tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post8136764677157673252..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: The Beloved Disciple's Galilean InterestsRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-36219882958670987152021-04-07T12:18:45.980-04:002021-04-07T12:18:45.980-04:00Thanks, Jason!
I'm struck by the fact that Ba...Thanks, Jason!<br /><br />I'm struck by the fact that Bauckham suggests Nathanael was the source of the story of the marriage at Cana. Of course a story can come secondhand. All of Luke's in his Gospel probably did. But given that Bauckham things the author of the 4th Gospel was the BD, why hypothesize this? Apparently it's an add-on to account for the inclusion of a unique Galilee story when Bauckham thinks that the BD was non-itinerant. So this is multiplying links in the chain to the story to save the theory that the BD was non-itinerant. In point of fact, the 4th Gospel records more journeys back and forth from Galilee to Jerusalem and vice versa than any other Gospel, so in terms of perspective, it has a very itinerant feel to it. For example, the journey north to Galilee is recorded in stages in John 4, because it includes the story of the woman at the well in Samaria. <br /><br />Bauckham has many virtues as a scholar, but one of his weaknesses is that he treats certain premises as proved (such as the premise that the BD was not from Galilee and did not travel with Jesus and the 12 to Galilee) and then just adds auxiliaries as needed to retain them once he has settled on them.Lydia McGrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00423567323116960820noreply@blogger.com