Historical Theology
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 57, No. 2 – Spring 2015
Managing Editor: Terry L. Wilder
By James D. G. Dunn. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2013. 400 pages. Paperback, $45.00.
A prolific scholar on Jesus Research and Pauline studies, James D. G. (Jimmy) Dunn, Lightfoot Professor of Divinity Emeritus at the University of Durham in England, provides a thought-provoking series of essays in The Oral Gospel Tradition. Although most of the articles are responses to critics of his book Jesus Remembered or are articles that further clarify his opinions on the oral transmission of the gospel message, three articles are included that predate that book—going back to 1977.
Since these articles are from scholarly journals or books, they are aimed at the scholar or upper-level student in Gospel studies. There are few definitions given of terms, nor is there much translation of Greek or German citations. These articles are meant to further scholarly understanding on the origins of the Gospels, and Dunn does a masterful job in doing so.
Dunn is an engaging writer. He presents helpful analogies, such as in illustrating the default settings that all scholars have. It is like a word processor with a default setting of a certain font type and size (41-43). He says most scholars approach the Synoptic Problem (the challenge of explaining both the differences and similarities in Matthew, Mark, and Luke) from a default setting of a literary culture perspective rather than from an oral culture perspective (44-51, 122).
Dunn champions the oral approach. This is his major contribution, and he repeatedly echoes the refrain that first-century AD Palestine was an oral culture (50-51, 53-57, 83) which had a “lively and diverse oral tradition” (122, see also 74, 82, 135-36, 165, 214). Along with this emphasis on the oral tradition, Dunn proposes an oral, non-fixed Q source (an alleged non-extant source for Matthew and Luke) for the Gospels (82). This idea is certainly more appealing than the typical scholarly understanding of the speculated Q as a fixed-form written source. However, some of his examples of differing oral accounts are unconvincing if one believes the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew and the Sermon on the Plain in Luke were two different sermons given in different settings (see 83-89). Similarly, Jesus taught The Lord’s Prayer in Matthew and Luke at different places and different times, but Dunn’s comparison works only if the two accounts are of the same event (95). His other examples are stronger (90-107). Interestingly, Dunn’s proposal of an oral, fluid Q may be just a step away from dispensing with Q altogether.1
To explain the similar-yet-different nature of some parallel Gospel passages, Dunn believes the Evangelists were familiar with different oral traditions that were similar to each other but different in some details (109-11, 126). However, the proposal would be stronger if it took into account the eyewitness testimony of the Evangelists: Matthew and John used their personal remembrances. Dunn claims Matthew used Mark as a source but omitted key phrases and themes (115), but it would be interesting to compare the evidence with how it would differ if Mark used Matthew as a source.
In part 2, Dunn’s essays answer some key critics of Jesus Remembered. These responses are quite helpful, because Dunn sounds less radical in his clarifications than in the first-half of the book or in Jesus Remembered. However, the term “fictionalizing events,” that refers to all oral remembrances of Jesus, is troubling (200-02). Dunn’s main point of emphasis is that all oral or written testimony or memory involves some interpretation. However, it is common to assert facts about other ancient people (such as, the Roman general Titus destroyed the Temple in AD 70), but unfortunately when it comes to Jesus, many theologians are hesitant to use the word “historical fact”—including Dunn.
Here are some positive emphases in the book: (1) Dunn accepts John’s Gospel as reliable material (176, 188-89), (2) he rightly affirms an oral culture in Jesus’ day (as Richard Bauckham well demonstrates in his book2), (3) and he effectively shows the weakness of the criterion of dissimilarity (39)—the misguided belief that a true teaching of Jesus will be different from what both Second Temple Judaism and what the early church taught. The main strength of this compendium of articles is that it is a one-stop collection of scholarly articles that help explain and clarify Dunn’s unique position on the oral transmission of the gospel message. His position is not different enough to be called a new perspective on Jesus (see 202-03),3 but it is a welcome addition to the scholarly debate.
- See Mark Goodacre, The Case Against Q: Studies in Markan Priority and the Synoptic Problem (London: T&T Clark, 2002). Dunn does disagree with Goodacre’s position (76-78). ↩︎
- Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2008). ↩︎
- This was the title of an earlier book by Dunn on the same subject as the present volume: James D. G. Dunn, A New Perspective on Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005). ↩︎
