My Jewish Need

So I'm in the middle of working away at my exegesis on Luke. After reading about 50 pages of commentary I find myself asking some pretty uncomfortable questions.

If Luke is so focused on telling "a good order of things/events" as the prologue tells us in Ch. 1, then what do I do with an historical interpretation of Jesus? What do I mean by that? In light of the Gospel story that Jesus is telling parables and encountering peoples that speak of the coming of a radical Kingdom where the poor become blessed, the lame are healed, the rich and poweful are brought low etc., I'm pretty happy with small stories that speak toward a grander narrative.

But sometimes I need historical information. Did Jesus really hang out with a guy named Zacchaeus? Did Jesus really heal the ten lepers in the way that Luke describes? There is such a focus in Luke about how intentional the author is to tell us something as Dr. Rowe paraphrases "for our catechesis/learning" and "for our faith to be grounded on something as sturdy as asphalt" that it makes me wonder what happened to the historical Jesus. Was all of this stuff in the Gospels (in this case Luke) just created and embellished at whim to make for a better overall story? Take the case of the dude who wrote that book that became an Oprah club book and it became a HUGE scandal and discredit to the man when it came out that he did the same to his memoir.

Yes, I can get some asphalt from reports about what others at the time said about Jesus' existence and the conversions of Jews to Christians. I can get some asphalt from the presence of my own faith. But what about from the text itself? I have intertextuality--not just with the other Gospels (especially the Synoptics) and the Christian New Testament, but i have the Old Testament. I also have the testimony of the Jews. Without the presence of the Jews and the foundation that was laid through God's self-revelation through a particular people in space and time I'm not sure how much asphalt I would have for the validity of Jesus, the validity of YHWH, and the validity of faith and practice.

Perhaps this is what Dr. Jennings has tried to drill into our heads while reading T.F. Torrance who seems to give this very same theological explanation (minus the wonderings and Lukan-ness). Thanks Jennings and Torrance. But I must say, thank you God for the testimony of the Jews!