Abstract
AbstractWhile some might construct their view of the historical Jesus based upon the published findings of the Jesus Seminar, others may re-examine individual pericopae and argue that a change of 'colour' would be appropriate. Here it is suggested that the arguments offered by the Seminar to justify the colouring of one saying of Jesus—that a prophet is rejected in his home town (Gos. Thom. 31.1, Mk 6.4, Matt. 13.57, Lk. 4.24, and Jn 4.44)—as a (deep) pink are flawed. Arguments based upon multiple attestation, plausibility and embarrassment are considered and rejected, leading to the conclusion that black is the most appropriate colour for the saying. Two explanations for its inclusion in the Gospels are offered: that it is a proverb inserted by the writers because it mirrored their own circumstances, and the more speculative view that the saying was viewed as appropriate because of Jesus' own hyperbolic characterization of discipleship (cf. Lk. 14.26).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
