Jesus-Tradition Oral and Written

"Jesus-Tradition Oral and Written" Wenham pp. 217-222

In this penultimate chapter Wenham asks the very important question of why the gospels are not referred to throughout the New Testament if, in fact, they were written early. There are remarkably few specific citations of the gospels in the remainder of the New Testament and even in the immediate subapostolic period. p. 219 "The thinness of appeal to the Jesus-tradition is not confined to the literature written at a time when the existence of the gospels is debatable, but it continues into the period of the apostolic fathers."

Wenham summarizes the arguments of Thompson on pp. 219-220. "1.) Language which echose the gospels is commonest in paraenesis. But in paraenesis, where argument ceases and exhortation begins, Paul has no need to cite sources. 2.) The occasional nature of the epistles means that their purpose is not to present the ABCs of Christian tradition for neophytes, but to give particular answers to particular problems. 3.) Paul's own chief experience of Christ was on the Damascus road, and his supreme concern continues to be with Christ as he is, rather than as he was. 4.) The cross outshone all other examples of love and humility, and the resurrection outshone all other examples of power. The whole Jesus-tradition was necessary to make the gospel claim intelligible, but in paraenesis all was secondary to its great climax. 5.) Chrsitianity was builto n Judaism and this remained a source for much of what Paul taught. So it is that he had no occasion to tell his readers what Jesus habitually spoke in parables, that he healed the sick and ministered in Galilee, that he was baptised, tempted and transfigured."

We go on to see five more reasons which may have prevented the norm in the Church from being the written gospels in the early period. First, those who had heard messages from the apostles would be more likely to depend on what those apostles said rather than what they wrote. Second, while Jewish education emphasized memorization of scriptures, the Gentile converts had more of an oral culture so would have been more familiar with sayings than writings. Third, scrolls are difficult to manage and refer to. Until the common use of the codex it would be more natural to quote and paraphrase from well known events. Fourth, it was some time before churches developed a habit of reading specifically a gospel and an epistle. The epistles were read but the gospel was stated in the preaching. Finally, canonicity would have developed slowly out of apostolic authority. The apostlic teaching was seen as the authority, but the writing was not necessarily considered as the whole body of the apostolic doctrine.

p. 222 "These factors account for the paucity of references to the gospels as manuals of instruction and show that in practice reliance was placed for a long time on oral instruction rather than on written texts."