Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

ORAL TRADITION, FORM CRITICISM, AND THE GOSPELS

Year 2019, Issue: 46, 297 - 327, 18.06.2019
https://doi.org/10.17120/omuifd.540787

Abstract

What kind of sources were used by the authors of the
anonymous texts that were written in 35-70 years after Jesus’ death and were
subsequently defined as “Gospels” is a topic discussed among researchers. In
this context, it has been revealed that the authors of the Gospels use not only
each other’s texts as sources but also some hypothetical sources. However, it
is also accepted that there is a corpus of narrative called the “oral
tradition” behind the Gospels. The oral tradition consists of small, separate,
independent, and oral narratives about Jesus which spread from around 30 C.E.
to the second quarter of the second century. With reference to the written
texts called Gospels today,
scientific research for the understanding of the
oral tradition behind these texts and how the Gospel writers to shape this
tradition as redactors
have highlighted a methodological approach called
“form criticism”.
Form criticism is a discipline that aims to define
the structure, original basis and the process of the oral tradition. This
discipline makes it possible to reach important conclusions in the field of
Gospel studies. German researchers such as
Wellhausen, Schmidt, Dibelius, and Bultmann are leading names in
this field
. Nevertheless, just like the other methods included in Biblical
Criticism, form criticism is not known by the Turkish academy. This article
aims to attract the attention of the Turkish scholars to the oral tradition
behind the Gospels and to the form criticism method that tries to clarify the
oral tradition

References

  • Ashton, John. Understanding the Fourth Gospel. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
  • Augustinus. De Consensu Evangelistarum. İngilizce trc. S.D.F. Salmond, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Seri 1, C. 6. Ed. Philip Schaff. Buffalo, New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1888.
  • Bağır, Muhammet Ali. “Kutsal Kitap Eleştirisi: Eski Ahit Örneği ve Modern Dönem Öncüleri”. Harran Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 31 (Ocak-Haziran 2014) 279-310.
  • Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1987.
  • Bruce, F.F. “The History of the New Testament Study”. New Testament Interpretation, Essays on Principles and Methods. 1977. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, Revised 1979, 21-59.
  • Bultmann, Rudolf K. The History of the Synoptic Tradition. İngilizce trc. J. Marsh. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1972.
  • Carson, D.A.-Moo, Douglas J. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2. Basım. Michigan, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.
  • Colwell, Ernest Cadman. “Biblical Criticism: Lower and Higher”. Journal of Biblical Literature 67/1 (1948) 1-12 Demir, Şehmus. “Kitab-ı Mukaddes’i Mitolojik Unsurlardan Arındırma Çabası ve Kur’an Kıssalarının Tarihsel Gerçekliği”. İslami İlimler Dergisi 9:1 (Bahar 2014) 103-122.
  • Duran, Asım. “Aydınlanma ve Kutsal Kitap Yorumunun Tarihsel Dönüşümü”. Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi 17:2 (2017) 111-128.
  • Duygu, Zafer. İsa, Pavlus, İnciller: Hıristiyanlık Neden ve Nasıl Ortaya Çıktı? İstanbul: Düşün Yayınları, 2018.
  • Dvorak, James. “Martin Dibelius and Rudolf Bultmann”. Pillars in the History of Biblical Interpretations, C.I, Prevailing Methods Before 1980. ed. Stanley E Porter, Sean A Adams. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publication, 2016, 257-277.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and Invented Their Stories of the Savior. New York: HarperOne, 2017.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus, Interrupted, Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know About Them). San Francisco: HarperOne, 2009.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. 2. Basım. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
  • Farmer, William R. The Synoptic Problem: A Critical Analysis. New York: The Macmillan Company-Londra: Collier-Macmillan Limited, 1964.
  • Goodacre, Mark. The Synoptic Problem: A Way through Maze. Londra: T-T Clark, 2001.
  • Hengel, Martin. “Eye-Witness Memory and the Writing of the Gospels: Form Criticism, Community Traditions and the Authority of the Authors”. The Written Gospel. ed. M. Bockmuehl-D.A. Hagner. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005, 70-98.
  • Irenaeus. Adversus Haereses. İngilizce trc. Alexander Roberts and William Rambaut. Ante-Nicene Fathers C. 1. ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.
  • Koester, Helmut. Introduction to the New Testament: II, History and Literature of Early Christianity. 2. Basım. New York-Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2000.
  • Kuzgun, Şaban. Dört İncil: Yazılması, Derlenmesi, Muhtevası. Genişletilmiş 2. Baskı. Ankara, 1996.
  • Maccoby, Hyam. The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity. Londra: Wiedenfeld-Nicolson, 1986.
  • McKnight, Edgar V. What is Form Criticism? Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.
  • Meral, Yasin. “Spinoza’nın Teolojik-Politik İncelemesinde Tanah Eleştirisi”. Mukaddime 6:1 (2015) 19-46. Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Londra-New York: United Bible Societies, 1971.
  • Paçacı, Mehmet. Kutsal Kitaplarda Ölüm Ötesi. Ankara: Ankara Okulu Yayınları, 2001.
  • Perrin, Norman. What Is Redaction Criticism. 4. Basım, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974.
  • Polat, Salahattin. Metin Tenkidi. İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Yayınları, 2010.
  • Shaw, Brent D. “The Myth of the Neronian Persecution”. Journal of Roman Studies 105 (2015) 73-100.
  • Smalley, Stephen S. "Redaction Criticism". New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. ed. I. Howard Marshall. 1977. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, revised 1979, 181-196.
  • Smith, Stephen H. “Mark 3, 1-6: Form, Redaction and Community Function”. Biblica 75:2 (1994) 153-174.
  • So, Ky-Chun. Jesus in Q: The Sabbath and Theology of the Bible and Extracanonical Texts. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock.
  • Sparks, Kenton L. “Form Criticism”. Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation. ed. Stanley E. Porter. Londra-New York: Routledge, 2007, 111-114.
  • Stanton, Graham. New Light on Jesus and the Gospels. Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press, 2005. Stanton, Graham. The Gospels and Jesus. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
  • Travis, Stephen H. “Form Criticism”. New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. ed. I. Howard Marshall. 1977. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press revised 1979, 153-164.
  • Vardy, Peter-Mills, Mary. The Puzzle of the Gospels. New York: M.H. Sharpe, Inc., 1997.
  • Wills, Lawrence M. The Quest of the Historical Gospel: Mark, John and the Origins of the Gospel Genre. Londra: Routledge, 1997.

SÖZLÜ GELENEK, FORM KRİTİĞİ VE İNCİLLER

Year 2019, Issue: 46, 297 - 327, 18.06.2019
https://doi.org/10.17120/omuifd.540787

Abstract

İsa’nın ölümünden 35-70 yıl sonra bugün “İncil” diye tanımlanan anonim
metinleri kaleme alan yazarların hangi bilgi kaynaklarını kullandıkları
meselesi, araştırmacılar arasında tartışılan bir konudur. Bu bağlamda, İncil
yazarlarının bazen birbirlerinin metinlerini kaynak olarak kullandıkları ortaya
konulmuştur. Bazen hipotetik bazı yazılı kaynakları da kullanmış oldukları
düşünülmektedir. Ancak İncillerin arkasında “sözlü gelenek” denilen şifahi bir
rivayet külliyatının bulunduğu da kabul edilmektedir. Sözlü gelenek
; İsa hakkında 30’lu
yıllardan II. yüzyılın ikinci çeyreğine kadar yayılarak dolaşan küçük, ayrı,
bağımsız, sözlü anlatılardan oluşmaktadır. Günümüzde “İncil” tabir edilen
yazılı metinlerden
hareketle, bu metinlerin arkasındaki sözlü geleneğin anlaşılmasına ve İncil
yazarlarının redaktörler olarak bu geleneği nasıl şekillendirdiklerine dair bilimsel
arayışlar ise “form kritiği” denilen metodolojik bir yaklaşımı öne çıkarmıştır.
Form kritiği,  sözlü geleneğin yapısını,
özgün temelini ve tarihini tanımlanmayı amaçlayan bir disiplindir. Bu disiplin,
İncil araştırmaları alanında önemli sonuçlara ulaşmayı mümkün kılmaktadır.
Wellhausen, Schmidt, Dibelius ve Bultmann gibi Alman araştırmacılar, bu alanın
öncü isimleri olmuşlardır. Bununla beraber, form kritiği konusu, tıpkı Kitab-ı
Mukaddes Kritiği kapsamındaki diğer yöntemler gibi Türk akademisi özelinde boş bırakılmıştır.
Bu makale, İncil rivayetlerinin arka planını oluşturan “sözlü gelenek” kavramına
ve bu süreci çeşitli açılardan inceleyen ve aydınlatmaya çalışan “form kritiği”
yöntemine, Türk akademisinin dikkatini çekmeyi amaçlamaktadır. 

References

  • Ashton, John. Understanding the Fourth Gospel. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
  • Augustinus. De Consensu Evangelistarum. İngilizce trc. S.D.F. Salmond, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Seri 1, C. 6. Ed. Philip Schaff. Buffalo, New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1888.
  • Bağır, Muhammet Ali. “Kutsal Kitap Eleştirisi: Eski Ahit Örneği ve Modern Dönem Öncüleri”. Harran Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 31 (Ocak-Haziran 2014) 279-310.
  • Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1987.
  • Bruce, F.F. “The History of the New Testament Study”. New Testament Interpretation, Essays on Principles and Methods. 1977. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, Revised 1979, 21-59.
  • Bultmann, Rudolf K. The History of the Synoptic Tradition. İngilizce trc. J. Marsh. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1972.
  • Carson, D.A.-Moo, Douglas J. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2. Basım. Michigan, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.
  • Colwell, Ernest Cadman. “Biblical Criticism: Lower and Higher”. Journal of Biblical Literature 67/1 (1948) 1-12 Demir, Şehmus. “Kitab-ı Mukaddes’i Mitolojik Unsurlardan Arındırma Çabası ve Kur’an Kıssalarının Tarihsel Gerçekliği”. İslami İlimler Dergisi 9:1 (Bahar 2014) 103-122.
  • Duran, Asım. “Aydınlanma ve Kutsal Kitap Yorumunun Tarihsel Dönüşümü”. Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi 17:2 (2017) 111-128.
  • Duygu, Zafer. İsa, Pavlus, İnciller: Hıristiyanlık Neden ve Nasıl Ortaya Çıktı? İstanbul: Düşün Yayınları, 2018.
  • Dvorak, James. “Martin Dibelius and Rudolf Bultmann”. Pillars in the History of Biblical Interpretations, C.I, Prevailing Methods Before 1980. ed. Stanley E Porter, Sean A Adams. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publication, 2016, 257-277.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and Invented Their Stories of the Savior. New York: HarperOne, 2017.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus, Interrupted, Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know About Them). San Francisco: HarperOne, 2009.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
  • Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. 2. Basım. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
  • Farmer, William R. The Synoptic Problem: A Critical Analysis. New York: The Macmillan Company-Londra: Collier-Macmillan Limited, 1964.
  • Goodacre, Mark. The Synoptic Problem: A Way through Maze. Londra: T-T Clark, 2001.
  • Hengel, Martin. “Eye-Witness Memory and the Writing of the Gospels: Form Criticism, Community Traditions and the Authority of the Authors”. The Written Gospel. ed. M. Bockmuehl-D.A. Hagner. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005, 70-98.
  • Irenaeus. Adversus Haereses. İngilizce trc. Alexander Roberts and William Rambaut. Ante-Nicene Fathers C. 1. ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.
  • Koester, Helmut. Introduction to the New Testament: II, History and Literature of Early Christianity. 2. Basım. New York-Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2000.
  • Kuzgun, Şaban. Dört İncil: Yazılması, Derlenmesi, Muhtevası. Genişletilmiş 2. Baskı. Ankara, 1996.
  • Maccoby, Hyam. The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity. Londra: Wiedenfeld-Nicolson, 1986.
  • McKnight, Edgar V. What is Form Criticism? Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.
  • Meral, Yasin. “Spinoza’nın Teolojik-Politik İncelemesinde Tanah Eleştirisi”. Mukaddime 6:1 (2015) 19-46. Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Londra-New York: United Bible Societies, 1971.
  • Paçacı, Mehmet. Kutsal Kitaplarda Ölüm Ötesi. Ankara: Ankara Okulu Yayınları, 2001.
  • Perrin, Norman. What Is Redaction Criticism. 4. Basım, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974.
  • Polat, Salahattin. Metin Tenkidi. İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Yayınları, 2010.
  • Shaw, Brent D. “The Myth of the Neronian Persecution”. Journal of Roman Studies 105 (2015) 73-100.
  • Smalley, Stephen S. "Redaction Criticism". New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. ed. I. Howard Marshall. 1977. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, revised 1979, 181-196.
  • Smith, Stephen H. “Mark 3, 1-6: Form, Redaction and Community Function”. Biblica 75:2 (1994) 153-174.
  • So, Ky-Chun. Jesus in Q: The Sabbath and Theology of the Bible and Extracanonical Texts. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock.
  • Sparks, Kenton L. “Form Criticism”. Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation. ed. Stanley E. Porter. Londra-New York: Routledge, 2007, 111-114.
  • Stanton, Graham. New Light on Jesus and the Gospels. Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press, 2005. Stanton, Graham. The Gospels and Jesus. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
  • Travis, Stephen H. “Form Criticism”. New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. ed. I. Howard Marshall. 1977. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press revised 1979, 153-164.
  • Vardy, Peter-Mills, Mary. The Puzzle of the Gospels. New York: M.H. Sharpe, Inc., 1997.
  • Wills, Lawrence M. The Quest of the Historical Gospel: Mark, John and the Origins of the Gospel Genre. Londra: Routledge, 1997.
There are 36 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Zafer Duygu 0000-0002-8762-9850

Publication Date June 18, 2019
Submission Date March 15, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Issue: 46

Cite

ISNAD Duygu, Zafer. “SÖZLÜ GELENEK, FORM KRİTİĞİ VE İNCİLLER”. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 46 (June 2019), 297-327. https://doi.org/10.17120/omuifd.540787.