A recurring complaint charges the early Church with
having ‘edited’ the Gospels, a charge imputing to the Church the intention to
pervert the truth. It may surprise not a few people to learn that not only were
the Gospels themselves edited, but it seems there was an editorial process at
work throughout, from the earliest oral and written sources through to the
finished work. But this editorial process was not undertaken, as has been
suggested, for the purpose of suppressing embarrassing biographical details,
nor to make the written Gospel acceptable to a Roamn or, in the wider sense, a
Gentile readership. Again, it was the practical, pastoral purpose which
dictated that was done. For example, the New Testament scholars generally agree
that Mark’s Gospel ends at chapter 16, verse 8, and that verses 9-20 were added
later, rounding off what was an abrupt and unsatisfactory ending. The
interpretation which follows Jesus’ parable of the sower is also thought by
scholars to be a late editorial addition in line with pastoral need. There can
be no question of there being anything wrong in the Church adding these
finishing touches. The Gospels from the first to last were Church documents,
shaped by the Church, completed by the Church for the needs of the Church, and were
not the result of some disinterested party sitting down and writing a detached
history. (Peter Bartley, The Gospel Jesus: Fact or Fiction? [Dublin:
Veritas, 1996], 90-91)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
