317-548-2146

For Whom Are the Gospels Written?

The scholarly consensus is that each of the Gospels were written for a specific local community rather than a general audience. However, The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences is a collection of essays edited by Richard Bauckham that refutes the current consensus.[1] The central thesis of the work is straightforward: “The Gospels were written for all Christians, not specific churches.”[2] Bauckham begins the book with his own essay, which lays the groundwork for the arguments supporting his thesis. After providing a brief history of scholarship, Bauckham provides historical and literary evidence that suggests that early Christianity consisted of a network of communities that kept the communication channels open; thus, writing only for an immediate community seemed highly unlikely.[3] Ironically, recent scholarship has also sided with Bauckham for very different reasons. For example, Hugo Méndez contends that similarities and differences between the Gospels can be explained by disguised authorship and literary borrowing, such as that which occurs within pseudepigraphal writings, rather than explained by a specific community hypothesis.[4] Thus, the consensus view has come under fire from multiple directions, not just conservative scholars.

The remainder of the book is a compilation of essays that further support Bauckham’s central thesis. Michael Thompson’s essay shows that the early churches had the ability to communicate with each other and did not exist on theological islands. Loveday Alexander explores how ancient Christians utilized the codex technology as a vehicle to disseminate the Gospel writings. Richard Burridge highlights that genre, rather than an agenda of a local community, provides the framework for the message of the Gospels. More granularly, Bauckham adds to the compilation by asserting that scholarship’s view of John’s independence from Mark is overstated. Stephen Barton’s essay argues that evidence does not exist to support an audience of specific communities. Finally, Francis Watson contends that assuming a hypothetical original community as the source of content implies an allegorical rather than a literal reading of the text. Each essay supports the overall aim and thesis of Bauckham’s initiative. However, the question remains as to whether the initiative is successful. The remainder of the analysis addresses various strengths and weaknesses of the work.

The strengths of Bauckham’s compilation of essays are significant. First, Bauckham successfully points out several arguments that support the specific community hypothesis could also support the general community hypothesis. For example, during the last century, scholars have presupposed that certain content of the Gospels was directed toward a specific community, but Bauckham explains that the same content could have also been applied to a broader, more general, community.[5] Similarly, Bauckham appropriately notes that just because Paul’s epistles were written with a specific community in mind does not require the Gospels, which entail a different genre, to do the same.[6] Furthermore, Bauckham successfully argues that the ancient Roman world during the time of Christ was not isolated into small community pockets, but rather, it was highly interconnected.[7] Thompson picks up on the notion of an ancient information superhighway between ancient communities.[8] Although not mentioned, consensus exists around the positive impact of Pax Romana on mobility during the time of Christ, which further supports Thompson’s argument. Accordingly, both Bauckham and Thompson make logical and coherent arguments for the possibility of a general audience.

A second important strength of the work surrounds Thompson’s essay, which addresses the utilization of codex technology. As Thompson explains, the codex was portable, adaptable, and utilitarian.[9] It would be difficult to understand why the codex was so popular among ancient Christians unless the purpose was to employ the benefits of the medium. First, it is reasonable to assume that if an author took the time to write the text, then the purpose of the painstaking task of documentation in antiquity might go beyond communicating with a next-door neighbor. It is not unreasonable to conclude that the codex format was a good fit for authors who desired to easily disseminate a message to a wider audience. Furthermore, the argument of genre addressed by Burridge fits well with the codex vehicle. In other words, if the genre of the Gospels is βίος, then it would seem reasonable that early Christians would have been motivated to tell the story of Jesus utilizing a portable medium.

03 182x300 - The Gospels for All Christians Book Review

What Are the Gospels?: A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography

[10] Since the strengths and weaknesses of Burridge’s hypothesis have been examined in a previous discussion board, no further analysis is necessary.

A third strength revolves around the internal evidence of the Gospel texts. The scholarly consensus is that John is wholly independent of the other Gospels due to its distinctiveness. However, Bauckham successfully points out that two of John’s parenthetical explanations in John 3:24 and 11:2 provide evidence that the author was writing to an audience already familiar with Mark.[11] The argument assists in both directions. First, if a general circulation of Mark existed, then the internal evidence further supports Bauckham’s thesis with regard to the Gospel of Mark. Second, if a general circulation of Mark existed, then it seems reasonable that John would also assume that his Gospel would someday follow the same path of general dissemination.

A fourth strength pertains to allegorization. Barton explains that a type of circularity occurs within scholarly consensus. If the presupposition of a specific community exists, then the meaning of the text must reflect the agenda of the specific community. However, if textual evidence is lacking to support the specific community hypothesis, then, in effect, the hermeneutic is sociologically allegorized.[12] Similarly, although Sitz im Leben is an important aspect of biblical theology, Watson notes that the life setting is not necessarily theologically neutral.[13] More specifically, if the emphasis of Sitz im Leben trumps the intended genre for the purpose of furthering a presupposition that lacks evidence, then, once again, an allegorical reading occurs that lends itself to an arbitrary interpretation.[14] Both Barton and Watson appropriately highlight the inherent risks of applying presuppositions to the hermeneutical process.

Weaknesses also exist within the compilation of essays. First, although it is true that the written word may be a substitute for living within the same community, other alternatives may exist. For example, a grandfather may want to leave a written memoir for posterity. In other words, the existence of written Gospels does not require a general dissemination, but neither does it preclude it. Second, the evidence of Christians utilizing the codex format certainly provides the possibility of general dissemination of the Gospels, but it does not absolutely require it. Other factors may have contributed to the use of codex such as ease of access. Similarly, access to transportation is not the same as usage. Third, Bauckham claims that early Christians “had a strong, lively, and informed sense of participation in a worldwide movement.”[15] Although the assertion is possible, further explanation of the significant divergence of thought between Christian communities, as exemplified in Paul’s letter to the Galatians, would need to be addressed as the lack of agreement lends itself to localized diversity. As James Dunn explains in a response to Bart Ehrman’s book, Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and Invented Their Stories of the Savior, the Gospels were “clearly intended for different hearers,” even though authors like Ehrman significantly exaggerate the distinctions between the Synoptics.[16] Fourth, the authors may, at times, overstate their case. It is certainly possible that the authors of the Gospels had a very specific community in mind, while simultaneously recognizing that the principles would have universal appeal. Accordingly, the authors could have written with both perspectives in mind. Classical literature provides a plethora of examples. F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby was certainly meant to appeal to residents of Long Island, New York in the 1920s. Fitzgerald even alluded to the idea that Jay Gatsby was at least partially autobiographical. Regardless, the treatment of social class, gender, race, and environmentalism all have had universal appeal and application. Similarly, Mark 15:21 refers to specific individuals, which provides a strong local flavor; thus, the authors could be at risk of inappropriately deemphasizing the local context. In sum, it appears Bauckham has provided enough evidence to suggest that the Gospels were written with a general audience in mind. However, the evidence does not appear to preclude the possibility that a local community was also in view.

_______________________________                      

[1] Richard Bauckham, The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997).

[2] Ibid., 2.

[3] Ibid., 30–43.

[4] Hugo Méndez, “Did the Johannine Community Exist?,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 42, no. 3 (March 2020): 353.

[5] Bauckham, The Gospels for All Christians, 22–26.

[6] Ibid., 26–30.

[7] Ibid., 30–43.

[8] Ibid., 50–53.

[9] Ibid., 72–86.

[10] Ibid., 120–130. See also Richard A. Burridge, What Are the Gospels?: A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography (Waco: Baylor University, 2020).

[11] Bauckham, The Gospels for All Christians, 150–169.

[12] Ibid., 174–179.

[13] Ibid., 195–197.

[14] Ibid., 207–217.

[15] Ibid., 3.

[16] James D. G. Dunn, “Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and Invented Their Stories of the Savior,” Modern Believing 58, no. 3 (2017): 267–268.

 

Bibliography

  • Bauckham, Richard. The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997.
  • Burridge, Richard A. What Are the Gospels?: A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography. Waco: Baylor University, 2020.
  • Dunn, James D. G. “Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and Invented Their Stories of the Savior.” Modern Believing 58, no. 3 (2017): 267–268.
  • Méndez, Hugo. “Did the Johannine Community Exist?” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 42, no. 3 (March 2020): 350–374.
Wilder - The Gospels for All Christians Book Review
Derek Wilder Executive Director
DEREK WILDER, PhD, is the Executive Director of Lives Transforming Group, Inc., a Christian counseling ministry focused on personal transformation, and the author of FREEDOM and Minds on Fire. Wilder has a Master of Theological Studies, an MDiv in Pastoral Counseling, and a PhD in Biblical Exposition. Wilder's scholarly focus lies in Pauline studies, with his doctoral dissertation specifically examining the ontological implications present in the eighth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Wilder, an adjunct professor, founded Convergence Therapy, integrating cognitive therapy and grace-based theology into the accredited college course: “Thought Life & Spirit Growth.”