My MA(TS) Thesis will focus on mark 5.1-20, using rhetorical criticism to highlight the source material. I’m not really struggling with the idea that Jesus ‘didn’t really’ cast out the demons, but I know that others are. As a matter of fact, I’ve wondered how you could go about preaching that without defeating faith or confusing the congregation or cause them to question the authority of Scripture. So, in reading Wright’s first essay in this book, I caught this line:
He begins, “Our vision of social justice and of salvation have become cruelly detached from one another.”
He goes one to say that he has covered this in an earlier book, ]], stating that philosophically, the “problem of evil has been allowed to float free from the cross, while the cross seen as atonement, has become quite detached from the massasive and deeply troubling fact of evil…”
Excellent. Agreed. Cheers. But, in this, he goes on, and I quote, “(T)he evangelists are reflecting a train of thought and prayer and vocation which was Jesus’ own train of thought.” I get the part that we cannot simply believe that Jesus had no clue as to what He was doing, leaving the creation of the mythos to the Gospel writers. But, my focus is, is the idea that the Gospel (telling/writing) is a vocation in of itself and was a means to confront evil so that the Gospel is still Jesus working a social justice concern through the salvic moment of the Cross which allowed the Evangelists to speak of Jesus, in the present, still working.