Birger Mullessson's Model Of Oral Traditions
INTRODUCTION/NEED FOR SYNTHESIS – 1 PAGE
A number of models explaining the oral transmission of the Gospels have been put forth in the years since Birger Gerhardsson published his groundbreaking book Memory and Manuscript. However, the continuing development of new models and theories illustrates the reality that we may not have the issue figured out at this point in time. Each of these models have contributed towards our understanding of what this process may have looked like in the years between Jesus' ministry and the writing of the first Gospel, but no one model seems sufficient to the task at hand.
Each major approach focuses on a single aspect of the early church, failing to step back to see the bigger picture. For example, Gerhardsson …show more content…
The first section of the book analyzes how traditions were passed on in rabbinic Judaism, while the second turns towards the transmission of oral traditions in early Christianity. His research is based on records available from second century rabbinic Judaism, understanding that while transmission several centuries earlier may not have been exactly the same, they would still be similar enough to draw meaningful …show more content…
Setting up the clear distinction between the two, he states: “according to reliable rabbinic tradition ad distinction was drawn as early as the time of Hillel and Shammai, if not earlier, between written and oral Torah: תורה שבכתב was that part of the sacred authoritative tradition which was transmitted in writing; תורה שבעל פה that part which was transmitted orally.” He goes on to elaborate on the differences in how the Pharisees understood that the two sets of traditions were to be passed down: “The Pharisees thus stand out in the struggle with the Sadducees—if we have interpreted the sources correctly—as energetic advocates of the principle that oral Torah is, and must remain, oral Torah.”
The importance of the distinction between the oral and written Torah becomes clear when the methods for memorizing them are discussed. Discussing the learning methods of learning the written Torah, Gerhardsson writes: “The written Torah could not be learned from the teacher’s mouth (מתוך הפה): it had to be learned from the book (בכתב). The aim was to teach the child to read (קרא) the text, fluently and accurately (which in practice meant off by heart).” It is an important feature of the written text that it must be learned from reading the written text, not from the mouth of any
A number of models explaining the oral transmission of the Gospels have been put forth in the years since Birger Gerhardsson published his groundbreaking book Memory and Manuscript. However, the continuing development of new models and theories illustrates the reality that we may not have the issue figured out at this point in time. Each of these models have contributed towards our understanding of what this process may have looked like in the years between Jesus' ministry and the writing of the first Gospel, but no one model seems sufficient to the task at hand.
Each major approach focuses on a single aspect of the early church, failing to step back to see the bigger picture. For example, Gerhardsson …show more content…
The first section of the book analyzes how traditions were passed on in rabbinic Judaism, while the second turns towards the transmission of oral traditions in early Christianity. His research is based on records available from second century rabbinic Judaism, understanding that while transmission several centuries earlier may not have been exactly the same, they would still be similar enough to draw meaningful …show more content…
Setting up the clear distinction between the two, he states: “according to reliable rabbinic tradition ad distinction was drawn as early as the time of Hillel and Shammai, if not earlier, between written and oral Torah: תורה שבכתב was that part of the sacred authoritative tradition which was transmitted in writing; תורה שבעל פה that part which was transmitted orally.” He goes on to elaborate on the differences in how the Pharisees understood that the two sets of traditions were to be passed down: “The Pharisees thus stand out in the struggle with the Sadducees—if we have interpreted the sources correctly—as energetic advocates of the principle that oral Torah is, and must remain, oral Torah.”
The importance of the distinction between the oral and written Torah becomes clear when the methods for memorizing them are discussed. Discussing the learning methods of learning the written Torah, Gerhardsson writes: “The written Torah could not be learned from the teacher’s mouth (מתוך הפה): it had to be learned from the book (בכתב). The aim was to teach the child to read (קרא) the text, fluently and accurately (which in practice meant off by heart).” It is an important feature of the written text that it must be learned from reading the written text, not from the mouth of any