you know how many denarius, denarii have been found

45800:32:49.630 --> 00:32:51.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in Galilee and in Judea?

45900:32:51.430 --> 00:32:52.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Barely any.

46000:32:53.320 --> 00:32:53.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's not,

46100:32:53.740 --> 00:32:54.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's a Roman,

46200:32:54.640 --> 00:32:55.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's a Roman coinage.

46300:32:56.110 --> 00:33:01.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So this again shows, I think, that the origin of

46400:33:01.300 --> 00:33:02.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>this language,

46500:33:02.290 --> 00:33:03.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'm not saying the origin of the story necessarily,

46600:33:03.790 --> 00:33:05.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the origin of this language is in a kind of

46700:33:05.440 --> 00:33:08.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>literary imagination that is connecting Mark and John here.

46800:33:13.000 --> 00:33:16.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So in this passage and others like it, scholars don't

46900:33:16.210 --> 00:33:19.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>hesitate to say Matthew is using Mark.

47000:33:19.750 --> 00:33:22.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And yet John here is as close to Matthew and

47100:33:22.930 --> 00:33:23.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark

47200:33:23.980 --> 00:33:25.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>uh, well, closer to Matthew and

47300:33:25.060 --> 00:33:28.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark than than Lucas, for example. There's even an eight

47400:33:28.150 --> 00:33:32.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>word verbatim agreement between Matthew and John, which is closer

47500:33:32.860 --> 00:33:35.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>than, that is the bit at the end, the pull you'll

47600:33:35.110 --> 00:33:36.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have with you always, but you won't always have me

47700:33:36.640 --> 00:33:40.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is interrupted in mark by by another clause, but it

47800:33:40.210 --> 00:33:43.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>runs on together in parallel in Matthew and John.

47900:33:43.630 --> 00:33:47.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now that's actually a longer verbatim string between John and

48000:33:47.890 --> 00:33:52.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew than any verbatim string in this passage between Matthew

48100:33:52.630 --> 00:33:53.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and Mark.

48200:33:53.200 --> 00:33:54.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's nothing that goes to eight words in Matthew and

48300:33:54.610 --> 00:33:55.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark, just to be clear.

48400:33:55.720 --> 00:33:58.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So that's quite striking as well.

48500:33:58.510 --> 00:34:01.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The longest verbatim agreement between John and the Synoptics is

48600:34:01.990 --> 00:34:05.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>nine words, and it's in the betrayal story.

48700:34:05.710 --> 00:34:06.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Amen

48800:34:06.370 --> 00:34:08.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I say to you that one of you will betray

48900:34:08.530 --> 00:34:08.919<v Prof Mark Goodacre>me.

49000:34:09.639 --> 00:34:12.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is the second longest between John and Matthew.

49100:34:12.639 --> 00:34:15.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The equal second longest is also between John and Matthew,

49200:34:15.820 --> 00:34:16.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and it is.

49300:34:16.570 --> 00:34:17.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Does anyone happen to know what it is?

49400:34:18.520 --> 00:34:19.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's, um.

49500:34:20.919 --> 00:34:21.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Oh my goodness, what is it?

49600:34:22.149 --> 00:34:23.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is the prompt doing it from memory, you see.

49700:34:24.340 --> 00:34:26.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Oral tradition memory is harder than than reading from literary

49800:34:26.800 --> 00:34:27.129<v Prof Mark Goodacre>text.

49900:34:27.129 --> 00:34:31.659<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The in Matthew and John it is you are the

50000:34:31.659 --> 00:34:34.179<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Messiah, the Son of God.

50100:34:34.570 --> 00:34:38.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Uh, that is an eight word verbatim agreement between, uh,

50200:34:38.110 --> 00:34:40.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew 16 and John 11.

50300:34:44.500 --> 00:34:48.429<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, in this paper, I'm mainly trying to look at

50400:34:48.429 --> 00:34:53.889<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the sheer similarities between John and the Synoptics, but I

50500:34:53.889 --> 00:34:55.929<v Prof Mark Goodacre>want to at least a hint at why I think

50600:34:55.929 --> 00:34:59.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that the direction of dependence goes from the Synoptics to

50700:34:59.740 --> 00:35:01.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John and not the reverse, because some people do think

50800:35:01.480 --> 00:35:03.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that John is earlier than the Synoptics and that he

50900:35:03.610 --> 00:35:05.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>could be using he could be using them.

51000:35:06.100 --> 00:35:07.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There are a couple of things that do suggest, I

51100:35:07.690 --> 00:35:09.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think, that John is secondary here.

51200:35:09.040 --> 00:35:14.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>One is that it's rather strange the anatomy of what's

51300:35:14.410 --> 00:35:18.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>going on here, because in the Synoptics, in Matthew one,

51400:35:18.340 --> 00:35:22.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark, the woman anoints Jesus's head.

51500:35:23.770 --> 00:35:28.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In John's Gospel, Mary anoints Jesus's feet with the perfume

51600:35:28.930 --> 00:35:30.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and then wipes them with her hair.

51700:35:31.570 --> 00:35:34.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now this business of wiping with the hair seems to

51800:35:34.900 --> 00:35:38.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have come in from Luke chapter seven, where the anonymous

51900:35:38.740 --> 00:35:41.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>woman who's called a sinner in Luke 7 wipes Jesus's

52000:35:41.980 --> 00:35:42.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>feet with her hair.

52100:35:42.790 --> 00:35:44.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But it makes sense in Luke because she's just wept

52200:35:44.770 --> 00:35:47.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>on Jesus feet and she wipes him with her hair.

52300:35:47.080 --> 00:35:50.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, it also makes sense because in Luke's gospel, the

52400:35:50.740 --> 00:35:53.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>woman has walked into somebody else's house,

52500:35:53.380 --> 00:35:55.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Simon the Pharisees house.

52600:35:55.510 --> 00:35:59.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But in John's gospel, Mary and Martha are in their

52700:35:59.380 --> 00:36:00.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>own house.

52800:36:00.130 --> 00:36:01.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's set in their house, and so do they not

52900:36:01.870 --> 00:36:03.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have towels and their own house.

53000:36:03.610 --> 00:36:05.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think the detail has come in from Luke.

53100:36:05.860 --> 00:36:07.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a sort of secondary ness.

53200:36:07.600 --> 00:36:10.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And what's more, the perfume has now ended up on

53300:36:10.930 --> 00:36:14.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mary's hair and not on Jesus, which is kind of

53400:36:14.260 --> 00:36:15.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the wrong way around.

53500:36:16.120 --> 00:36:19.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's another detail as well both Mark and John have

53600:36:19.900 --> 00:36:21.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>leave her.

53700:36:21.700 --> 00:36:23.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus rebukes Judas

53800:36:23.980 --> 00:36:28.000<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it is in John, and rebukes the people in Mark.

53900:36:28.780 --> 00:36:33.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But the thing is, when Jesus says, leave her alone

54000:36:33.640 --> 00:36:37.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in Mark's gospel, there's been a line previously that says,

54100:36:37.840 --> 00:36:42.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and they scolded her, so they're telling her off.

54200:36:42.700 --> 00:36:44.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And Jesus says, leave her alone.

54300:36:44.620 --> 00:36:47.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In John's gospel, we don't get the line about telling

54400:36:47.730 --> 00:36:48.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>them off.

54500:36:49.740 --> 00:36:52.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's in the middle of telling us about Judas, but

54600:36:52.500 --> 00:36:55.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>then he retains the leave her alone line.

54700:36:55.170 --> 00:37:00.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So Jesus' rebuke is there, but without the scolding that

54800:37:00.660 --> 00:37:01.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>requires it.

54900:37:01.710 --> 00:37:03.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I think again, there what you've got is a

55000:37:03.990 --> 00:37:06.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>bit of Johannine secondary ness.

55100:37:06.540 --> 00:37:07.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It could be.

55200:37:07.200 --> 00:37:08.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I don't want to lean on that point too much,

55300:37:08.820 --> 00:37:11.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>because it could be that Jesus is a sort of

55400:37:11.280 --> 00:37:12.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>hearing

55500:37:12.060 --> 00:37:14.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Judas is implying that, you know, he might be saying

55600:37:14.910 --> 00:37:15.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to you, leave her alone.

55700:37:15.840 --> 00:37:16.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Stop,

55800:37:16.050 --> 00:37:17.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>stop talking about, you know, money.

55900:37:17.700 --> 00:37:19.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, that might be what John's John's saying, but

56000:37:19.890 --> 00:37:21.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the story makes more sense in Mark.

56100:37:21.540 --> 00:37:23.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It works better in Mark.

56200:37:23.010 --> 00:37:27.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Notice as well that in Mark's gospel they're specifically talking

56300:37:27.360 --> 00:37:29.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to the woman and Jesus says, leave her alone.

56400:37:30.270 --> 00:37:33.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But Judas is just as he said, Judas just says

56500:37:33.330 --> 00:37:33.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it.

56600:37:33.690 --> 00:37:34.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He doesn't say it to the woman.

56700:37:34.920 --> 00:37:35.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So it makes better sense.

56800:37:35.970 --> 00:37:39.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in in Mark and John. It's a little like I

56900:37:39.450 --> 00:37:41.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>wrote an article once in 1998,

57000:37:41.220 --> 00:37:44.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I wish everything I'd written had been as frequently cited

57100:37:44.310 --> 00:37:46.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as this was, but I wrote an article in 1998

57200:37:46.560 --> 00:37:50.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>called 'Fatigue in the Synoptics', which argued that that's the

57300:37:50.100 --> 00:37:54.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>kind of thing which shows Matthew's dependence on Mark, Luke's

57400:37:54.210 --> 00:37:55.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>dependence on Mark.

57500:37:55.020 --> 00:37:57.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I argue Luke's dependence on Matthew, and I think

57600:37:57.150 --> 00:37:58.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the same here for John.

57700:37:58.260 --> 00:38:02.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Occasionally you'll see something, a secondary thing getting repeated in

57800:38:02.910 --> 00:38:03.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's gospel.

57900:38:05.160 --> 00:38:07.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But that, of course, is to get ahead of ourselves

58000:38:07.350 --> 00:38:10.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a bit, because I just want to underline the point

58100:38:10.050 --> 00:38:12.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>at this stage that I want to underline the point

58200:38:12.630 --> 00:38:17.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>at this stage that John really looks when you put

58300:38:17.190 --> 00:38:21.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's gospel alongside the Synoptics in individual passages, frequently looks

58400:38:21.690 --> 00:38:22.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>very synoptic.

58500:38:24.690 --> 00:38:25.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And

58600:38:30.390 --> 00:38:33.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you might think that I'm just trying to sort of

58700:38:33.090 --> 00:38:38.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>cook the evidence a bit, you know, um, Helen mentioned

58800:38:38.910 --> 00:38:40.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that I've written about Q before.

58900:38:41.220 --> 00:38:45.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, Professor foster and I have have argued about this

59000:38:45.840 --> 00:38:48.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in public and in private, and we remain friends.

59100:38:48.510 --> 00:38:52.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But, um, you might think that, you know, this this

59200:38:52.560 --> 00:38:55.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>guy that thinks he can conjure away Q, now thinks

59300:38:55.320 --> 00:38:57.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that he can kind of conjure John into being a

59400:38:57.810 --> 00:38:58.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>synoptic gospel.

59500:38:58.890 --> 00:39:00.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you might think I'm kind of crazy.

59600:39:00.750 --> 00:39:01.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Maybe I am.

59700:39:03.000 --> 00:39:07.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If I were right, surely what we would have in

59800:39:07.980 --> 00:39:10.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>our printed synopsis would be all four Gospels, not three.

59900:39:11.400 --> 00:39:12.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What we do.

60000:39:12.120 --> 00:39:14.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Do you know what the every, every day

60100:39:15.300 --> 00:39:19.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>when I've been writing this book, I have been consulting

60200:39:19.290 --> 00:39:22.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a synopsis of the Gospels by Kurt Aland, and the

60300:39:22.650 --> 00:39:29.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>title of it is Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum, which, roughly translated,

60400:39:29.190 --> 00:39:31.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is a synopsis of the four Gospels.

60500:39:32.670 --> 00:39:34.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Do you know it's so strange, the misdirection.

60600:39:34.590 --> 00:39:37.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I have used that book day in, day out for

60700:39:38.010 --> 00:39:41.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>30 years, and it never really occurred to me.

60800:39:41.640 --> 00:39:43.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Synopsis of the four Gospels.

60900:39:43.920 --> 00:39:45.000<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, I knew that John's in there.

61000:39:45.030 --> 00:39:49.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I keep looking it up and checking it, but John

61100:39:49.680 --> 00:39:55.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is clearly, explicitly synoptic, even in German traditional scholarship of

61200:39:55.560 --> 00:39:57.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the great Kurt Aland.

61300:39:58.110 --> 00:40:03.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But if John is sometimes synoptic in individual passages, what

61400:40:03.600 --> 00:40:05.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about the gospel as a whole?

61500:40:05.130 --> 00:40:07.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Because one of the reasons that in our introductory lectures

61600:40:07.590 --> 00:40:08.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we say that John is synoptic.

61700:40:08.790 --> 00:40:11.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The reasons we give isn't just individual passages, it's the

61800:40:11.790 --> 00:40:12.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>order.

61900:40:12.540 --> 00:40:19.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The order of the passages is basically similar between Matthew,

62000:40:19.710 --> 00:40:20.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark and Luke.

62100:40:20.400 --> 00:40:22.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And John is radically different.

62200:40:22.110 --> 00:40:26.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you think in particular of the cleansing of the

62300:40:26.130 --> 00:40:30.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>temple right at the end of the Synoptics, right at

62400:40:30.270 --> 00:40:31.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the beginning of John.

62500:40:31.080 --> 00:40:33.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You can't want for a more radical difference, can you?

62600:40:33.690 --> 00:40:34.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John

62700:40:34.080 --> 00:40:37.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>chapter two right at the beginning, or another famous one,

62800:40:37.470 --> 00:40:40.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Luke five has the miraculous haul of fish, which we

62900:40:40.920 --> 00:40:43.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have to wait all the way to 21 to get

63000:40:43.440 --> 00:40:45.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a parallel for in John's gospel.

63100:40:45.450 --> 00:40:48.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So we have these radical departures from the synoptic order,

63200:40:48.930 --> 00:40:51.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>which suggests once more, doesn't it, that John is not

63300:40:51.960 --> 00:40:52.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>synoptic.

63400:40:53.700 --> 00:40:57.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, it doesn't though, because if you actually I just

63500:40:57.540 --> 00:41:00.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>thought one day I thought, let's actually get down every

63600:41:00.780 --> 00:41:04.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>significant parallel passage between John and the Synoptics in a

63700:41:04.800 --> 00:41:07.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>nice chart, and then mark which ones were in a

63800:41:07.080 --> 00:41:07.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>different order.

63900:41:07.950 --> 00:41:10.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And the results are on the handout under number three.

64000:41:11.550 --> 00:41:15.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There are only three passages that are not in the

64100:41:15.780 --> 00:41:16.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>synoptic order.

64200:41:16.770 --> 00:41:18.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Two of them are the ones that we always use

64300:41:18.480 --> 00:41:19.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in our introductory lectures,

64400:41:19.890 --> 00:41:22.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>'The Cleansing of the Temple' and 'The Miraculous Catch of

64500:41:22.530 --> 00:41:23.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Fish.'

64600:41:23.370 --> 00:41:25.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The other one is the triumphal entry, which is just

64700:41:25.860 --> 00:41:27.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>switched around in the Synoptics,

64800:41:27.840 --> 00:41:29.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's before the anointing.

64900:41:29.220 --> 00:41:30.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In John, it's after the anointing.

65000:41:30.810 --> 00:41:34.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Otherwise, every single passage is in the same relative order.

65100:41:35.790 --> 00:41:37.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'm just pausing for dramatic effect. [laughter]

65200:41:38.640 --> 00:41:39.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Because this is still.

65300:41:40.140 --> 00:41:41.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So let me let me give you a little bit

65400:41:41.880 --> 00:41:42.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of background of

65500:41:42.390 --> 00:41:45.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a book I'm writing. I gave the speaker's lectures in Oxford

65600:41:45.870 --> 00:41:51.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in 2016 on on this topic, but at that time

65700:41:51.030 --> 00:41:54.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I hadn't realised how strong my own case was. [laughter]

65800:41:55.680 --> 00:41:58.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In other words, I kind of talked myself into it

65900:41:58.050 --> 00:41:59.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>more as I worked on it.

66000:41:59.670 --> 00:42:03.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And only this summer did I write up this this

66100:42:03.180 --> 00:42:05.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>chapter because I suddenly realised, oh my goodness, I've been

66200:42:05.580 --> 00:42:07.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>underestimating the evidence.

66300:42:07.500 --> 00:42:11.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You allow yourself sometimes to be talked into your opponent's

66400:42:11.640 --> 00:42:12.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>rhetoric.

66500:42:12.450 --> 00:42:14.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I thought, you know, do you know what I

66600:42:14.160 --> 00:42:14.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think?

66700:42:14.370 --> 00:42:16.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I really I think I'm right about this.

66800:42:16.410 --> 00:42:16.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So.

66900:42:16.980 --> 00:42:20.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I wrote this up this, this summer, and I

67000:42:20.040 --> 00:42:23.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>was just so struck by how much stronger the evidence

67100:42:23.430 --> 00:42:24.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>was than I had given credence for.

67200:42:24.810 --> 00:42:26.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Which is why I pushed this chapter to chapter two

67300:42:26.700 --> 00:42:27.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of my book.

67400:42:28.350 --> 00:42:31.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, you might say, when you look at this chart,

67500:42:31.740 --> 00:42:35.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>well, it's not that remarkable because you obviously have to

67600:42:35.640 --> 00:42:39.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have the prophecy of Judas's betrayal before the betrayal, the

67700:42:39.150 --> 00:42:41.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>prophecy of Peter's denial, before Peter's denial.

67800:42:41.610 --> 00:42:44.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've got to have the arrest before the trial.

67900:42:44.280 --> 00:42:45.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've got to have the trial before the crucifixion, the

68000:42:45.990 --> 00:42:47.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>crucifixion, before the resurrection, and so on.

68100:42:47.880 --> 00:42:53.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's some truth in that, obviously, but it risks confusing

68200:42:53.760 --> 00:42:55.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>story and discourse.

68300:42:55.020 --> 00:42:58.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's the question of of the order in which the

68400:42:58.710 --> 00:43:01.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>chronological events happened and the way that we narrate them.

68500:43:02.250 --> 00:43:07.140<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And John narrates things in a very particular way that

68600:43:07.140 --> 00:43:10.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>doesn't necessarily have to have been the case.

68700:43:10.410 --> 00:43:12.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The clearest example of that, I think, is in the

68800:43:12.780 --> 00:43:13.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>denial of Peter.

68900:43:14.130 --> 00:43:19.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So both Mark and John tell the story of the

69000:43:19.890 --> 00:43:21.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>denial in the same way.

69100:43:21.240 --> 00:43:25.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's it's what's called an intercalation or sandwich.

69200:43:26.040 --> 00:43:28.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, we often talk about the mark and the sandwich,

69300:43:28.770 --> 00:43:30.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>which is what I call my lunch.

69400:43:30.930 --> 00:43:34.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, but it's a terrible, terrible joke, but, um.

69500:43:34.970 --> 00:43:37.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Really terrible cut as well from the video.

69600:43:38.240 --> 00:43:39.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I do hope you got an editor.

69700:43:39.830 --> 00:43:41.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>No, I'll just check for you.

69800:43:42.080 --> 00:43:42.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um.

69900:43:43.940 --> 00:43:45.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's intercalation.

70000:43:45.740 --> 00:43:49.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Basically, the classic example is the story of Jairus daughter.

70100:43:49.700 --> 00:43:53.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Where in Mark chapter five, Mark begins by telling us

70200:43:53.960 --> 00:43:56.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about Jairus coming and telling us his daughter is ill.

70300:43:56.660 --> 00:44:00.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Then, as Jesus is on the way to Jairus house,

70400:44:00.590 --> 00:44:04.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the woman with a haemorrhage comes and touches Jesus's garment

70500:44:04.880 --> 00:44:05.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and gets healed.

70600:44:05.900 --> 00:44:08.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And by the time that that story is over, Jairus's

70700:44:08.990 --> 00:44:09.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>daughter has died.

70800:44:09.800 --> 00:44:11.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then we go to Jairus house.

70900:44:11.870 --> 00:44:14.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now that's how Mark likes telling stories.

71000:44:14.210 --> 00:44:16.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There are at least six of them in his gospel.

71100:44:16.160 --> 00:44:17.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And this isn't just something I've come up with.

71200:44:17.270 --> 00:44:17.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is,

71300:44:17.570 --> 00:44:18.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>everyone says this.

71400:44:18.380 --> 00:44:22.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Even my colleague Joel Marcus has six examples, including that

71500:44:22.460 --> 00:44:22.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>one.

71600:44:23.540 --> 00:44:26.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is how Mark tells the story of Peter's denial.

71700:44:26.870 --> 00:44:30.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He introduces the story with Peter out in the courtyard,

71800:44:30.320 --> 00:44:31.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>warming himself.

71900:44:31.820 --> 00:44:33.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Then you go to the story of the trial, and

72000:44:33.920 --> 00:44:35.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>then you come back and you get the rest of

72100:44:35.690 --> 00:44:37.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the story of the of the denials.

72200:44:37.430 --> 00:44:38.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John does the same thing.

72300:44:38.570 --> 00:44:40.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's got the same intercalation.

72400:44:40.160 --> 00:44:42.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And the way he tells the story, it's not absolutely

72500:44:42.470 --> 00:44:45.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>identical, but the literary structure is just the same.

72600:44:45.620 --> 00:44:47.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And again, if you say, well, maybe things happen that

72700:44:47.570 --> 00:44:49.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>way, that's how that's the sort of, you know, well,

72800:44:49.970 --> 00:44:52.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>there may have happened that way, but Matthew and Luke

72900:44:52.640 --> 00:44:53.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>don't tell it that way.

73000:44:53.660 --> 00:44:55.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew and Luke tell the story quite differently.

73100:44:55.850 --> 00:44:58.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They actually tell Peter's denial all in one go.

73200:44:58.580 --> 00:45:01.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And don't sort of wrap it around the trial story.

73300:45:01.670 --> 00:45:03.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you've got things like that.

73400:45:03.260 --> 00:45:05.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've also got things like think of the feeding of

73500:45:05.480 --> 00:45:09.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the 5000 in John six, followed by the walking on

73600:45:09.260 --> 00:45:09.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the sea.

73700:45:10.970 --> 00:45:14.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Do you have to have the walking on the sea

73800:45:14.210 --> 00:45:16.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>following the feeding of the 5000?

73900:45:16.130 --> 00:45:19.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You clearly don't have to have it because Luke doesn't

74000:45:19.100 --> 00:45:19.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>do it that way.

74100:45:19.820 --> 00:45:21.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Luke tells you the story of the feeding of the

74200:45:21.320 --> 00:45:21.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>5000.

74300:45:21.920 --> 00:45:24.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's no walking on the sea in Luke.

74400:45:24.530 --> 00:45:27.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Also, both Matthew and Mark tell another feeding story, the

74500:45:27.410 --> 00:45:30.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>story of the 4000 that doesn't have a walking on

74600:45:30.350 --> 00:45:31.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the sea after it.

74700:45:31.160 --> 00:45:33.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you can clearly tell big feeding stories without a

74800:45:33.290 --> 00:45:34.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>walking on the sea afterwards.

74900:45:34.610 --> 00:45:36.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That juxtaposition is important.

75000:45:37.340 --> 00:45:39.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And just saying maybe it happened that way doesn't actually

75100:45:39.890 --> 00:45:42.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>help us, because it's always a question of how you

75200:45:42.440 --> 00:45:43.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>choose to tell the story.

75300:45:48.830 --> 00:45:49.370<v Speaker 4>Shall I give you a

75400:45:49.370 --> 00:45:51.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>little quotation from C. K. Barrett?

75500:45:52.910 --> 00:45:56.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The fact is, that there crops up repeatedly

75600:45:56.090 --> 00:45:58.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in John, evidence that suggests that the evangelists knew a

75700:45:58.220 --> 00:46:01.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>body of traditional material that either was Mark or was

75800:46:01.130 --> 00:46:04.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>something much like Mark. And anyone who, after an interval

75900:46:04.550 --> 00:46:07.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of 19 centuries, he was writing a few years ago,

76000:46:07.820 --> 00:46:11.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>feels himself in a position to distinguish nicely between Mark

76100:46:11.180 --> 00:46:13.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and something much like Mark is at liberty to do

76200:46:13.580 --> 00:46:14.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>so.

76300:46:14.150 --> 00:46:17.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The simpler hypothesis, which does not involve the postulation of

76400:46:17.660 --> 00:46:21.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>otherwise unknown entities, is not without attractiveness.

76500:46:21.140 --> 00:46:24.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I love that wonderful British understatement.

76600:46:25.250 --> 00:46:26.000<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The um,

76700:46:28.310 --> 00:46:33.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the difficulty is always what I call recursion.

76800:46:33.380 --> 00:46:36.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I found that as I've been researching John, every time

76900:46:36.530 --> 00:46:40.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that you run into cases where John is really similar

77000:46:40.100 --> 00:46:42.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to the Synoptics, you'll get the idea.

77100:46:42.020 --> 00:46:45.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, maybe John knew Mark's source, maybe John know

77200:46:45.170 --> 00:46:48.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew's source, maybe John knew Luke's source. Maybe they shared a

77300:46:48.590 --> 00:46:50.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>source, maybe the underlying oral traditions.

77400:46:50.390 --> 00:46:52.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The difficulty is you can always do that in any

77500:46:52.940 --> 00:46:53.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>scholarship,

77600:46:53.570 --> 00:46:55.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>push it back onto the unknown.

77700:46:55.220 --> 00:46:57.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But what's the benefit of pushing it back onto the

77800:46:57.380 --> 00:46:58.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>unknown?

77900:46:58.340 --> 00:47:02.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Especially when you have literary evidence that suggest it wasn't

78000:47:02.060 --> 00:47:05.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the unknown sources, but it was the actual documents themselves.

78100:47:10.160 --> 00:47:11.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>How are we doing time-wise?

78200:47:11.540 --> 00:47:14.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We've got about 40 minutes, 40, 40, 45 minutes.

78300:47:14.180 --> 00:47:14.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Something like that?

78400:47:14.990 --> 00:47:15.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Total.

78500:47:16.250 --> 00:47:16.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Cool.

78600:47:16.610 --> 00:47:18.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah, cool.

78700:47:21.350 --> 00:47:24.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We're up to a passion narrative with an extended introduction,

78800:47:24.890 --> 00:47:28.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>which is number four on the handout.

78900:47:36.020 --> 00:47:38.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Is everyone still doing okay, you still got the okay with

79000:47:38.390 --> 00:47:39.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the where the handouts are and everything?

79100:47:40.340 --> 00:47:40.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Cool.

79200:47:42.230 --> 00:47:45.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So it's another introductory lecture thing, the passion narrative with

79300:47:45.920 --> 00:47:46.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>an extended introduction.

79400:47:46.940 --> 00:47:49.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a good essay examination question I'm afraid I, I

79500:47:49.970 --> 00:47:52.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>set these, you know, a partial narrative with an extended

79600:47:52.370 --> 00:47:52.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>introduction.

79700:47:52.760 --> 00:47:56.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then how is this a good, um, description of

79800:47:56.270 --> 00:47:57.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark's gospel?

79900:47:58.130 --> 00:48:00.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, Martin Kayler, who was the one who said this,

80000:48:00.770 --> 00:48:03.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he was actually applying it to all four Gospels, not

80100:48:03.110 --> 00:48:03.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark.

80200:48:03.650 --> 00:48:04.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's funny,

80300:48:04.010 --> 00:48:05.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we've just decided it was Mark, but actually he was

80400:48:05.990 --> 00:48:07.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>saying it about all four.

80500:48:07.490 --> 00:48:10.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And actually it applies better to John than it does

80600:48:10.910 --> 00:48:12.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to any of the other three.

80700:48:13.280 --> 00:48:15.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Uh, basically at least half of John's gospel is the

80800:48:15.830 --> 00:48:16.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>passion narrative.

80900:48:16.820 --> 00:48:20.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Bear in mind that you actually get to the anointing

81000:48:20.180 --> 00:48:23.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of Jesus in John 12, like halfway through the gospel

81100:48:23.600 --> 00:48:26.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And in John 13, we're already on the last weekend.

81200:48:26.720 --> 00:48:28.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Like, I mean, if you think of it as I

81300:48:28.640 --> 00:48:31.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>know it wasn't Good Friday, you know, etc. but if

81400:48:31.310 --> 00:48:33.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you think of it as Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, we're

81500:48:33.380 --> 00:48:36.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>already at Maundy Thursday by John 13, just over half

81600:48:36.650 --> 00:48:37.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>way through the gospel.

81700:48:37.880 --> 00:48:41.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you've got the passion narrative and an extended introduction.

81800:48:41.330 --> 00:48:44.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's even more Mark and and Mark is out marking

81900:48:44.330 --> 00:48:45.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark.

82000:48:45.470 --> 00:48:48.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew and Luke did this to some extent, but they

82100:48:48.080 --> 00:48:50.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>just have so much longer in ministry.

82200:48:50.330 --> 00:48:52.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then Luke has that great big road trip in

82300:48:52.250 --> 00:48:54.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the middle of his gospel before you get to Jerusalem

82400:48:54.590 --> 00:48:55.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>later on.

82500:48:56.600 --> 00:48:58.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I thought it'd be fun to see if it was

82600:48:58.850 --> 00:49:00.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>possible to quantify this.

82700:49:00.950 --> 00:49:02.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I might regret this.

82800:49:02.360 --> 00:49:04.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, but I thought I'd see if it's possible to

82900:49:04.850 --> 00:49:05.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>quantify it.

83000:49:05.990 --> 00:49:09.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, this little thing I did before in a in

83100:49:09.020 --> 00:49:14.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>an essay that I wrote for brilliant volume co-edited by

83200:49:14.360 --> 00:49:20.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Helen Bond, Catherine Williams and Eva Marie Becker, and I

83300:49:20.780 --> 00:49:23.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>actually to my great shame, when I looked, when I

83400:49:23.750 --> 00:49:25.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>looked it up, I realise I've got the numbers wrong

83500:49:25.700 --> 00:49:26.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in the book.

83600:49:26.630 --> 00:49:30.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I actually I actually counted, I actually well, I

83700:49:30.830 --> 00:49:36.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>counted all the verses that are textually uncertain.

83800:49:36.710 --> 00:49:38.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I forgot to subtract those.

83900:49:38.960 --> 00:49:40.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But anyway, the numbers are roughly similar.

84000:49:41.090 --> 00:49:45.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But basically this is the experiment to see how far

84100:49:45.260 --> 00:49:50.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>proportionately into the gospel, the triumphal entry comes, it basically

84200:49:50.360 --> 00:49:50.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>comes,

84300:49:50.840 --> 00:49:54.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you basically got 63.8% of Mark's gospel before the triumphal

84400:49:54.290 --> 00:49:56.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>entry, and 61.7% of John.

84500:49:56.750 --> 00:50:00.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've got 36% of Mark, which is the narrative, and

84600:50:00.410 --> 00:50:02.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>38% of John. It's really similar.

84700:50:02.960 --> 00:50:03.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's really similar.

84800:50:03.680 --> 00:50:06.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And you might say, well, you've chosen you've chosen the

84900:50:06.320 --> 00:50:08.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>triumphal entry arbitrarily to make the point.

85000:50:08.690 --> 00:50:11.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I thought, all right, let's try the arrest then.

85100:50:11.270 --> 00:50:14.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the bit leading up to the arrest in Mark's

85200:50:14.780 --> 00:50:18.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>gospel, 87%, leading up to the arrest in John's gospel,

85300:50:18.110 --> 00:50:21.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>84%. Which makes the passion narrative in Mark 12%

85400:50:21.640 --> 00:50:23.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of the gospel and passion

85500:50:23.230 --> 00:50:23.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>narrative proper

85600:50:23.920 --> 00:50:26.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in John 15% of the gospel nearly 16%.

85700:50:26.620 --> 00:50:30.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the Sir John's Gospel really is a passion narrative

85800:50:30.010 --> 00:50:31.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>with an extended introduction.

85900:50:31.240 --> 00:50:32.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And just to be clear, I don't think that John

86000:50:32.950 --> 00:50:35.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>was sitting there measuring the scroll.

86100:50:35.530 --> 00:50:37.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, I'm not you know, I might be crazy,

86200:50:37.270 --> 00:50:38.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>but I'm not quite that crazy.

86300:50:38.350 --> 00:50:40.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'm just trying to make the point that you can

86400:50:40.780 --> 00:50:44.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>actually quantify how much of each gospel is passion narrative

86500:50:44.770 --> 00:50:47.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and how much is introduction, and it's really similar.

86600:50:51.370 --> 00:50:52.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Number five,

86700:50:56.470 --> 00:50:57.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of The Hidden Messiah.

86800:50:58.480 --> 00:50:59.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Oh, hold on now I want to do one more

86900:50:59.890 --> 00:51:00.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>thing first.

87000:51:00.460 --> 00:51:01.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Have I got time for one quick?

87100:51:01.240 --> 00:51:02.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think one more quick thing before that.

87200:51:02.410 --> 00:51:02.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

87300:51:02.590 --> 00:51:02.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Cool.

87400:51:03.760 --> 00:51:06.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's not just the passion narrative with an extended introduction.

87500:51:06.430 --> 00:51:11.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's also the question of John the Baptist. Who told

87600:51:11.410 --> 00:51:14.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John that you have to start the story with John

87700:51:14.590 --> 00:51:17.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Baptist? All the people that think that John is

87800:51:17.650 --> 00:51:22.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>independent of the Synoptics have to presuppose that everybody told

87900:51:22.330 --> 00:51:24.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Jesus story the same way.

88000:51:24.010 --> 00:51:26.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There was a master narrative that begins with John the

88100:51:26.410 --> 00:51:29.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Baptist saying that Jesus is the one to come, and

88200:51:29.530 --> 00:51:31.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the strap of his sandals, all of that.

88300:51:31.090 --> 00:51:31.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Right?

88400:51:31.900 --> 00:51:34.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If Gardner-Smith, you thought that John didn't know the

88500:51:34.180 --> 00:51:36.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Synoptics, he just thought that that was so embedded in

88600:51:36.400 --> 00:51:40.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>storytelling that that John just had to tell it that

88700:51:40.180 --> 00:51:40.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>way.

88800:51:41.230 --> 00:51:42.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But where's the evidence for that?

88900:51:43.000 --> 00:51:45.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, and Paul doesn't tell it that way.

89000:51:45.670 --> 00:51:47.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Paul doesn't even mention John the Baptist.

89100:51:48.220 --> 00:51:50.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, I mean, Paul can talk about Jesus being,

89200:51:50.650 --> 00:51:51.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you know, the seed of David.

89300:51:51.790 --> 00:51:54.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He can quote stuff about the Eucharist.

89400:51:54.790 --> 00:51:56.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He never says anything about John the Baptist, you know,

89500:51:56.920 --> 00:51:57.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>prophesying.

89600:51:58.000 --> 00:51:59.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Or we don't even have to go there.

89700:51:59.650 --> 00:52:02.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Go to the Gospel of Thomas, which isn't, I don't

89800:52:02.740 --> 00:52:04.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think, even though I date it later-ish, I don't

89900:52:04.840 --> 00:52:06.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think it's much later than John's gospel.

90000:52:06.610 --> 00:52:07.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It doesn't think you have to begin the story of

90100:52:07.990 --> 00:52:09.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John the Baptist.

90200:52:09.970 --> 00:52:13.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If I look at any second century gospel and the

90300:52:13.870 --> 00:52:15.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>only ones that seem to begin the story is John

90400:52:15.730 --> 00:52:18.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Baptist are those that know the synoptic Gospels, like

90500:52:18.910 --> 00:52:22.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the [inaudible] and so you don't have to

90600:52:22.900 --> 00:52:23.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have it that way.

90700:52:24.220 --> 00:52:26.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Of course, one of the reasons, unfortunately, that this is

90800:52:26.680 --> 00:52:28.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>where I will have to bring Q into it.

90900:52:28.300 --> 00:52:33.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If Q existed, then that does begin with John the

91000:52:33.160 --> 00:52:34.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Baptist as well.

91100:52:34.630 --> 00:52:36.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So that then means you've got Mark and Q and

91200:52:36.850 --> 00:52:38.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John that all begin with John the Baptist.

91300:52:38.530 --> 00:52:41.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But if there's no Q, this is Mark's way of

91400:52:41.560 --> 00:52:44.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>telling the story, which is taken over by Matthew, taken

91500:52:44.710 --> 00:52:46.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>over by Luke, and taken over by John.

91600:52:46.660 --> 00:52:49.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I don't think beginning with John the Baptist is is

91700:52:49.540 --> 00:52:51.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the normative way of telling the story.

91800:52:51.550 --> 00:52:53.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a special way of telling the story.

91900:52:53.170 --> 00:52:55.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We think it's normative because we know the four canonical

92000:52:55.630 --> 00:52:57.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>gospels in the New Testament, and that's the stuff that

92100:52:57.280 --> 00:52:58.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we're used to.

92200:52:58.060 --> 00:53:00.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But I suspect it wasn't always told that way.

92300:53:00.700 --> 00:53:04.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And there's a great book by Francis Watson and Sarah

92400:53:04.390 --> 00:53:07.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Parkhouse called Telling the Christian Story Differently.

92500:53:08.320 --> 00:53:09.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And you can look through there and see how rare

92600:53:09.970 --> 00:53:10.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it is to begin

92700:53:10.810 --> 00:53:11.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the story is John the Baptist.

92800:53:11.830 --> 00:53:12.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I want to throw that in as well.

92900:53:12.880 --> 00:53:15.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And by the way, Josephus talks about John the Baptist.

93000:53:16.030 --> 00:53:16.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He,

93100:53:16.840 --> 00:53:18.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you wouldn't even know that John the Baptist had anything

93200:53:18.790 --> 00:53:19.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to do with Jesus.

93300:53:20.260 --> 00:53:22.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And in fact, where Josephus puts the John the Baptist

93400:53:22.630 --> 00:53:26.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>story is later in the narrative around about 36 C.E.,

93500:53:26.170 --> 00:53:30.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>when Herod Antipas is basically being defeated in battle.

93600:53:30.940 --> 00:53:32.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's a good case as well of story and

93700:53:32.680 --> 00:53:34.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>discourse, because he does it as a flashback.

93800:53:34.810 --> 00:53:37.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Anyway, that's just a little aside as well.

93900:53:37.720 --> 00:53:41.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So last major point number five, revelation of the Hidden

94000:53:41.560 --> 00:53:42.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Messiah.

94100:53:43.390 --> 00:53:46.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I want to point out that it's not just sentences,

94200:53:46.930 --> 00:53:48.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's not just passages.

94300:53:48.160 --> 00:53:52.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's not even whole gospels, parallel sequences, passionalities with extended

94400:53:52.570 --> 00:53:53.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>introductions.

94500:53:53.410 --> 00:54:00.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's also the fundamental literary conceit of all four canonical

94600:54:00.160 --> 00:54:00.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>gospels

94700:54:00.730 --> 00:54:01.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that's the same.

94800:54:02.200 --> 00:54:06.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And the fundamental literary conceit is this that there are

94900:54:06.460 --> 00:54:12.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>insiders who understand and there are outsiders who don't understand.

95000:54:13.720 --> 00:54:20.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus hides himself, and these mysteries are solved by the

95100:54:21.040 --> 00:54:22.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>key of the resurrection. And I will

95200:54:22.390 --> 00:54:24.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>unpack each of those one by one.

95300:54:25.630 --> 00:54:28.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>First issue is insiders and outsiders.

95400:54:32.260 --> 00:54:37.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>A lot of you all know William Wrede's famous messianic secret.

95500:54:37.930 --> 00:54:40.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Uh, 1901, the German original.

95600:54:41.110 --> 00:54:42.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The English translation 1971.

95700:54:42.970 --> 00:54:46.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I love the fact it took 70 years for, uh,

95800:54:46.330 --> 00:54:51.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>for American speak, sorry, English speaking scholarship to, um, to

95900:54:51.670 --> 00:54:52.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>catch up with them.

96000:54:54.250 --> 00:54:58.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>A bit like with, uh, if we teach Wrede, we

96100:54:58.720 --> 00:55:00.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>teach it in the context of Mark's gospel.

96200:55:00.460 --> 00:55:01.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's what I always do.

96300:55:01.690 --> 00:55:06.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But, um, Wrede's books actually about all four canonical gospels,

96400:55:06.100 --> 00:55:07.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>just as Kayler's was

96500:55:07.360 --> 00:55:09.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>statements about is about all four.

96600:55:09.460 --> 00:55:16.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And what Wrede pointed out is that Jesus keeps everything

96700:55:16.750 --> 00:55:21.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>secret in the Gospels, and he has this extraordinary kind

96800:55:21.250 --> 00:55:22.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of mystery going on.

96900:55:22.960 --> 00:55:25.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And one key element of this, and you get it

97000:55:25.240 --> 00:55:27.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in both John and in the Synoptics.

97100:55:27.160 --> 00:55:28.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But although John and Mark are the closest, if you,

97200:55:28.780 --> 00:55:31.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in John and and the Synoptics, secrets are revealed

97300:55:31.990 --> 00:55:35.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to insiders for whom Jesus's speeches make sense.

97400:55:36.790 --> 00:55:39.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Outsiders are hostile to Jesus.

97500:55:39.160 --> 00:55:43.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They find him either incomprehensible or, worse, blasphemous.

97600:55:43.570 --> 00:55:46.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The best example of this is John 10:24 to 27.

97700:55:46.510 --> 00:55:48.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It comes frequently, but this is the best example.

97800:55:48.490 --> 00:55:50.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the Judeans gathered around him and said to him,

97900:55:50.530 --> 00:55:52.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>how long will you keep us in suspense?

98000:55:52.270 --> 00:55:54.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.

98100:55:54.640 --> 00:55:56.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus answered, I have told you, and you do not

98200:55:56.650 --> 00:55:58.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>believe the works that I do in my father's name

98300:55:58.660 --> 00:55:59.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>testify to me.

98400:55:59.710 --> 00:56:01.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But you do not believe, because you do not belong

98500:56:01.810 --> 00:56:02.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to my sheep.

98600:56:02.710 --> 00:56:04.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>My sheep hear my voice.

98700:56:04.030 --> 00:56:05.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I know them and they follow me.

98800:56:06.400 --> 00:56:09.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This function is very similarly to what we think of

98900:56:09.130 --> 00:56:12.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as the parable secret in Mark 4:10 to 12

99000:56:12.400 --> 00:56:14.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to you has been given the secret of the kingdom

99100:56:14.530 --> 00:56:15.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of God.

99200:56:15.040 --> 00:56:18.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But to those outside everything comes in parables.

99300:56:18.490 --> 00:56:21.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And in that context, in Mark 4 is paralleled in

99400:56:22.000 --> 00:56:24.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew 13 and in Luke chapter eight.

99500:56:25.210 --> 00:56:29.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>In those in those places, they all quote Isaiah6,

99600:56:29.860 --> 00:56:33.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>which has this idea of people's hearts being hardened.

99700:56:33.730 --> 00:56:37.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John also quotes Isaiah 6, the very same passage in

99800:56:37.780 --> 00:56:41.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>12:39 to 40 hearts that have been hardened.

99900:56:41.050 --> 00:56:44.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So it's very, very similar basic theology.

100000:56:45.550 --> 00:56:48.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think in John, there's even an improvement here

100100:56:48.610 --> 00:56:50.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>on Mark's secrecy theme.

100200:56:50.080 --> 00:56:54.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark's gospel is in many ways unsatisfactory.

100300:56:54.430 --> 00:56:56.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's why I think people kept trying to improve on

100400:56:56.500 --> 00:56:57.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it and rewrite it.

100500:56:57.640 --> 00:57:02.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But Mark's gospel actually ends up with none of the

100600:57:02.440 --> 00:57:03.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>disciples.

100700:57:03.280 --> 00:57:07.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We're not we don't get a narration of the resurrection

100800:57:07.080 --> 00:57:09.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to them and even the female disciples that go to

100900:57:09.870 --> 00:57:11.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the tomb in chapter 16,

101000:57:11.430 --> 00:57:14.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>even they flee at the end and don't say anything

101100:57:14.040 --> 00:57:15.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to anyone, for they were afraid.

101200:57:16.200 --> 00:57:20.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So Mark is kind of strange, the ending, because you're

101300:57:20.700 --> 00:57:23.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>waiting for this big revelation of Jesus, the Messiah, and

101400:57:23.820 --> 00:57:25.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>for the disciples to go, oh, I've been so stupid.

101500:57:25.680 --> 00:57:29.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I understand now in John's gospel that's kind of corrected.

101600:57:30.030 --> 00:57:35.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the disciples explicitly come to believe at the resurrection,

101700:57:36.720 --> 00:57:39.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and you even have one disciple.

101800:57:39.090 --> 00:57:41.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So instead of them all fleeing one of the male

101900:57:41.370 --> 00:57:43.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>disciples, the women are still there at the cross as

102000:57:43.470 --> 00:57:44.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>they are in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

102100:57:44.760 --> 00:57:48.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But one of the male disciples is there in chapter

102200:57:48.420 --> 00:57:50.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>19 at the cross, the beloved disciple.

102300:57:50.640 --> 00:57:52.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you even improve on Mark's theme that one of

102400:57:52.590 --> 00:57:53.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>them remains faithful.

102500:57:53.820 --> 00:57:57.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So John's narrative coheres a little better on this.

102600:57:57.570 --> 00:58:01.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Insiders and outsiders theme, but John also has this

102700:58:01.650 --> 00:58:03.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>idea of Jesus being the hidden Messiah.

102800:58:04.020 --> 00:58:06.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We don't find it intuitive to talk about it in

102900:58:06.720 --> 00:58:09.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John because John's Jesus is so bold.

103000:58:09.990 --> 00:58:12.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He just comes out, I am the way, the truth

103100:58:12.300 --> 00:58:13.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and the life and so on.

103200:58:13.560 --> 00:58:15.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's very bold and you know, he'll just stand up

103300:58:15.720 --> 00:58:20.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>but actually in John, just like in Mark, Jesus

103400:58:20.640 --> 00:58:22.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>keeps withdrawing himself.

103500:58:22.080 --> 00:58:23.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I've put a couple of examples of it on the

103600:58:23.730 --> 00:58:24.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>handout.

103700:58:24.480 --> 00:58:26.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>7:10 to 11 after his brothers had gone to the

103800:58:26.790 --> 00:58:27.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>festival,

103900:58:27.270 --> 00:58:30.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>then he also went not publicly, but as it were,

104000:58:30.420 --> 00:58:31.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in secret.

104100:58:31.110 --> 00:58:33.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The Judeans were looking for him at the festival, saying,

104200:58:33.060 --> 00:58:33.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>where is he?

104300:58:33.720 --> 00:58:36.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, this is literally a hide and seek kind

104400:58:36.030 --> 00:58:37.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of thing going on.

104500:58:37.020 --> 00:58:40.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>12:36 to 37 After Jesus had said this, he departed

104600:58:40.920 --> 00:58:42.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and hid from them.

104700:58:42.030 --> 00:58:44.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Although he had performed so many signs in their presence,

104800:58:44.280 --> 00:58:45.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>they did not believe in him.

104900:58:45.390 --> 00:58:49.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the same idea of Jesus withdrawing and hiding himself

105000:58:49.440 --> 00:58:51.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is present in John as it is in Mark.

105100:58:51.780 --> 00:58:54.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then in chapter 12 you get the combination of

105200:58:54.540 --> 00:58:56.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>both of these motifs.

105300:58:56.010 --> 00:58:59.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The insiders outsiders motif and the hiding motif, and

105400:58:59.940 --> 00:59:01.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's one of the most brilliant.

105500:59:01.440 --> 00:59:06.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John is a fascinating book because sometimes it's it's like

105600:59:06.090 --> 00:59:09.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it's like a it reads like a, like a muddle.

105700:59:09.270 --> 00:59:11.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's really difficult to work out what on Earth is saying,

105800:59:11.790 --> 00:59:13.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>especially the trial narrative.

105900:59:13.260 --> 00:59:15.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, John 18, I've looked at that over and

106000:59:15.810 --> 00:59:16.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>over again.

106100:59:16.200 --> 00:59:17.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What is going on here?

106200:59:17.310 --> 00:59:18.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, I think I've worked out, but anyway.

106300:59:18.600 --> 00:59:20.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But but it's not easy.

106400:59:20.160 --> 00:59:20.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's not easy to work.

106500:59:21.780 --> 00:59:24.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But every now and then there's a bit of sublime

106600:59:24.510 --> 00:59:26.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>literary genius and this is one of them.

106700:59:26.760 --> 00:59:28.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You have to see it, I think, as a drama,

106800:59:28.470 --> 00:59:31.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>because what happens is Jesus hides himself,

106900:59:31.860 --> 00:59:34.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>so you've got that motif. While Jesus is hidden,

107000:59:34.440 --> 00:59:38.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the narrator actually walks forward and starts doing some explanation

107100:59:38.970 --> 00:59:40.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and quoting Isaiah six.

107200:59:40.890 --> 00:59:45.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is someone, I think, who's internalised the Mark story

107300:59:45.600 --> 00:59:48.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and is kind of improved on it and dramatised it.

107400:59:48.810 --> 00:59:50.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I have a whole chapter in oh, well, I'll

107500:59:50.520 --> 00:59:51.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>tell you about that at the end.

107600:59:51.240 --> 00:59:51.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Sorry about at the end.

107700:59:52.590 --> 00:59:53.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Don't get ahead of myself.

107800:59:53.550 --> 00:59:53.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Right.

107900:59:54.000 --> 00:59:57.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You were flipping on the last side of the handout.

108001:00:03.870 --> 01:00:06.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>People key in Mark and in John.

108101:00:06.360 --> 01:00:09.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, in the Synoptics and in John is the resurrection

108201:00:10.350 --> 01:00:10.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Wrede

108301:00:10.920 --> 01:00:14.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>thought that 9:9 was absolutely key, which is

108401:00:14.040 --> 01:00:16.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>where Jesus actually mentions the resurrection to the disciples.

108501:00:16.890 --> 01:00:20.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But it's worked out most clearly, I think, in Luke's

108601:00:20.220 --> 01:00:27.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>gospel, because in 24 you have the angels at the

108701:00:27.180 --> 01:00:29.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>tomb saying, remember?

108801:00:29.910 --> 01:00:31.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I've underlined it how he spoke to you while

108901:00:31.950 --> 01:00:34.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he was in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man

109001:00:34.110 --> 01:00:35.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>must be delivered into the hands of men who were

109101:00:35.790 --> 01:00:39.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>sinners, or have gone, have gone all, um, uh, what

109201:00:39.090 --> 01:00:39.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we call it.

109301:00:39.480 --> 01:00:40.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Non-inclusive there.

109401:00:40.680 --> 01:00:41.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I apologise for that.

109501:00:42.210 --> 01:00:44.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, and be crucified and on the third day rise.

109601:00:44.970 --> 01:00:46.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And they remembered his words.

109701:00:46.770 --> 01:00:49.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the resurrection is the moment when the memory is

109801:00:49.800 --> 01:00:53.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>triggered to get the clarity on the entire underlying plan.

109901:00:54.600 --> 01:00:58.140<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John picks that up and runs with it. Already in

110001:00:58.140 --> 01:01:01.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John 2:22, after he was raised from the dead, his

110101:01:01.380 --> 01:01:04.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>disciples remembered that he had said this, so he already

110201:01:04.980 --> 01:01:08.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>prefigures that it's we're looking at it even though we're

110301:01:08.550 --> 01:01:11.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>reading John two, we're looking at it from the perspective

110401:01:11.850 --> 01:01:12.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of John 20.

110501:01:14.040 --> 01:01:14.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John 12.

110601:01:14.760 --> 01:01:15.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Same thing.

110701:01:15.180 --> 01:01:17.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>His disciples did not understand these things at first, but

110801:01:17.670 --> 01:01:21.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things

110901:01:21.450 --> 01:01:23.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>had been written of him and had been done to

111001:01:23.430 --> 01:01:23.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>him.

111101:01:23.880 --> 01:01:26.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's essentially the same motif that you have in the

111201:01:26.730 --> 01:01:30.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>synoptic Gospels, but John actually pulls it forward so that

111301:01:30.900 --> 01:01:33.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you're conscious that you're reading the whole thing and the

111401:01:33.330 --> 01:01:35.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>light of the resurrection.

111501:01:35.400 --> 01:01:38.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Hans Councilman once said something which I think is kind

111601:01:38.970 --> 01:01:43.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of brilliant, which is that the secrecy theory is the

111701:01:43.170 --> 01:01:47.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>hermeneutical position of the entire gospel genre.

111801:01:47.070 --> 01:01:49.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, this is a day before we knew that the

111901:01:49.020 --> 01:01:52.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Gospels were be-oy, biographies.

112001:01:52.620 --> 01:01:55.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But the point is a kind of a brilliant one

112101:01:55.050 --> 01:01:58.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that the whole literary conceit of writing a gospel is

112201:01:58.380 --> 01:02:01.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>basically saying, we know how the story ended, we understand

112301:02:01.620 --> 01:02:04.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about the resurrection, which helps us to reinterpret everything in

112401:02:04.920 --> 01:02:05.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus's life.

112501:02:05.970 --> 01:02:08.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But telling the story of Jesus's life pre-resurrection is

112601:02:08.640 --> 01:02:09.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>difficult,

112701:02:09.150 --> 01:02:11.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>so you introduce this idea.

112801:02:11.340 --> 01:02:13.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is why people didn't understand.

112901:02:13.680 --> 01:02:16.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is why not everybody recognised Jesus.

113001:02:16.320 --> 01:02:20.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is why those who did recognise Jesus are understand

113101:02:20.370 --> 01:02:21.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that he is the Messiah, the Son of God, and

113201:02:21.960 --> 01:02:23.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that you may have life in his name.

113301:02:23.040 --> 01:02:27.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So it's it's basically the foundation of all four synoptic

113401:02:27.120 --> 01:02:27.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>gospels, I think.

113501:02:30.390 --> 01:02:34.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So what I've tried to argue is that John is

113601:02:34.650 --> 01:02:36.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the fourth Synoptic gospel.

113701:02:36.330 --> 01:02:39.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I don't think I want to argue that we should

113801:02:39.030 --> 01:02:40.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>change the terminology.

113901:02:40.590 --> 01:02:43.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Served us pretty well for quite a while, although if

114001:02:43.350 --> 01:02:45.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>anyone wants to talk me into it, I'll.

114101:02:46.200 --> 01:02:48.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'm happy to argue for it.

114201:02:48.450 --> 01:02:52.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But what I want to say is that the difficulty

114301:02:52.290 --> 01:02:56.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is that we are so obsessed with the language of

114401:02:56.340 --> 01:02:58.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John and the Synoptics that we sort of believe our

114501:02:58.860 --> 01:02:59.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>own rhetoric.

114601:02:59.790 --> 01:03:02.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Like, you know, it's a pedagogical point, and it's good

114701:03:02.610 --> 01:03:04.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to have these pedagogical points, because I want my students

114801:03:04.800 --> 01:03:07.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to know that John's really different from the synoptics.

114901:03:07.200 --> 01:03:09.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But then I start believing my own rhetoric to the

115001:03:09.600 --> 01:03:13.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>point where I isolate John, and I treat John as

115101:03:13.320 --> 01:03:15.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>if he's different in kind and not just different in

115201:03:15.690 --> 01:03:16.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>degree.

115301:03:16.230 --> 01:03:17.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's really the issue here.

115401:03:17.550 --> 01:03:20.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So if we reflect at the end on what if

115501:03:20.670 --> 01:03:22.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John is synoptic, you know, why does it matter?

115601:03:24.120 --> 01:03:26.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think if you treat John in isolation from

115701:03:26.790 --> 01:03:32.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Synoptics, you end up avoiding lots of interesting questions

115801:03:32.370 --> 01:03:34.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about its literary relations.

115901:03:34.230 --> 01:03:38.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You make it like the Johannine community, which is another

116001:03:38.280 --> 01:03:42.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>famous aspect of Johannine scholarship, isolated from the rest of

116101:03:42.420 --> 01:03:43.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the world and unique.

116201:03:43.710 --> 01:03:47.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And you can use to silo it off to one

116301:03:47.580 --> 01:03:48.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>point.

116401:03:48.630 --> 01:03:51.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But where John's parallels with the Synoptics are conceptualised as

116501:03:51.860 --> 01:03:53.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>parallel traditions.

116601:03:53.480 --> 01:03:55.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Sorry, let me change the way that I'm saying that,

116701:03:55.760 --> 01:04:00.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>where John's parallels with the Synoptics parallel.

116801:04:01.730 --> 01:04:04.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It enables us to just remove every problem onto this

116901:04:04.610 --> 01:04:07.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>kind of vague oral tradition

117001:04:07.070 --> 01:04:13.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>sea stream river and it's not recoverable. But where the

117101:04:13.340 --> 01:04:17.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>literary parallels and structures and so on are taken seriously,

117201:04:17.210 --> 01:04:20.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John comes back into conversation with the synoptic Gospels and

117301:04:20.660 --> 01:04:26.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>others, and seeing these literary parallels then demands the question,

117401:04:26.030 --> 01:04:28.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>well, if they are so similar, could it be that

117501:04:28.130 --> 01:04:29.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John knew the Synoptics?

117601:04:29.870 --> 01:04:32.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So just to end, I'd like to say now, it's

117701:04:32.510 --> 01:04:36.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>always difficult giving a paper, which is basically a chapter

117801:04:36.260 --> 01:04:37.820<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in a larger project.

117901:04:37.820 --> 01:04:40.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I'll briefly, just in a couple of sentences, tell

118001:04:40.730 --> 01:04:42.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you how the rest of the the rest of the

118101:04:42.710 --> 01:04:43.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>book pans out.

118201:04:43.310 --> 01:04:47.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>This is chapter two in chapter three, or what I

118301:04:47.360 --> 01:04:51.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>argue is that John knows not just Mark's gospel, but

118401:04:51.230 --> 01:04:53.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew's and Luke's versions of Mark.

118501:04:53.090 --> 01:04:57.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I have a chapter called John from Mark via

118601:04:57.290 --> 01:05:00.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew and Luke. In chapter four

118701:05:00.980 --> 01:05:06.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I argue that John actually presupposes these synoptic gospel narratives.

118801:05:07.940 --> 01:05:12.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John only makes sense if you read him as presupposing

118901:05:12.170 --> 01:05:14.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>narratives that he's not actually narrating.

119001:05:14.570 --> 01:05:16.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The reason we don't usually notice this is we're so

119101:05:16.520 --> 01:05:19.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>familiar with the narratives ourselves that we don't realise that

119201:05:19.070 --> 01:05:21.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John hasn't actually narrated it.

119301:05:21.890 --> 01:05:24.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Ten examples of that I just chose my ten favourite

119401:05:24.320 --> 01:05:25.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I like ten.

119501:05:25.100 --> 01:05:28.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I've got ten examples of Methane and Luke and Redaction.

119601:05:28.670 --> 01:05:31.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Ten examples of John presupposing the Synoptics.

119701:05:31.190 --> 01:05:36.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I, my supervisor doctor supervisor John Goodman, said, never weaken

119801:05:36.020 --> 01:05:39.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a good case by adding weak examples.

119901:05:39.380 --> 01:05:40.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think that's so.

120001:05:40.550 --> 01:05:42.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you have to sort of be disciplined and not

120101:05:42.440 --> 01:05:43.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>be exhaustive.

120201:05:44.570 --> 01:05:48.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I then argue in chapter five that John dramatically transforms

120301:05:48.380 --> 01:05:52.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Synoptics takes synoptic narration and puts it into direct

120401:05:52.250 --> 01:05:55.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>speech, which is a classic dramatists phenomenon.

120501:05:56.780 --> 01:06:00.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So basically, lots of the time where in Mark's gospel,

120601:06:00.680 --> 01:06:02.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a voice crying in the wilderness prepare the way of

120701:06:02.420 --> 01:06:02.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Lord.

120801:06:02.750 --> 01:06:05.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The narrator says that in John's Gospel, John the Baptist

120901:06:05.300 --> 01:06:07.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>says it, and you get that repeatedly.

121001:06:07.040 --> 01:06:08.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They all ate and were satisfied.

121101:06:08.870 --> 01:06:12.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark's narrator says in John's Gospel, you all ate and

121201:06:12.620 --> 01:06:13.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>were satisfied.

121301:06:13.340 --> 01:06:17.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus tells them what the narrator says in Mark, and

121401:06:17.240 --> 01:06:21.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>reading the Synoptic Gospels alongside John means that you can

121501:06:21.350 --> 01:06:25.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>actually reinterpret the oldest problem in John's in the history

121601:06:25.580 --> 01:06:27.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of scholarship on John's gospel, the beloved disciple.

121701:06:27.980 --> 01:06:31.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And it turns out that the traditional answer was right

121801:06:31.130 --> 01:06:31.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>all along.

121901:06:32.360 --> 01:06:35.000<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that and that he was John, son of Zebedee.

122001:06:35.480 --> 01:06:39.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Like, that's a bit of a shocker, but but it

122101:06:39.980 --> 01:06:41.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>turns out that that's the case.

122201:06:41.600 --> 01:06:46.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And finally, that John effects a kind of Christological transformation

122301:06:46.190 --> 01:06:47.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of the Synoptics.

122401:06:47.300 --> 01:06:51.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Every single Christological title, an idea that you get in

122501:06:51.740 --> 01:06:53.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the Synoptic Gospels, is carried over into John.

122601:06:54.350 --> 01:06:57.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, I mean, it's not just Messiah and Son

122701:06:57.260 --> 01:07:00.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of God, but Lord Rabbani.

122801:07:00.710 --> 01:07:05.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Rabbi, the one who comes every single title is actually

122901:07:05.450 --> 01:07:08.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>one that doesn't come from Luke.

123001:07:08.240 --> 01:07:09.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Epistle to Mark.

123101:07:09.320 --> 01:07:10.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's the only one.

123201:07:10.580 --> 01:07:12.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's a very Luke and thing anyway, so we

123301:07:12.470 --> 01:07:14.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>can sideline that, but otherwise it's all there.

123401:07:14.630 --> 01:07:17.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So that's roughly how I kind of tie this up.

123501:07:17.540 --> 01:07:21.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And thank you very much for your attention and looking

123601:07:21.350 --> 01:07:24.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>forward to any thoughts or questions and rebuttals.

123701:07:24.590 --> 01:07:25.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Thank you. [applause]

123801:07:33.920 --> 01:07:35.750<v Prof Helen Bond>Thank you so much, Mark.

123901:07:35.750 --> 01:07:40.160<v Prof Helen Bond>A brilliant and brilliantly delivered lecture.

124001:07:40.160 --> 01:07:41.960<v Prof Helen Bond>And I'm completely on board.

124101:07:42.140 --> 01:07:44.990<v Prof Helen Bond>Um, and so we've got plenty of time now for

124201:07:44.990 --> 01:07:45.770<v Prof Helen Bond>questions.

124301:07:45.800 --> 01:07:48.860<v Prof Helen Bond>Would anybody like to start us off?

124401:07:52.790 --> 01:07:53.450<v Speaker 2>Yes.

124501:07:54.140 --> 01:07:54.410<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

124601:07:54.410 --> 01:07:55.940<v Speaker 2>I'm fascinated by the.

124701:07:55.940 --> 01:07:58.070<v Speaker 2>Thought that when I look at the title, I just

124801:07:58.070 --> 01:07:58.640<v Speaker 2>find it.

124901:07:59.330 --> 01:08:03.290<v Speaker 2>It's sort of confrontational, but I think that what you

125001:08:03.290 --> 01:08:06.230<v Speaker 2>talk about is really clear and also about structure and

125101:08:06.380 --> 01:08:06.950<v Speaker 2>to see.

125201:08:07.370 --> 01:08:09.800<v Speaker 2>Well, there are so many similarities between.

125301:08:10.070 --> 01:08:11.570<v Speaker 2>I mean, among the gospels as well.

125401:08:11.600 --> 01:08:14.510<v Speaker 2>So one question I have in mind is about that.

125501:08:14.750 --> 01:08:18.350<v Speaker 2>So how does the insiders and also the community work

125601:08:18.350 --> 01:08:19.190<v Speaker 2>in John?

125701:08:19.370 --> 01:08:23.870<v Speaker 2>Because I have some uh, because somehow, uh, in my

125801:08:23.870 --> 01:08:26.990<v Speaker 2>perception of I'm gonna be very serious.

125901:08:27.200 --> 01:08:31.460<v Speaker 2>So I'm just add some ethics and maybe a theological

126001:08:31.460 --> 01:08:33.859<v Speaker 5>side point of view, a couple others.

126101:08:33.859 --> 01:08:36.259<v Speaker 2>So, um, I just wonder if we just had the

126201:08:36.259 --> 01:08:41.569<v Speaker 2>past on the about talking about the disciples in the

126301:08:41.569 --> 01:08:45.380<v Speaker 2>Gospel of John sometimes is representing someone who does not

126401:08:45.380 --> 01:08:50.569<v Speaker 2>represent and understand quite clearly what and what Jesus talked

126501:08:50.569 --> 01:08:52.640<v Speaker 2>about, especially in the Samaritan story.

126601:08:52.640 --> 01:08:56.299<v Speaker 2>So, um, Jesus also said to the disciples that I

126701:08:56.299 --> 01:08:58.009<v Speaker 2>have eaten food that I've eaten.

126801:08:58.279 --> 01:09:00.799<v Speaker 2>Sometimes the Samaritan women understand more.

126901:09:00.799 --> 01:09:01.130<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

127001:09:01.130 --> 01:09:03.799<v Speaker 2>And in the rest of this narrative as well.

127101:09:03.799 --> 01:09:09.799<v Speaker 2>And I think Jesus also revealed himself to, uh, Mary

127201:09:09.799 --> 01:09:13.160<v Speaker 2>Magdalene first and then and and then starting over to

127301:09:13.160 --> 01:09:17.839<v Speaker 2>the disciples and even the disciples, Thomas and Thomas afterwards.

127401:09:18.259 --> 01:09:22.730<v Speaker 2>I doubt the his I mean, the reality of Jesus

127501:09:22.730 --> 01:09:23.359<v Speaker 2>resurrection.

127601:09:23.359 --> 01:09:27.350<v Speaker 2>Now, I just curious about how the insider and outsider.

127701:09:28.130 --> 01:09:28.609<v Speaker 2>Okay.

127801:09:29.509 --> 01:09:30.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>No thanks.

127901:09:30.109 --> 01:09:34.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, I think it's it's it's an age old

128001:09:34.250 --> 01:09:36.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>literary trope, isn't it, that you you have to find

128101:09:36.980 --> 01:09:38.509<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a way of empowering the reader.

128201:09:38.509 --> 01:09:40.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've got to make the reader feel special.

128301:09:41.120 --> 01:09:43.819<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And what John does, I think, is he makes the

128401:09:43.819 --> 01:09:46.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>really feel special because like saying the Samaritan woman, you

128501:09:46.130 --> 01:09:49.549<v Prof Mark Goodacre>mentioned the, you know, the that the food and they

128601:09:49.549 --> 01:09:50.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think, oh, he wants us to go and find some

128701:09:50.720 --> 01:09:50.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>food.

128801:09:50.990 --> 01:09:53.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And the reader's thinking, no spiritual food.

128901:09:53.240 --> 01:09:54.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then Jesus says, oh, you spiritual food.

129001:09:55.010 --> 01:09:55.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Oh, yes.

129101:09:55.490 --> 01:09:57.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And the reader thinks, I got that one, you know,

129201:09:57.530 --> 01:10:00.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and and the point is, the reader is reading from

129301:10:00.260 --> 01:10:03.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the perspective of after the end of the gospel, because

129401:10:03.320 --> 01:10:06.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it presupposes that the reader knows how the story ends.

129501:10:06.710 --> 01:10:08.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I think, I think most of the thing it's

129601:10:08.930 --> 01:10:10.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about empowering the reader.

129701:10:11.090 --> 01:10:16.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's a there's one some wonderful dramatic irony in in

129801:10:16.010 --> 01:10:18.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's Gospel as well, I think, which empowers the reader.

129901:10:18.620 --> 01:10:22.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>There's a great moment in chapter seven where everyone's going,

130001:10:22.250 --> 01:10:25.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>well, you know, can't be the Messiah because we all

130101:10:25.100 --> 01:10:27.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>know the Messiah is born in Bethlehem, the city of

130201:10:27.110 --> 01:10:29.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>David, and the reader's thinking.

130301:10:29.930 --> 01:10:33.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think because I think that John expects his readers

130401:10:33.260 --> 01:10:36.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to know the Synoptics, the readers thinking, no, but he

130501:10:36.020 --> 01:10:37.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>was born in Bethlehem, wasn't he?

130601:10:37.580 --> 01:10:40.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And then an extra layer of irony there is.

130701:10:40.270 --> 01:10:42.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But really, he's not from Bethlehem.

130801:10:42.580 --> 01:10:43.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's from above.

130901:10:44.230 --> 01:10:46.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So empowers the reader because the reader is thinking, oh,

131001:10:46.810 --> 01:10:49.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>they're so stupid they don't realise he's born in Bethlehem.

131101:10:49.630 --> 01:10:51.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And ah, they're even more stupid because he's not really

131201:10:51.700 --> 01:10:52.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>from Bethlehem, he's from above.

131301:10:52.930 --> 01:10:54.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's all his earthly Bethlehem.

131401:10:54.160 --> 01:10:56.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But but, you know, so I think it is about

131501:10:56.170 --> 01:10:57.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>empowering the reader.

131601:10:57.850 --> 01:11:00.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's about giving the reader the insight into the mysteries

131701:11:00.700 --> 01:11:05.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to you who's been given the the secret of the

131801:11:06.610 --> 01:11:08.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus and give you the secret of the to know

131901:11:08.680 --> 01:11:09.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the secret.

132001:11:09.340 --> 01:11:11.680<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, in Mark, the secret in Matthew and Luke,

132101:11:11.680 --> 01:11:14.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the secrets that John John's like that as well.

132201:11:14.260 --> 01:11:17.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You've been given the key, I think, and he tells

132301:11:17.230 --> 01:11:17.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you.

132401:11:17.320 --> 01:11:20.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's why the prologue in John, this whole word

132501:11:20.350 --> 01:11:23.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>made flesh is so important because he puts the whole

132601:11:23.710 --> 01:11:25.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>story in the cosmic stage right at the beginning.

132701:11:25.780 --> 01:11:27.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So you then read the whole of the rest of

132801:11:27.070 --> 01:11:28.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it in the light of that cosmic story.

132901:11:29.830 --> 01:11:30.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Thank you, thank you.

133001:11:32.140 --> 01:11:32.590<v Prof Helen Bond>Yeah.

133101:11:33.550 --> 01:11:33.880<v Speaker 2>Thank you.

133201:11:33.880 --> 01:11:34.150<v Speaker 2>Mark.

133301:11:34.150 --> 01:11:35.800<v Speaker 2>I'm on the board as well.

133401:11:36.340 --> 01:11:40.960<v Speaker 2>I'm interested, however, in Matthew Lawson has this idea of

133501:11:40.960 --> 01:11:42.970<v Speaker 2>a sort of progressive publication.

133601:11:42.970 --> 01:11:44.230<v Speaker 2>Yes, of gospels.

133701:11:44.410 --> 01:11:50.680<v Speaker 2>And would ancient readers really have considered Matthew as a

133801:11:50.680 --> 01:11:52.570<v Speaker 2>different world than Mark?

133901:11:52.780 --> 01:11:53.110<v Speaker 2>Mhm.

134001:11:53.530 --> 01:11:55.750<v Speaker 2>Chances are that we think it's a new edition.

134101:11:56.530 --> 01:12:00.460<v Speaker 2>Uh, would they have understood, John, to be a new

134201:12:00.460 --> 01:12:01.030<v Speaker 2>edition?

134301:12:01.810 --> 01:12:05.740<v Speaker 2>Mark, I can see the, you know, the strongest similarity.

134401:12:05.740 --> 01:12:06.040<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

134501:12:06.370 --> 01:12:06.790<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

134601:12:07.420 --> 01:12:08.980<v Speaker 2>You can see how they did that.

134701:12:10.120 --> 01:12:12.010<v Speaker 2>They think the same Mark.

134801:12:12.010 --> 01:12:15.250<v Speaker 2>And another great question analogies that might help us think

134901:12:15.250 --> 01:12:15.700<v Speaker 2>about this.

135001:12:15.820 --> 01:12:16.120<v Speaker 2>Mhm.

135101:12:16.390 --> 01:12:22.120<v Speaker 2>For example Genesis Jubilees and the Genesis for the same.

135201:12:22.120 --> 01:12:22.540<v Speaker 2>Right.

135301:12:22.990 --> 01:12:24.340<v Speaker 2>Again quite different.

135401:12:24.550 --> 01:12:24.880<v Speaker 2>Mhm.

135501:12:25.060 --> 01:12:28.630<v Speaker 2>Say that Jubilees is like Matthew with Genesis.

135601:12:28.630 --> 01:12:30.640<v Speaker 2>But the Genesis was like John.

135701:12:31.510 --> 01:12:31.810<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

135801:12:32.470 --> 01:12:33.550<v Speaker 2>So I was wondering yeah.

135901:12:34.390 --> 01:12:35.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, it's a great question.

136001:12:35.200 --> 01:12:37.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, the for those that don't know Matt Larson's

136101:12:37.870 --> 01:12:40.870<v Prof Mark Goodacre>work and he's argued that that basically people would have

136201:12:40.870 --> 01:12:44.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>seen the Gospels as kind of, um, collections of notes,

136301:12:44.230 --> 01:12:46.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as it were, ready to sort of be expanded and

136401:12:46.840 --> 01:12:47.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>changed.

136501:12:47.470 --> 01:12:51.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I, I'm kind of with Larson some of the way

136601:12:51.460 --> 01:12:52.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>on Mark.

136701:12:52.660 --> 01:12:55.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think that people would have read and the evidence

136801:12:55.480 --> 01:12:58.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is did read Mark as being unfinished, whether it Mark

136901:12:58.450 --> 01:13:01.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>intended to finish the gospel at 16 eight or not.

137001:13:01.420 --> 01:13:03.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think people thought, well, he can't have meant to

137101:13:03.280 --> 01:13:04.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>end it there, the fresh endings.

137201:13:04.990 --> 01:13:07.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So they thought it was unfinished.

137301:13:07.210 --> 01:13:10.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Even if even if it even if it was finished,

137401:13:11.710 --> 01:13:12.460<v Prof Mark Goodacre>but I don't.

137501:13:12.460 --> 01:13:15.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But to me, it's where I, where I struggle with,

137601:13:15.550 --> 01:13:18.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>with Matt's work on that is I don't think there's

137701:13:18.130 --> 01:13:20.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>any evidence anyone saw Matthew or John that way.

137801:13:20.950 --> 01:13:23.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, I mean people I mean, as early as

137901:13:23.800 --> 01:13:26.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we go, people were talking about, you know, Matthew's gospel

138001:13:26.890 --> 01:13:28.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as Matthew's gospel.

138101:13:28.240 --> 01:13:31.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, we don't see references to hybrids and things

138201:13:31.210 --> 01:13:32.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>like that.

138301:13:32.110 --> 01:13:33.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And irony is things.

138401:13:33.670 --> 01:13:37.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, irony is really not many decades after the

138501:13:37.570 --> 01:13:38.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>writing of these.

138601:13:38.560 --> 01:13:41.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And he already thinks these are four distinct works, as

138701:13:41.620 --> 01:13:44.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>distinct as, you know, four corners of the earth, you

138801:13:44.320 --> 01:13:44.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>know.

138901:13:44.800 --> 01:13:46.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I don't go for that.

139001:13:46.450 --> 01:13:49.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But the bit, which I do think is fascinating in

139101:13:49.360 --> 01:13:52.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the question about Genesis often I wrote an article on

139201:13:52.360 --> 01:13:55.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>hypostasis of the Archons, which retells the Genesis story.

139301:13:55.960 --> 01:13:57.790<v Speaker 4>And there's no there's not.

139401:13:57.790 --> 01:13:59.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>A chance that's trying to replace Genesis.

139501:14:00.130 --> 01:14:03.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You're supposed to be reading, I think you're supposed to

139601:14:03.160 --> 01:14:06.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>read hypostasis of the Archons alongside Genesis, and it tells

139701:14:06.430 --> 01:14:07.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you a bit more of the story.

139801:14:07.810 --> 01:14:11.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's like it's presupposed, you know, about Cain and Abel,

139901:14:11.380 --> 01:14:12.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and then he's going to tell you a little bit

140001:14:12.430 --> 01:14:14.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>more about what's happening in the sort of cosmic level.

140101:14:15.040 --> 01:14:16.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's a little bit like that, I think.

140201:14:16.630 --> 01:14:20.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think, I don't think John thinks he can replace

140301:14:20.830 --> 01:14:23.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the synoptic gospels, and that's why he presupposes them.

140401:14:23.530 --> 01:14:25.120<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Sometimes it doesn't need to tell.

140501:14:25.120 --> 01:14:28.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The Eucharist narrative doesn't need to tell the Transfiguration, but

140601:14:28.570 --> 01:14:29.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he does presuppose them.

140701:14:30.220 --> 01:14:33.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Even quotes from I think so, I think John, I

140801:14:33.640 --> 01:14:34.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think John is not.

140901:14:34.510 --> 01:14:38.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's one thing I would I feel that it's

141001:14:38.350 --> 01:14:40.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>one of the big questions, I think this, that John's

141101:14:40.270 --> 01:14:45.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>use of the Synoptics helps to solve is John isn't

141201:14:45.190 --> 01:14:46.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>trying to replace them.

141301:14:46.990 --> 01:14:49.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think I think my guess is there's all, you

141401:14:49.540 --> 01:14:50.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>know, hypotheses.

141501:14:50.200 --> 01:14:53.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But my guess is that he knows he can't at

141601:14:53.380 --> 01:14:56.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>this point, that they're already so popular that his best

141701:14:56.740 --> 01:14:58.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>bet is to say, okay, I've got another angle.

141801:14:59.050 --> 01:15:01.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's really what Gospel of Thomas is doing as well.

141901:15:01.180 --> 01:15:02.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I've got another angle here.

142001:15:02.410 --> 01:15:03.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'll tell you the secret stuff.

142101:15:03.760 --> 01:15:06.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They love secrets, you know, there's all the public stuff.

142201:15:06.700 --> 01:15:08.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And it's quite ironic that Thomas thinks that.

142301:15:08.260 --> 01:15:10.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But anyway, he says there's all that public stuff.

142401:15:10.360 --> 01:15:11.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, I'm going to tell you this stuff, he whispered

142501:15:11.890 --> 01:15:14.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>into my ear, you know, so I think John's a

142601:15:14.050 --> 01:15:14.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>bit like that.

142701:15:14.890 --> 01:15:18.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So there's a bit of a roundabout way of answering

142801:15:18.010 --> 01:15:20.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>question, but I'm not with Larson.

142901:15:20.650 --> 01:15:25.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>These are all kind of rewriting the same thing.

143001:15:25.180 --> 01:15:26.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think Matthew is like that to Mark.

143101:15:26.440 --> 01:15:29.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's trying to rewrite Mark to some extent, Lucas as

143201:15:29.020 --> 01:15:29.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>well.

143301:15:29.290 --> 01:15:32.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But Matthew Murphy, I think, does think he can absorb

143401:15:32.110 --> 01:15:35.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark and replace it and he nearly achieved it.

143501:15:36.040 --> 01:15:39.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But um, Mark battled on through and survived.

143601:15:40.210 --> 01:15:40.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know.

143701:15:40.480 --> 01:15:40.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Mark.

143801:15:40.780 --> 01:15:40.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

143901:15:41.230 --> 01:15:43.600<v Prof Helen Bond>So you've got, uh, William and then Paul.

144001:15:43.600 --> 01:15:43.930<v Prof Helen Bond>William.

144101:15:44.110 --> 01:15:44.410<v Speaker 2>Sure.

144201:15:44.410 --> 01:15:44.710<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

144301:15:44.710 --> 01:15:46.720<v Speaker 2>Mark, thank you for this, uh, lecture.

144401:15:47.140 --> 01:15:49.870<v Speaker 6>I'm a doctoral student working on this topic cause my

144501:15:49.870 --> 01:15:50.800<v Speaker 6>life's almost.

144601:15:50.800 --> 01:15:51.220<v Speaker 2>Done.

144701:15:52.300 --> 01:15:53.020<v Speaker 6>With this book.

144801:15:53.800 --> 01:15:55.780<v Speaker 6>Um, and I'm looking at it through the lens, like

144901:15:55.870 --> 01:15:58.390<v Speaker 6>Daniel just said, uh, some of these other Jewish texts,

145001:15:58.390 --> 01:16:00.970<v Speaker 6>this, this question through the lens of stuff like this

145101:16:00.970 --> 01:16:02.020<v Speaker 6>is part of a jubilee.

145201:16:02.920 --> 01:16:04.630<v Speaker 6>Um, but I'm looking more at Mark.

145301:16:04.630 --> 01:16:07.540<v Speaker 6>I'm not really focusing on Luke and Matthew.

145401:16:08.170 --> 01:16:09.850<v Speaker 6>Uh, when it comes to I mean, this is very

145501:16:09.850 --> 01:16:14.020<v Speaker 6>well argued, like when it comes to Luke in particular,

145601:16:14.470 --> 01:16:16.480<v Speaker 6>I have to say I'm kind of on the fence

145701:16:16.480 --> 01:16:18.700<v Speaker 6>on some of these away more than I am from

145801:16:18.700 --> 01:16:19.090<v Speaker 6>here.

145901:16:19.270 --> 01:16:22.030<v Speaker 6>And I'm just curious how you would answer a question

146001:16:22.030 --> 01:16:25.570<v Speaker 6>like, um, how should I say this?

146101:16:25.570 --> 01:16:27.820<v Speaker 6>Maybe like a two part hard questions to those who

146201:16:27.820 --> 01:16:30.100<v Speaker 6>would say, like, you know, it's hard to date.

146301:16:30.460 --> 01:16:31.690<v Speaker 6>Like, what are we?

146401:16:31.720 --> 01:16:33.700<v Speaker 6>There are people that would put me pretty close to

146501:16:33.910 --> 01:16:35.470<v Speaker 6>someone say, you post this job.

146601:16:36.490 --> 01:16:40.030<v Speaker 6>Um, and it's kind of hard to determine, especially if

146701:16:40.030 --> 01:16:41.080<v Speaker 6>you're right that you knew that.

146801:16:41.410 --> 01:16:44.260<v Speaker 6>Yeah, because then you're getting really close, depending on how

146901:16:44.260 --> 01:16:45.670<v Speaker 6>you're dating John here.

147001:16:45.670 --> 01:16:47.440<v Speaker 6>So that's one question I get.

147101:16:47.440 --> 01:16:49.450<v Speaker 6>I'm just curious how you would respond to them.

147201:16:49.450 --> 01:16:50.890<v Speaker 6>And kind of second part of that.

147301:16:51.550 --> 01:16:51.850<v Speaker 7>Um.

147401:16:52.210 --> 01:16:55.420<v Speaker 6>Is in the case of the anointing, yeah, you have

147501:16:55.420 --> 01:16:58.270<v Speaker 6>these very like important overlaps, like, okay, so the woman

147601:16:58.270 --> 01:17:00.070<v Speaker 6>wipes his feet with her hair.

147701:17:00.070 --> 01:17:02.020<v Speaker 6>And these companies are very hard to explain.

147801:17:02.590 --> 01:17:05.500<v Speaker 6>But at the same time, like Luke's anointing narrative is

147901:17:06.370 --> 01:17:09.760<v Speaker 6>more than twice as long as both Mark and John's

148001:17:09.760 --> 01:17:10.390<v Speaker 6>and greed.

148101:17:10.720 --> 01:17:13.360<v Speaker 6>And it's so radically different that it just kind of

148201:17:13.360 --> 01:17:15.700<v Speaker 6>raised some questions about like, I mean, I don't even

148301:17:15.700 --> 01:17:17.920<v Speaker 6>know if that's an anointing he's talking about.

148401:17:17.950 --> 01:17:18.220<v Speaker 6>Mhm.

148501:17:18.670 --> 01:17:20.110<v Speaker 6>In terms of how we're titling it.

148601:17:20.920 --> 01:17:23.110<v Speaker 6>Um, so when you look at something like that, I

148701:17:23.110 --> 01:17:25.260<v Speaker 6>mean that even raises questions like why would you leave

148801:17:25.440 --> 01:17:27.120<v Speaker 6>a mark that would that radically?

148901:17:27.210 --> 01:17:29.940<v Speaker 6>Um, uh, and he has things like the alabaster jar,

149001:17:29.940 --> 01:17:33.510<v Speaker 6>the stuff is still in there and the greed, but

149101:17:33.510 --> 01:17:34.500<v Speaker 6>you get where I'm going.

149201:17:34.500 --> 01:17:36.060<v Speaker 6>But I'm just wondering, like the first, how would you

149301:17:36.060 --> 01:17:37.380<v Speaker 6>answer the question about dating?

149401:17:37.710 --> 01:17:41.460<v Speaker 6>And then second, um, in a, in an instance like

149501:17:41.460 --> 01:17:44.940<v Speaker 6>Luke's anointing, uh, what do you think about that is

149601:17:44.940 --> 01:17:48.180<v Speaker 6>that people would just say, well, that's there's just too

149701:17:48.180 --> 01:17:51.570<v Speaker 6>much degree that you have a kind of creates a

149801:17:51.570 --> 01:17:53.160<v Speaker 6>difficulty for understanding a method.

149901:17:53.550 --> 01:17:54.630<v Speaker 6>Why he would use this.

150001:17:54.870 --> 01:17:55.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Sure.

150101:17:55.740 --> 01:17:56.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, thanks.

150201:17:56.280 --> 01:17:57.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's really helpful.

150301:17:57.030 --> 01:18:00.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The, the on the question of this is probably one

150401:18:00.510 --> 01:18:02.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of the more controversial areas in this.

150501:18:02.370 --> 01:18:04.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Did John know Luke or Luke know John if there's

150601:18:04.260 --> 01:18:05.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>if there is a connection, a lot of people say

150701:18:05.730 --> 01:18:06.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>there isn't.

150801:18:06.780 --> 01:18:10.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think that John is secondary in lots of places

150901:18:10.260 --> 01:18:13.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and I argue, I realise that I'm bringing forward stuff

151001:18:13.230 --> 01:18:14.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that haven't, you know, dealt with here.

151101:18:14.880 --> 01:18:17.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But I argue in my chat to three that John

151201:18:17.400 --> 01:18:20.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>shows knowledge of Luke's redaction of Mark, and I make

151301:18:20.340 --> 01:18:23.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it uncontroversial by just take five examples of Luke's rejection

151401:18:23.400 --> 01:18:24.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of Mark.

151501:18:24.420 --> 01:18:26.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I give one example, which I think is one of

151601:18:26.640 --> 01:18:29.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the strongest, and I think it's remarkable no one ever

151701:18:29.250 --> 01:18:32.220<v Prof Mark Goodacre>comments on it, or very rarely people comment on it.

151801:18:32.220 --> 01:18:37.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But in the trial narrative, three times in Luke and

151901:18:37.200 --> 01:18:41.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in John, Pilate says, I find no cause against this

152001:18:41.910 --> 01:18:42.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>person.

152101:18:42.900 --> 01:18:45.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, one of the things that's really striking, that's striking

152201:18:45.690 --> 01:18:48.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>already is a parallel one that's really interesting is the

152301:18:48.270 --> 01:18:52.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>way that that's expressed about finding, though, cause three times

152401:18:53.850 --> 01:18:55.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is a very Lucan way of doing it all the

152501:18:55.830 --> 01:18:58.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>way through Luke and acts, when he has people that

152601:18:58.920 --> 01:19:01.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>are brought against the authorities.

152701:19:01.740 --> 01:19:05.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You'll get the line they found no cause for.

152801:19:05.190 --> 01:19:07.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a forensic use of the thing, and it's only

152901:19:07.530 --> 01:19:08.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>found there in John.

153001:19:08.580 --> 01:19:12.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But it's frequently Luke and acts, so I see John

153101:19:12.780 --> 01:19:15.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as secondary to Luke in cases like that and and

153201:19:15.420 --> 01:19:16.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>other ones as well.

153301:19:16.200 --> 01:19:19.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The anointing I think you can make good sense of

153401:19:19.230 --> 01:19:23.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as well that it takes a longer, harder trawl.

153501:19:23.670 --> 01:19:27.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But getting getting the question about the sheer difference between

153601:19:27.720 --> 01:19:30.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Luke and John there and between Luke and the Synoptics

153701:19:30.930 --> 01:19:31.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>there.

153801:19:32.070 --> 01:19:37.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What's difficult is I think we get seduced by how

153901:19:37.230 --> 01:19:39.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>similar the Synoptics are to one another.

154001:19:39.390 --> 01:19:41.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>A lot of the times, so that we start thinking

154101:19:41.040 --> 01:19:42.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that that's the norm.

154201:19:42.180 --> 01:19:44.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's actually really unusual in antiquity.

154301:19:44.310 --> 01:19:45.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, I mean, as you all know from your

154401:19:45.660 --> 01:19:48.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>work, I mean, on on things like Genesis, Apocrypha and

154501:19:48.450 --> 01:19:49.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jubilees and so on.

154601:19:49.770 --> 01:19:53.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, often they massively different from the source material.

154701:19:53.610 --> 01:19:58.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So to an extent, that's the way Josephus retells stories

154801:19:58.980 --> 01:20:00.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>from the Old Testament.

154901:20:00.630 --> 01:20:03.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>They're often dramatically different real paraphrases.

155001:20:03.990 --> 01:20:06.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I don't think we should ever be surprised when

155101:20:06.540 --> 01:20:08.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>we see someone telling a story really differently like Luke

155201:20:08.850 --> 01:20:09.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>sometimes does.

155301:20:09.690 --> 01:20:11.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What we should be surprised by is when they tell

155401:20:11.970 --> 01:20:12.300<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the story.

155501:20:12.300 --> 01:20:15.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So similarly, that's what I think is really surprising.

155601:20:15.570 --> 01:20:18.690<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I just think we I found the same thing

155701:20:18.690 --> 01:20:20.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>with Thomas people, are they?

155801:20:20.250 --> 01:20:22.920<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Thomas is nowhere near as similar to the Synoptics as

155901:20:22.920 --> 01:20:23.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>they are to one another.

156001:20:23.880 --> 01:20:24.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Correct?

156101:20:24.510 --> 01:20:25.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's not.

156201:20:25.080 --> 01:20:28.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But Thomas is more normal in having that, you know,

156301:20:28.290 --> 01:20:29.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>being a bit further away.

156401:20:29.130 --> 01:20:32.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, the collection that Helen co-edited, I think several

156501:20:32.910 --> 01:20:35.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>authors make that point really clearly that, you know, the

156601:20:35.250 --> 01:20:38.010<v Prof Mark Goodacre>norm is, is is paraphrase, you know, so that's where

156701:20:38.010 --> 01:20:38.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I would go on the anointing.

156801:20:38.970 --> 01:20:40.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I realise that some people just say, no, it's

156901:20:40.530 --> 01:20:41.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>just too different.

157001:20:41.100 --> 01:20:42.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's fair enough.

157101:20:42.390 --> 01:20:43.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But I don't buy that.

157201:20:44.640 --> 01:20:45.150<v Prof Helen Bond>Paul.

157301:20:45.840 --> 01:20:48.870<v Speaker 8>Mark, thank you very much for such a wonderfully engaging

157401:20:48.870 --> 01:20:51.060<v Speaker 8>paper and I look forward to reading the book.

157501:20:51.840 --> 01:20:55.800<v Speaker 8>I was grateful for the percentages you gave us and

157601:20:55.800 --> 01:20:58.950<v Speaker 8>held us to account upon narrative.

157701:20:59.370 --> 01:21:02.790<v Speaker 8>I wonder if I can ask a question about your

157801:21:02.790 --> 01:21:05.940<v Speaker 8>case for John's knowledge of Matthew.

157901:21:05.940 --> 01:21:10.350<v Speaker 8>You gave us two examples the string of eight words

158001:21:10.350 --> 01:21:11.220<v Speaker 8>in the anointing.

158101:21:11.220 --> 01:21:13.920<v Speaker 8>But yes, really all of those eight words are in

158201:21:13.920 --> 01:21:15.060<v Speaker 8>Mark there agreeing.

158301:21:15.090 --> 01:21:15.390<v Speaker 8>That's right.

158401:21:15.420 --> 01:21:16.770<v Speaker 8>Omitting the safety.

158501:21:16.770 --> 01:21:17.280<v Speaker 2>Yes.

158601:21:17.520 --> 01:21:19.080<v Speaker 8>And you also gave us.

158701:21:19.080 --> 01:21:22.350<v Speaker 8>You are the Christ, the Son of God, the son

158801:21:22.350 --> 01:21:23.250<v Speaker 8>of the living God.

158901:21:23.280 --> 01:21:27.240<v Speaker 8>In Matthew four of those words from Mark in some

159001:21:27.240 --> 01:21:29.040<v Speaker 8>manuscripts, all these words.

159101:21:29.040 --> 01:21:29.460<v Speaker 2>Yes.

159201:21:29.490 --> 01:21:29.790<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

159301:21:29.790 --> 01:21:32.910<v Speaker 8>So, you know, percentages are important.

159401:21:32.910 --> 01:21:37.290<v Speaker 8>I think Matthew has 18,345 words.

159501:21:37.740 --> 01:21:38.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Okay.

159601:21:38.220 --> 01:21:38.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

159701:21:38.670 --> 01:21:38.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So.

159801:21:39.750 --> 01:21:41.700<v Speaker 2>Yeah, you've given us even.

159901:21:42.720 --> 01:21:43.050<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

160001:21:45.900 --> 01:21:48.510<v Speaker 8>You know, you want to be held accountable to the

160101:21:48.510 --> 01:21:49.140<v Speaker 8>percentage.

160201:21:49.140 --> 01:21:49.410<v Speaker 8>Yes.

160301:21:49.740 --> 01:21:53.460<v Speaker 8>Less than 0.1% of agreement.

160401:21:53.550 --> 01:21:53.790<v Speaker 8>Mhm.

160501:21:54.510 --> 01:21:58.290<v Speaker 8>Didn't Sean waste his time reading Matthew and not using

160601:21:58.290 --> 01:22:01.050<v Speaker 8>more than 99.9%.

160701:22:01.050 --> 01:22:06.450<v Speaker 8>But I mean surely your own argument one is agreement

160801:22:06.450 --> 01:22:07.800<v Speaker 8>and then permission.

160901:22:08.250 --> 01:22:11.700<v Speaker 8>The others slightly extended Christological titles.

161001:22:11.760 --> 01:22:11.970<v Speaker 2>Mhm.

161101:22:12.390 --> 01:22:15.840<v Speaker 8>I find this, you know, the mark and stuff you

161201:22:15.840 --> 01:22:20.130<v Speaker 8>have obviously a strong case scholarship is has swung in

161301:22:20.130 --> 01:22:20.340<v Speaker 8>that.

161401:22:20.340 --> 01:22:22.560<v Speaker 2>Direction and probably but.

161501:22:23.190 --> 01:22:27.480<v Speaker 8>You know the Matthew case is just not even the

161601:22:27.480 --> 01:22:27.990<v Speaker 8>icing.

161701:22:27.990 --> 01:22:29.760<v Speaker 8>It's a bit of dusting on the icing.

161801:22:29.910 --> 01:22:30.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well yeah.

161901:22:30.780 --> 01:22:32.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean it's another one of these things.

162001:22:32.310 --> 01:22:35.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Another one is slightly unfair things that I'll say well

162101:22:35.580 --> 01:22:36.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>elsewhere in the book.

162201:22:36.420 --> 01:22:40.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But but I mean, so, so the example I really

162301:22:40.620 --> 01:22:42.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>wanted to use here, but I can't because I'm saving

162401:22:42.600 --> 01:22:45.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it for chapter three is the is the crown of

162501:22:45.270 --> 01:22:46.140<v Prof Mark Goodacre>thorns.

162601:22:46.140 --> 01:22:49.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So the way that Matthew rewards Mark's crown of thorns

162701:22:49.620 --> 01:22:52.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>story, um, agrees very closely with John.

162801:22:53.010 --> 01:22:55.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So, so John, Saint John, I argue in chapter three,

162901:22:55.740 --> 01:22:57.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>has knowledge of that of that story.

163001:22:57.210 --> 01:23:00.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So and then I have four further examples.

163101:23:00.810 --> 01:23:04.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, one of the, one of the classics is,

163201:23:04.020 --> 01:23:06.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is in the burial story, where we not only have

163301:23:06.840 --> 01:23:09.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Joseph as a disciple of Jesus, which is unique to

163401:23:09.600 --> 01:23:11.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Matthew and John, but we have the introduction of this

163501:23:11.970 --> 01:23:14.880<v Prof Mark Goodacre>as being a new tomb, too, which is which is

163601:23:14.880 --> 01:23:17.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>something that Matthew adds to Mark, and John takes over,

163701:23:17.070 --> 01:23:17.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I argue.

163801:23:17.940 --> 01:23:21.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So okay, these are these couple of examples here that

163901:23:21.990 --> 01:23:23.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mentioned as we're going through.

164001:23:23.940 --> 01:23:26.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But there are there are lots more I think.

164101:23:26.280 --> 01:23:30.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I suppose the Messiah, the Son of God one

164201:23:30.060 --> 01:23:34.140<v Prof Mark Goodacre>is interesting because I thought to myself, well, that's just

164301:23:34.140 --> 01:23:35.970<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the kind of thing surely everybody thought.

164401:23:35.970 --> 01:23:38.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But then the only two places in the whole of

164501:23:38.040 --> 01:23:40.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the New Testament where you get the Messiah, the Son

164601:23:40.860 --> 01:23:44.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of God, are in twice in Matthew and twice in

164701:23:44.280 --> 01:23:44.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John.

164801:23:44.700 --> 01:23:46.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, the second time it comes in, John is,

164901:23:46.560 --> 01:23:50.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you know, is 20, 30 and 31, right?

165001:23:50.370 --> 01:23:50.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Right.

165101:23:50.730 --> 01:23:51.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah, yeah, yeah.

165201:23:52.170 --> 01:23:54.030<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And to be fair, I wish that.

165301:23:54.030 --> 01:23:56.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I wish that if Mark won one, if we went,

165401:23:56.760 --> 01:23:59.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>if we did go Messiah Son of God, that that

165501:23:59.130 --> 01:24:01.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>would help me, I think, because I want to argue

165601:24:01.020 --> 01:24:04.140<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that John is taking forward that fundamental Christology from the

165701:24:04.140 --> 01:24:04.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Synoptics.

165801:24:04.800 --> 01:24:07.770<v Speaker 8>But but it just seems to me a funny way

165901:24:07.770 --> 01:24:11.270<v Speaker 8>of reading that you take him out in the story.

166001:24:11.930 --> 01:24:16.940<v Speaker 8>And then you just take the odd word from Matthew

166101:24:16.970 --> 01:24:17.360<v Speaker 8>here.

166201:24:17.360 --> 01:24:20.930<v Speaker 8>But at no point, having read this, do you take

166301:24:21.290 --> 01:24:28.730<v Speaker 8>any story that uniquely Martha or and it just seems

166401:24:28.880 --> 01:24:32.960<v Speaker 8>more the view of a scholar than the work of

166501:24:32.960 --> 01:24:33.710<v Speaker 8>an ancient.

166601:24:33.890 --> 01:24:34.490<v Speaker 4>Well, I.

166701:24:34.490 --> 01:24:37.100<v Speaker 8>Just to take sure and drop it back in.

166801:24:37.100 --> 01:24:38.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, I don't, but the thing is, I don't think

166901:24:38.780 --> 01:24:40.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that they're thinking, you know, of of.

167001:24:40.940 --> 01:24:42.890<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Oh, well, you know, I'll pull this word here and

167101:24:42.890 --> 01:24:43.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>throw it in.

167201:24:43.580 --> 01:24:46.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's all about kind of having digested the whole and

167301:24:46.580 --> 01:24:49.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it being in your bloodstream so that phrases like Messiah,

167401:24:49.760 --> 01:24:51.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Son of God, you know, come out.

167501:24:51.890 --> 01:24:54.950<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, and I think, I think the thing is

167601:24:54.950 --> 01:24:55.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that.

167701:24:56.180 --> 01:25:00.080<v Speaker 8>Is that almost getting into the realms of a type

167801:25:00.080 --> 01:25:06.710<v Speaker 8>of morality, if if that's happened within John's audience or

167901:25:06.710 --> 01:25:08.690<v Speaker 8>even for, I mean, yes.

168001:25:08.690 --> 01:25:09.080<v Speaker 2>Doing.

168101:25:09.110 --> 01:25:11.300<v Speaker 8>This textually at any level.

168201:25:11.300 --> 01:25:15.110<v Speaker 8>So what kind of knowledge of these texts is it?

168301:25:15.110 --> 01:25:17.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And that's an excellent point.

168401:25:17.390 --> 01:25:18.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think that I think that's right.

168501:25:18.860 --> 01:25:22.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, because even if you go for a very

168601:25:22.130 --> 01:25:26.180<v Prof Mark Goodacre>closely literary version of John's use of the synoptics, which

168701:25:26.180 --> 01:25:28.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I don't, even if you did, you're still talking about

168801:25:28.490 --> 01:25:30.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>someone dictating to a scribe.

168901:25:30.470 --> 01:25:32.660<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, I assume that all four evangelists are dictating

169001:25:32.660 --> 01:25:33.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to scribes.

169101:25:33.110 --> 01:25:35.540<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So even that bit of the thing is oral.

169201:25:35.540 --> 01:25:39.320<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But but yes, I think what happens is the I

169301:25:39.320 --> 01:25:41.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>can quote bits of Matthew better than I can quote

169401:25:41.960 --> 01:25:44.840<v Prof Mark Goodacre>bits of Luke, because Matthew's poetry, like the one who

169501:25:44.840 --> 01:25:46.430<v Prof Mark Goodacre>lives by the sword, shall die by the sword.

169601:25:46.430 --> 01:25:47.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's really memorable.

169701:25:47.720 --> 01:25:49.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, Matthew is good at doing those kind of

169801:25:49.340 --> 01:25:49.910<v Prof Mark Goodacre>things.

169901:25:49.910 --> 01:25:53.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So but that's me remembering something that's written.

170001:25:53.810 --> 01:25:56.390<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So it's from the written to the memory to the

170101:25:56.390 --> 01:25:57.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>oral presentation of it.

170201:25:57.710 --> 01:25:59.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think that's true as well of John's gospel,

170301:25:59.990 --> 01:26:03.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that I think he goes from the memorable Matthias isms

170401:26:03.260 --> 01:26:06.980<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and market ism, Anglicanism, and then they're repurposed.

170501:26:07.220 --> 01:26:08.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, we say the same thing in Matthew's use

170601:26:08.750 --> 01:26:09.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of Mark.

170701:26:09.200 --> 01:26:11.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, something that in a completely different context.

170801:26:11.990 --> 01:26:13.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Suddenly it suddenly pops up.

170901:26:13.130 --> 01:26:14.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Same thing with Luke's use of Mark.

171001:26:14.930 --> 01:26:16.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, things in different contexts.

171101:26:16.220 --> 01:26:17.150<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, pop up.

171201:26:17.270 --> 01:26:20.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John does the same thing, you know, like the the

171301:26:20.060 --> 01:26:22.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>prophets, not without honour in John force.

171401:26:22.640 --> 01:26:24.710<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And he pops up in a different context, you know.

171501:26:25.160 --> 01:26:26.750<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, so yeah.

171601:26:26.750 --> 01:26:27.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So great.

171701:26:27.020 --> 01:26:27.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's great.

171801:26:27.440 --> 01:26:28.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a great question.

171901:26:28.340 --> 01:26:30.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But I suppose tell me again what you think once

172001:26:30.590 --> 01:26:32.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you've seen the other, you've seen the other examples.

172101:26:33.560 --> 01:26:36.350<v Prof Helen Bond>Can I ask you about, I mean, this whole thing

172201:26:36.350 --> 01:26:38.960<v Prof Helen Bond>about, you know, the Synoptics and then John, yeah, this

172301:26:38.960 --> 01:26:41.060<v Prof Helen Bond>strikes me is relatively modern thing.

172401:26:41.060 --> 01:26:41.330<v Prof Helen Bond>There is.

172501:26:41.450 --> 01:26:44.240<v Prof Helen Bond>I mean, you mentioned Gardner Smith and that's a terrible

172601:26:44.240 --> 01:26:44.600<v Prof Helen Bond>book.

172701:26:44.780 --> 01:26:47.090<v Prof Helen Bond>I mean, I, I read it, I don't know, about

172801:26:47.090 --> 01:26:47.750<v Prof Helen Bond>five years ago.

172901:26:47.810 --> 01:26:49.370<v Prof Helen Bond>It's one of those things that you think I'm always

173001:26:49.370 --> 01:26:49.880<v Prof Helen Bond>citing it.

173101:26:49.880 --> 01:26:50.870<v Prof Helen Bond>I ought to read it.

173201:26:51.020 --> 01:26:54.170<v Prof Helen Bond>And I was blown away by how bad it was.

173301:26:54.170 --> 01:26:55.670<v Prof Helen Bond>And and tiny.

173401:26:55.670 --> 01:26:56.180<v Prof Helen Bond>Tiny too.

173501:26:56.180 --> 01:26:58.400<v Prof Helen Bond>So all he's doing really is saying, oh, I've heard

173601:26:58.400 --> 01:27:01.250<v Prof Helen Bond>of this thing called form criticism, and I'm going to

173701:27:01.250 --> 01:27:02.090<v Prof Helen Bond>use it.

173801:27:02.090 --> 01:27:05.480<v Prof Helen Bond>And the whole thing about oral tradition to explain these

173901:27:05.480 --> 01:27:08.870<v Prof Helen Bond>similarities of wording between these things.

174001:27:09.020 --> 01:27:11.630<v Prof Helen Bond>I mean, if we didn't have that form critical idea

174101:27:11.630 --> 01:27:15.320<v Prof Helen Bond>of bits of oral tradition floating about, we would have

174201:27:15.320 --> 01:27:17.510<v Prof Helen Bond>to have some way of explaining.

174301:27:17.510 --> 01:27:20.210<v Prof Helen Bond>And it seems to me that prior to form criticism,

174401:27:20.210 --> 01:27:20.840<v Prof Helen Bond>they did.

174501:27:20.840 --> 01:27:23.240<v Prof Helen Bond>I mean, prior to the 19th century, as far as

174601:27:23.240 --> 01:27:26.300<v Prof Helen Bond>I know, people weren't making this sort of so hard

174701:27:26.300 --> 01:27:29.330<v Prof Helen Bond>and fast, which is presumably how Nader manages to sort

174801:27:29.330 --> 01:27:31.430<v Prof Helen Bond>of talk about all four of them without no right

174901:27:31.430 --> 01:27:32.630<v Prof Helen Bond>missing a beat.

175001:27:32.630 --> 01:27:35.000<v Prof Helen Bond>But so do you see this as fundamentally a modern

175101:27:35.000 --> 01:27:37.580<v Prof Helen Bond>problem that has been delivered to us, I think, form

175201:27:37.580 --> 01:27:38.180<v Prof Helen Bond>criticism.

175301:27:38.180 --> 01:27:38.480<v Prof Helen Bond>Yeah.

175401:27:38.480 --> 01:27:41.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Well, and I think it's God has missed.

175501:27:41.090 --> 01:27:45.470<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Fascinating because I think what happened is I so I

175601:27:45.470 --> 01:27:48.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>think, goodness, this book would have vanished without trace more

175701:27:48.350 --> 01:27:51.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>or less if it wasn't for Dodd.

175801:27:51.050 --> 01:27:51.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

175901:27:51.470 --> 01:27:55.370<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Dodd and Gordon Smith were both at Jesus College, Cambridge.

176001:27:55.700 --> 01:27:59.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Gardner Smith was the dean and Dodd was one of

176101:27:59.090 --> 01:28:01.670<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the was one of the Dons there.

176201:28:02.240 --> 01:28:04.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And they were friends.

176301:28:04.910 --> 01:28:05.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And you know what?

176401:28:05.960 --> 01:28:10.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Even though Dodd wrote two long books on John with

176501:28:11.090 --> 01:28:15.440<v Prof Mark Goodacre>complete, you know, John completely independent of the synoptics, he

176601:28:15.440 --> 01:28:18.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>only mentions Gardner Smith as having given him the idea.

176701:28:18.590 --> 01:28:22.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He never engages with them, because Dodd basically knows that

176801:28:22.130 --> 01:28:23.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the book's not very good.

176901:28:23.270 --> 01:28:24.620<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's never going to say that.

177001:28:24.620 --> 01:28:27.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So he just says, I was inspired by by Gardner.

177101:28:27.650 --> 01:28:30.860<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And Goldsmith didn't read German either, so he only had

177201:28:30.860 --> 01:28:31.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you're right.

177301:28:31.190 --> 01:28:32.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He'd heard about form criticism.

177401:28:32.600 --> 01:28:34.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He didn't actually engage with it at all.

177501:28:34.580 --> 01:28:39.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I so I originally my first chapter up until

177601:28:39.560 --> 01:28:42.590<v Prof Mark Goodacre>about a month ago was called I believe in Dodd.

177701:28:43.220 --> 01:28:46.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And what I think happened was I think Dodd was

177801:28:46.250 --> 01:28:49.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>so persuasive to a generation of scholars who were trained

177901:28:49.640 --> 01:28:53.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>on form criticism, but who loved the idea of a

178001:28:53.210 --> 01:28:55.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>historical tradition in John's Gospel.

178101:28:55.190 --> 01:28:57.380<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And they loved realised eschatology, and it gave him a

178201:28:57.380 --> 01:28:58.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>route to that.

178301:28:58.340 --> 01:29:02.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I actually changed it in the end because the.

178401:29:02.810 --> 01:29:03.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I thought, I believe in God.

178501:29:03.740 --> 01:29:06.200<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's such an in-joke for people like us.

178601:29:06.200 --> 01:29:08.420<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think for the general reader that's like who's,

178701:29:09.140 --> 01:29:09.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you know.

178801:29:09.410 --> 01:29:12.500<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So I've kept the discussion about Dodd, but I've, I've

178901:29:12.500 --> 01:29:13.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>shifted it a little bit.

179001:29:13.850 --> 01:29:15.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But yeah, I think I think that's right.

179101:29:15.350 --> 01:29:16.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's exactly right.

179201:29:16.640 --> 01:29:19.040<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And it's so funny because we learn to tell a

179301:29:19.040 --> 01:29:23.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>certain story about how the scholarship, the history of scholarship,

179401:29:23.930 --> 01:29:25.730<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and sometimes you go back and reread.

179501:29:25.730 --> 01:29:29.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So here's an example of how unknown Gardner Smith was

179601:29:29.930 --> 01:29:31.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>in 1945.

179701:29:31.730 --> 01:29:36.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Good Enough in America, wrote an entire piece for a

179801:29:36.020 --> 01:29:38.810<v Prof Mark Goodacre>journal called John A Primitive Gospel.

179901:29:39.380 --> 01:29:43.280<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And he says in the first footnote, it was, it's

180001:29:43.280 --> 01:29:45.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>been brought to my attention that there is a book

180101:29:45.800 --> 01:29:48.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>by Percival Gardner Smith, you know, and it's like seven

180201:29:48.740 --> 01:29:52.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>years earlier, you know, there's this other book which is

180301:29:52.070 --> 01:29:53.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>arguing the same thing as I'm arguing this article.

180401:29:53.930 --> 01:29:54.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I'm sorry.

180501:29:54.350 --> 01:29:55.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I didn't know about it, you know.

180601:29:55.850 --> 01:29:58.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>So it's really it's only it's only Dodd that makes.

180701:29:58.940 --> 01:30:02.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And Dodd's books are far better dodges a brilliant scholar,

180801:30:02.210 --> 01:30:02.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, I disagree.

180901:30:02.990 --> 01:30:06.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He's a brilliant scholar, unlike they still historical tradition and

181001:30:06.770 --> 01:30:07.400<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the fourth gospel.

181101:30:07.640 --> 01:30:09.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's one of the great books on John's Gospel.

181201:30:09.410 --> 01:30:10.850<v Prof Helen Bond>And you can see why people like it.

181301:30:10.850 --> 01:30:11.510<v Prof Helen Bond>Because yeah.

181401:30:11.510 --> 01:30:12.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

181501:30:12.050 --> 01:30:15.740<v Prof Helen Bond>Forging that that, that, that distinction then gives you access

181601:30:15.740 --> 01:30:15.860<v Prof Helen Bond>to.

181701:30:15.860 --> 01:30:17.090<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Historical it does it gets it.

181801:30:17.570 --> 01:30:18.560<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah, absolutely.

181901:30:18.920 --> 01:30:19.400<v Speaker 2>David.

182001:30:20.240 --> 01:30:21.650<v Speaker 5>On this issue of.

182101:30:21.650 --> 01:30:22.940<v Speaker 2>Where where.

182201:30:22.940 --> 01:30:26.300<v Speaker 8>The issue comes from and how it's been perpetuated, I've

182301:30:26.300 --> 01:30:28.370<v Speaker 8>thought even more so in biblical studies.

182401:30:28.370 --> 01:30:30.260<v Speaker 8>It's actually liturgy and lectionary.

182501:30:30.260 --> 01:30:32.060<v Speaker 8>So we know right from lectionary.

182601:30:32.060 --> 01:30:33.080<v Speaker 2>Now to.

182701:30:33.080 --> 01:30:34.880<v Speaker 8>Be running several decades.

182801:30:35.090 --> 01:30:36.740<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Three years, Matthew.

182901:30:36.740 --> 01:30:37.820<v Speaker 2>Mark and Luke.

183001:30:37.820 --> 01:30:38.990<v Speaker 5>And John gets.

183101:30:38.990 --> 01:30:44.840<v Speaker 9>Spliced in, uh, for some theological purposes during Lent and

183201:30:44.840 --> 01:30:47.960<v Speaker 9>Easter, and particularly in Mark's year, because there's less of

183301:30:47.960 --> 01:30:48.260<v Speaker 9>Mark.

183401:30:48.260 --> 01:30:50.000<v Speaker 9>So, so more material is needed.

183501:30:50.000 --> 01:30:53.960<v Speaker 9>So we kind of thought now is that lectionary, which

183601:30:53.960 --> 01:30:54.050<v Speaker 9>is.

183701:30:54.050 --> 01:30:55.010<v Speaker 2>Interesting, used by.

183801:30:55.010 --> 01:30:56.690<v Speaker 9>Multiple major global.

183901:30:56.710 --> 01:30:57.910<v Speaker 2>Churches and.

184001:30:57.910 --> 01:31:01.990<v Speaker 9>An exciting one growing Catholic church two that has to

184101:31:02.500 --> 01:31:06.580<v Speaker 9>solidify this perspective, and it's going to make it hard

184201:31:06.580 --> 01:31:07.630<v Speaker 9>to change.

184301:31:07.720 --> 01:31:09.070<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That's now fascinating, I think.

184401:31:09.070 --> 01:31:10.570<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I hadn't never thought of that.

184501:31:10.570 --> 01:31:10.930<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Yeah.

184601:31:10.930 --> 01:31:15.130<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I suppose I mean, in, in this lecture is

184701:31:15.130 --> 01:31:18.550<v Prof Mark Goodacre>are we more likely to get unique Johannine material and

184801:31:18.550 --> 01:31:21.310<v Prof Mark Goodacre>others more likely to have stuff from like farewell discourses

184901:31:21.310 --> 01:31:22.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>and stuff like that?

185001:31:22.270 --> 01:31:23.650<v Speaker 9>I think so, yes.

185101:31:23.800 --> 01:31:26.620<v Speaker 9>But also people will talk in other churches as well.

185201:31:26.890 --> 01:31:28.780<v Speaker 9>You think of, oh, in the year mark on the

185301:31:28.780 --> 01:31:28.930<v Speaker 9>earth.

185401:31:28.930 --> 01:31:29.290<v Speaker 9>Matthew.

185501:31:29.710 --> 01:31:30.250<v Speaker 9>Luke.

185601:31:30.280 --> 01:31:30.640<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

185701:31:30.940 --> 01:31:32.020<v Speaker 9>This was a year of John.

185801:31:32.170 --> 01:31:32.530<v Speaker 2>Awesome.

185901:31:34.030 --> 01:31:34.450<v Speaker 4>Fascinating.

186001:31:34.600 --> 01:31:35.440<v Prof Helen Bond>Your mission to.

186101:31:35.470 --> 01:31:35.950<v Prof Helen Bond>Yeah.

186201:31:35.950 --> 01:31:36.280<v Speaker 4>Wow.

186301:31:36.280 --> 01:31:36.670<v Speaker 4>Okay.

186401:31:36.670 --> 01:31:39.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>How long do you think that something I do might

186501:31:39.190 --> 01:31:41.530<v Prof Mark Goodacre>have some kind of theological relevance?

186601:31:42.610 --> 01:31:43.270<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Not usually.

186701:31:43.270 --> 01:31:44.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Very good at that.

186801:31:44.890 --> 01:31:45.160<v Prof Mark Goodacre>No.

186901:31:45.160 --> 01:31:45.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Thank you.

187001:31:45.520 --> 01:31:46.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's fascinating.

187101:31:47.470 --> 01:31:47.740<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

187201:31:49.810 --> 01:31:51.790<v S11>Again, thank you for the lecture.

187301:31:52.300 --> 01:31:56.230<v S11>Um, I have a question again about dating and the

187401:31:56.770 --> 01:32:01.060<v S11>logical relationship between the gospels you mentioned from time to

187501:32:01.060 --> 01:32:01.330<v S11>time.

187601:32:01.630 --> 01:32:04.270<v S11>Yeah, I'm sure you heard about his argument.

187701:32:04.270 --> 01:32:04.660<v S11>Yes.

187801:32:04.870 --> 01:32:08.770<v S11>Uh, about, uh, the possibility that John was the first

187901:32:08.770 --> 01:32:11.740<v S11>one and the Judean one, specifically gospel.

188001:32:12.250 --> 01:32:14.350<v S11>And that's why you have so many details about the

188101:32:14.350 --> 01:32:14.860<v S11>temple.

188201:32:14.980 --> 01:32:15.280<v S12>Mhm.

188301:32:16.450 --> 01:32:17.560<v S11>Jerusalem itself.

188401:32:18.040 --> 01:32:24.880<v S11>Um, I noticed that you, uh, several times brought Mark

188501:32:24.880 --> 01:32:28.180<v S11>and John together to make, you know, maybe.

188601:32:28.180 --> 01:32:31.630<v S11>Oh, we might be closer than we think.

188701:32:31.660 --> 01:32:36.040<v S11>If not, you know, perhaps contemporary or close together.

188801:32:36.760 --> 01:32:40.720<v S11>Um, I know that you would also argue that, um,

188901:32:41.050 --> 01:32:45.550<v S11>sometimes you say that John Key presupposes things from the

189001:32:45.550 --> 01:32:50.710<v S11>Gospels, and you would say that in that case, it's

189101:32:50.710 --> 01:32:55.750<v S11>because John is the either the literature you feel insecure.

189201:32:56.320 --> 01:32:57.910<v S11>How would you respond to that?

189301:32:58.660 --> 01:33:00.790<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's a big question and a fun one.

189401:33:01.180 --> 01:33:04.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I mean, what I'll say about, um, about my friend

189501:33:04.210 --> 01:33:06.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>George Vancouver, and he's on the side of the angels

189601:33:06.190 --> 01:33:11.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>when it comes to Q and, uh, sorry, Paul, but

189701:33:11.650 --> 01:33:14.290<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he so, so he's, you know, I mean, so you

189801:33:14.770 --> 01:33:16.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he hasn't yet got the fullness of insight, you know,

189901:33:17.560 --> 01:33:19.630<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the I he has challenged me.

190001:33:19.630 --> 01:33:22.060<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Actually, I, I've talked to him a bit about this.

190101:33:22.060 --> 01:33:25.360<v Prof Mark Goodacre>He has challenged me to think about these issues if

190201:33:25.360 --> 01:33:25.780<v Prof Mark Goodacre>you want.

190301:33:25.930 --> 01:33:28.330<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Very briefly, my answer on the on the thing that

190401:33:28.330 --> 01:33:32.050<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he leans on in particular, uh, John 52, there is

190501:33:32.050 --> 01:33:36.760<v Prof Mark Goodacre>a pool, uh, are talking about the, the, the pool

190601:33:36.760 --> 01:33:39.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>of Bethesda and the and the, you know, the and

190701:33:39.700 --> 01:33:41.020<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the porticos and all the rest of it.

190801:33:41.530 --> 01:33:43.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It's just fascinating, that present tense.

190901:33:43.480 --> 01:33:45.100<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think he leans on that too much.

191001:33:45.100 --> 01:33:45.610<v Prof Mark Goodacre>It.

191101:33:45.610 --> 01:33:48.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Dan Wallace made the same argument about 20 years ago.

191201:33:49.090 --> 01:33:52.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Uh, the it's quite possible to use the present tense.

191301:33:53.110 --> 01:33:54.580<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Whenever you know, whenever you're.

191401:33:54.610 --> 01:33:55.480<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Whenever you're writing.

191501:33:55.480 --> 01:33:59.650<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The pilgrim of Bordeaux in the early fourth century describes

191601:33:59.650 --> 01:34:01.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>exactly the same place in Jerusalem, and he uses the

191701:34:01.900 --> 01:34:02.770<v Prof Mark Goodacre>present tense.

191801:34:03.100 --> 01:34:06.340<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Now, that either means that the pool is intact in

191901:34:06.340 --> 01:34:08.350<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the early fourth century, in which case there's no problem

192001:34:08.350 --> 01:34:11.110<v Prof Mark Goodacre>with John saying it's in the early second century, or

192101:34:11.110 --> 01:34:13.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>it means that they can't say it.

192201:34:13.300 --> 01:34:16.720<v Prof Mark Goodacre>The Bordeaux pilgrim is making it up, in which case

192301:34:16.720 --> 01:34:17.830<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John could be making it up.

192401:34:17.860 --> 01:34:19.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>You know, I mean, so I don't think there's an

192501:34:19.900 --> 01:34:20.260<v Prof Mark Goodacre>issue there.

192601:34:20.290 --> 01:34:20.410<v Prof Mark Goodacre>What?

192701:34:20.410 --> 01:34:22.600<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I think if you want my speculation, I think what

192801:34:22.600 --> 01:34:25.450<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John is doing is he's writing in the shadow of

192901:34:25.450 --> 01:34:28.960<v Prof Mark Goodacre>the war, and I think he's affecting a kind of

193001:34:28.960 --> 01:34:32.080<v Prof Mark Goodacre>almost romantic nostalgia about Jerusalem.

193101:34:32.380 --> 01:34:34.900<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think what he's trying to do is say

193201:34:34.900 --> 01:34:39.190<v Prof Mark Goodacre>he's trying to evoke memories of this unspoilt Jerusalem, with

193301:34:39.190 --> 01:34:43.510<v Prof Mark Goodacre>its two pools and all these different, wonderful details then

193401:34:43.510 --> 01:34:47.800<v Prof Mark Goodacre>evoke pathos, because he's telling a story about conflict between

193501:34:47.800 --> 01:34:51.520<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Jesus and Judeans, which the reader, I think is supposed

193601:34:51.520 --> 01:34:53.170<v Prof Mark Goodacre>to think, oh my goodness, you know what?

193701:34:53.380 --> 01:34:54.250<v Prof Mark Goodacre>We've talked about this.

193801:34:55.330 --> 01:34:58.210<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Um, so, so I think that's what's going on.

193901:34:58.210 --> 01:35:00.490<v Prof Mark Goodacre>And I think that makes better sense of it than

194001:35:00.490 --> 01:35:00.640<v Prof Mark Goodacre>that.

194101:35:00.640 --> 01:35:03.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>John's written, you know, some really early, really early point.

194201:35:03.940 --> 01:35:04.990<v Prof Mark Goodacre>I would love to believe that.

194301:35:04.990 --> 01:35:06.940<v Prof Mark Goodacre>But I just don't believe it because I can I

194401:35:06.940 --> 01:35:09.700<v Prof Mark Goodacre>feel I can see him using the Synoptics a great

194501:35:09.700 --> 01:35:10.240<v Prof Mark Goodacre>deal.

194601:35:11.320 --> 01:35:15.280<v Prof Helen Bond>Well, it's been a brilliant lecture and very engaging questions.

194701:35:15.280 --> 01:35:17.590<v Prof Helen Bond>And I can see everybody sort of brain's thinking, oh,

194801:35:17.590 --> 01:35:19.090<v Prof Helen Bond>this is all very interesting stuff.

194901:35:19.090 --> 01:35:20.830<v Prof Helen Bond>So thank you once again, Mark.

195001:35:20.830 --> 01:35:21.280<v Unknown>Appreciate it.

195101:35:24.520 --> 01:35:24.850<v Unknown>Thank you.

195201:35:35.740 --> 01:35:36.790<v Speaker 4>That's great.

195301:35:36.790 --> 01:35:37.300<v Speaker 4>Thank you.

195401:35:37.300 --> 01:35:38.230<v Prof Mark Goodacre>That was great fun.

195501:35:38.470 --> 01:35:39.850<v Prof Mark Goodacre>Lovely lovely questions.