Triggered to Thinking

Raymond Brown was considered controversial by some. On the one hand, he was a Catholic priest; on the other, a historical-critical scholar. His arguments on the Gospel of John, the virgin birth and the appearance tradition of Jesus would disturb some modern readers. Nevertheless, his scholarship is essential and insightful. It also shows that one can maintain faith despite asking critical questions about the Bible. This post will be a short review of his book titled The Virginal Conception & Bodily Resurrection of Jesus.

Introduction 

Brown states, “While I try to show how critical biblical scholarship would nuance our approach to the Gospel accounts, I seek to do this with enough explanation so that the reader is open to conviction may see that a truly conservative attitude (as opposed to a fundamentalist attitude) need not be affronted by modern approaches to the Bible and theology” (Brown, 1973, p.2). This is an important theme of this book and of Brown’s scholarship. He explains that it is permissible to believe that “the early stories of Genesis were not historical; that Isaiah was not one book; that Matthew, the first Gospel, was not written by an apostolic eyewitness; that the Gospels were not harmonious biographies and were sometimes inaccurate in detail” (Brown, 1973,  p.5). These statements relate to what Brown states later in the introduction about Scriptures not escaping the limits of history (Brown, 1973). Brown later explains that inerrancy means the belief that the Bible is perfect in its teaching on the truth of salvation (Brown, 1973). 

Brown concludes the introduction by emphasizing three points that would be familiar to students of the Bible.

1. The OT authors did not foresee future details of Jesus’ life. Prophecy fulfilled by Jesus is thus seen in a different light compared to the original authors of the OT.
2. The original Gospel authors were not eyewitnesses, and Mark was the first Gospel written
3. There was growth in the gospel message from the early traditions.
4. The belief that God inspires the scriptures doesn’t mean they are factually exact. Brown emphasizes the Second Vatican Council. This council argues that, “the books of scripture must be acknowledged as teaching firmly, faithfully, and without error that truth which God wanted to put for the sake of our salvation” (Brown, 1973, p. 18-19).

Chapter 1- The Problem of the Virginal Conception of Jesus 

Brown begins the chapter by giving a brief survey of some of the issues and historical discussions of the virgin conception of Jesus. He is also keen to mention that, “while Matthew and Luke apparently accepted the virginal conception as historical, we cannot be certain where they got their information on this point” (Brown, 1973, p. 31). He then later discusses the implications of the virginal conception for Christian theology. Next, he discusses doctrines favourable to a virginal conception and doctrines unfavourable to a virginal conception (Brown, 1973). This is followed by a brief overview of groups that denied the virginal conception, including Jewish Christians and Gnostics (Brown, 1973). Brown then summarises the early traditions about the virgin birth and the arguments for and against its history. 

Chapter II- The Problem of the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus 

The chapter begins with a discussion of the language of the resurrection and reiterates the Apostles’ Creed and Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 15:14. Brown conveys how Jesus’s body was not ordinarily restored to life, but through a glorious renewal of the body with eschatological glory. He conveys the state of evidence regarding Jesus’s resurrection in the New Testament texts, but he also ponders the original understanding of Jesus’s victory over death (Brown, 1973). Next, the chapter provides an overview of the earliest Christian expressions of resurrection faith and the gospel narratives of the appearances to the twelve and to the others. He gives an insightful comment when he notes, “There is scholarly agreement that ch21 of John was written by someone other than the evangelist who was responsible for the Gospel “(Brown, 1973, p. 99). This chapter presents a chart of the variances in the post-resurrection appearances. He concludes that, “variations in place and time may stem in part from the evangelists themselves who are trying to fit the account of an appearance into a consecutive narrative” (Brown, 1973, p. 106). The chapter ends with a discussion of the empty tomb narratives and how these stories evolved. There is a survey of various scholarly explanations of the burial narratives and the source materials used by the gospel writers. He postulates that the angelic appearances at the empty tombs may not be historically correct but an imaginative creation of the gospel writers (Brown, 1973). The book concludes with some sober discussions on the significance of the resurrection for the Christian faith. 

Overall, this was a handy work of scholarship. This short book introduces readers to historical-critical questions in the academic study of the Bible. It can also show how scholars can still maintain their faith despite not adhering to stringent views on biblical literalism and fundamentalism. This book is an excellent resource for students interested in New Testament studies.