The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The ... - josephprestonkirk

106 A STUDY IN SHARED SYMBOLISM AND LANGUAGE
of historical data,” which have as good a claim to be historically reliable
as passages in the Synoptics. 30 In his study of the historical Jesus, John P.
Meier has shown that the Fourth Gospel often provides genuine historical
information. 31 In The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide, Gerd
Theissen and Annette Merz rightly stress that the Fourth Gospel is independent
of the Synoptics and in places preserves “old traditions” that are
“not worthless” historically. 32 In her Jesus of Nazareth: King of the Jews
(2000), Paula Fredriksen uses the Fourth Gospel to solve the riddle of
Jesus’ crucifixion and the survival of his followers. In Rabbi Jesus (2000),
Bruce D. Chilton heavily depends on the historical information found
in the Fourth Gospel to write this “intimate biography.” In the terminology
of Hellenistic historiography, the Fourth Gospel is a mixture of
rhetorical and mimetic historiography (as Martin Meiser argues for
Philo’s Against Flaccus); 33 but more importantly for understanding “history”
in the Fourth Gospel is the Jewish creative view of history 34 and
the importance of the events themselves (as Peder Borgen has shown for
Against Flaccus). 35
DUALISM
Of all archaeological discoveries, the Dead Sea Scrolls have had the
greatest impact upon the study of Johannine theology. 36 The dualistic
30. Dwight Moody Smith, “Historical Issues and the Problem of John and the
Synoptics,” in From Jesus to John (ed. M. C. de Boer; JSNTSup 84; Sheffield: JSOT
Press, 1994), 252–67. Also, see idem, “John and the Synoptics: Historical Tradition
and the Passion Narrative,” in Light in a Spotless Mirror: Reflections on Jewish Traditions in
Dialogue (ed. J. H. Charlesworth and M. A. Daise; Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press
International, 2001), 77–91.
31. John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (ABRL; New York:
Doubleday, 1991), esp. 1:41–55.
32. Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz, The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide
(trans. J. Bowden; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 36–37.
33. Martin Meiser, “Gattung, Adressaten und Intention von Philos ‘In Flaccum,’”
JSJ 30 (1999): 418–30.
34. See esp. Doron Mendels, “‘Creative History’: The Jewish Case,” JSP 2 (1988):
13–20.
35. Peder Borgen, “Philo’s Against Flaccus as Interpreted History,” in A Bouquet of Wisdom
(ed. K.-J. Illman et al.; Religionsvetenskapliga skrifter 48; Åbo: Åbo Akademi, 2000),
41–57; also see idem, Philo of Alexandria: An Exegete for His Time (Leiden: Brill, 1997).
36. R. Bauckham affirms this consensus, but thinks “this hypothesis is mistaken.”
See Richard Bauckham, “The Qumran Community and the Gospel of John,” in The
Dead Sea Scrolls Fifty Years after Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July
20—25, 1997 (ed. L. H. Schiffman, E. Tov, and J. C. VanderKam; Jerusalem: Israel