The Master's Men - William Barclay
I enjoy early church history, and the commentaries of William Barclay, so learning that he had written a book about the twelve apostles, telling their history, was intriguing. Unfortunately, there are certain aspect to Barclay's writings that I have some issues with, and The Master's Men leans far enough into those issues that I struggled with the book as a whole - actually, I started this in the middle of 2024, and only picked it up recently in order to finish it off, rather than from a sense of enjoyment.
Firstly, the good. Each chapter looks at one of the '12 disciples' named in the gospels (as well as some extra individuals - there are 15 chapters), giving the list of scriptural mentions (which, for some, are not very many), and then going into the 'historical' accounts found of them outside scripture. Barclay is quite good at joining the dots, and it is in these moments that the book becomes to most interesting. An example is during the chapter on Judas Iscariot (yes, the one who betrays Jesus). Barclay begins by referring to the fact that "in the ancient days the guests reclined on low couches, resting on the left elbow, with the right hand free for the work of raising the food and the drink" (this and following quotes all page 69), something that I was aware of. He points out that John must have been on Jesus' right, in order to be "reclining on Jesus' bosom (John 13.23)." But then he goes further: "But the position in which the most favoured guest was placed was on the host's left, for the host would be reclining with his head on the breast of the person to his left. When we read John's narrative, it seems clear that Judas was occupying the place of special honour...[because] Jesus handed [the unleavened bread] to Judas (John 13:26), and the likeliest place for Judas to be sitting was next to Jesus. Further, the whole atmosphere of the scene is that Jesus' conversation with Judas was private..." So, Barclay is able to suggest, quite convincingly, that Judas was honoured by Jesus during the Last Supper, which adds a lot to the narrative!
However, the struggle for me comes with just how much weight Barclay puts on myth and legends, even while admitting them to be myths and legends. He did the same in his commentary on The Letter to the Hebrews, but here he talks about the legends written down much later, and then uses them to comment on the personalities of those he is talking about.
That's like reading Taylor Swift fan-fiction and using it to 'prove' that Taylor is sweet and sensitive "because this story shows her being kind to cats."
And, when talking about historical figures, that bugs me.
Sure, some of the individuals may have little to nothing known about them, but don't then use obviously made-up stories to pad out your chapter. Just admit there is little to nothing known about them and move on.
Completed 18 January 2025.
Comments
Post a Comment