Abstract
The death story of Jesus of Nazareth has traditionally been understood as a matter of historical fact. The various versions of the story would seem to confirm a documented death scene. Nevertheless, critical appraisals of this material have raised numerous questions regarding the passion story. This article considers how the very structure of the story is a vital clue to the way in which the death of Jesus was invented. The Jewish tale of the suffering and vindication of the innocent one provides the memory locus for discovering meaning in the fate of Jesus. We find that the basic fact of the death tale of Jesus is that it was a fiction, authorising further elaborations for those who understood the craft of memory.
Highlights
At the origin of its haunting tradition the death of Jesus remains a traumatic event
Werner Kelber (2005) wisely notes: Our earlier observation that the past exists only as remembered past applies with special force to the events surrounding the crucifixion
No event in Christian origins is less likely to be transmitted in its factual rawness, and no experience is more in need of mnemonic frames and mediating patterns, than Jesus’ death. (p. 246)
Summary
At the origin of its haunting tradition the death of Jesus remains a traumatic event. We see that the story is, structured along the lines of the Tale of the Persecution and Vindication of the Innocent One. The meticulous effort of George Nickelsburg (1972) has demonstrated that this story emerged from Hellenistic Judaism, and that the constituent elements of that story pattern form the passion narrative of Mark (Nickelsburg 1980).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
