Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§8.1 The Tradition
known as 'Nazarenes' (Acts 24.5), which can be explained only by the fact that
they saw themselves and were seen as followers of 'Jesus the Nazarene'; 8 and
then as 'Christians' (Acts 11.26), 9 which again must be because they were known
to be followers of the one they called the 'Christ'. Moreover, Jesus is explicitly referred
to once or twice in the early tradition as the 'foundation' (themelion), which
Paul laid (including Jesus tradition?), 10 and on which the Corinthians were to
build their discipleship (1 Cor. 3.10-14); or as the 'corner stone' (akmgöniaios)
which began the building and established its orientation (Eph. 2.20; 1 Pet. 2.6). n
Sociological reflection on what this self-identification on the part of the
Christians would have involved yields further fruit. Here, after all, were small
house groups who designated themselves by reference to Jesus the Christ, or
Christ Jesus. Sociology and social anthropology teach us that such groups would
almost certainly have required a foundation story (or stories) to explain, to themselves
as well as to others, why they had formed distinct social groupings, why
they were designated as 'Nazarenes' and 'Christians'. It is hardly likely that a
bare kerygmatic formula like 1 Cor. 15.3-8 would have provided sufficient material
for self-identification. 12 Even the initiatory myths of the mystery cults told
more elaborate stories. 13 Stories of such diverse figures as Jeremiah and Diogenes
were preserved by their disciples as part of the legitimation for their own
commitment. 14 And if Moses is to be regarded as the nearest equivalent (as
founder of the religion of Israel), then we need simply recall that Exodus to Deuteronomy
are framed and interspersed by the story of Moses' life. Of course,
counter-examples can be named: we know very little of Qumran's Teacher of
Righteousness. 15 On the other hand, the Teacher of Righteousness never gave his
with Judaism (Jesus 18). Wright reiterates the point in his own terms: e.g., 'Jesus must be understood
as a comprehensible and yet, so to speak, crucifiable first-century Jew, whatever the
theological or hermeneutical consequences' (Jesus 86).
8. See below chapter 9 n. 272.
9. See further below, vol. 2.
10. See below §8.1b-e.
11. The term akmgöniaios designates 'the foundation stone at its farthest corner, with
which a building is begun — it firmly fixes its site and determines its direction' (H. Krämer,
EDNT 1.268).
12. Against those who assume that the kerygma of cross and resurrection not only overshadowed
the traditions of Jesus' pre-Good Friday ministry but also in effect expunged them
from the corporate memory.
13. See, e.g., Plutarch's treatment of the myth of Isis and Osiris, J. G. Griffiths, Plutarch's
de Iside et Ostride (Cardiff: University of Wales, 1970).
14. Jeremiah, e.g., 1.1-10 (dates and call); 19.14-20.6; 28; 32; 36-42. Dio Chrysostom,
Sixth Discourse: Diogenes, or on Tyranny (Loeb 1.250-83); Diogenes Laertius, Lives 6.20-81.
15. The basic treatment is still G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (SUNT 2;
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1963).
175