{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018885741265344664, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00047214353163361664, 'mean_word_length': 4.952247191011236, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Redactional Trajectories in the Crucifixion Narrative

where he worked under the supervision of Dr. I. Howard Marshall, is now Assistant Professor of New Testament in Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. This paper, which was read at a meeting of the Canadian Evangelical Society, provides welcome evidence that the subject which it treats is not the exclusive preserve of critical radicalism. A GREAT deal has been written regarding the negative results of redaction criticism. Even radical critics use a disproportionate amount of space tracing Traditionsgeschichte, or the development and validity of individual pericopes; and too little showing the results of Redaktionsgeschichte, or the theological purposes of the individual writers. The reason, of course, is obvious: there are greater possibilities for creative work in the former. Yet the latter aspect is more important in many ways, especially for the believer who wishes to apply biblical principles and attitudes to his present situation. This study will attempt to show how the methodology of redaction criticism can serve the interests of exposition and methodology. The New Hermeneutic of the radical critic recognizes the value ofthe proclaimed word, and so this purpose should apply to all theological strata. At the outset, however, we might note that many scholars have pointed the way to a positive evaluation of Gospel pericopae. 1 There is no basis for demanding a pessimistic approach to the narratives and sayings of Jesus. The scholar does not have to "demy-thologize" or existentialize the Tendenz of the Gospel writer, and it is my hope that this paper will contribute in some small way to the development of a more optimistic approach to redaction study. This is not to derogate tradition criticism in any way; that is a crucial aspect of New Testament research. However, we must seek a proper balance between the two aspects, i.e., between the development of the traditions and the theological nuances of the writer. Due both to the brevity required in this article and the purpose of it, we must restrict ourselves to the former aspect.