The story of the Transfiguration has received some attention in the past few decades, and the significance of Elijah and Moses has not been neglected. But their prominence in the Marcan narrative has not always been sufficiently recognized, and where it has been recognized it does not seem to have been correctly evaluated.

One of the most fruitful aspects of recent study of the Fourth Gospel has been the recovery of traditional sayings of Jesus embedded in Johannine discourses. They are often the starting point of the whole argument. The classic example of this is the Parable of the Apprenticed Son in John v. 19 f. This was isolated as a parable from earlier tradition by both C.H. Dodd and P. Gächter, working independently of each other. In this case it is easy to see how the entire exposition of the work of Jesus as the Son of man, with which the Son and the Slave in viii. 35 has a similar relation to the discourse in which it is enclosed, even though this may not be so obvious at first sight. These and other examples of parables in John have been conveniently collected in the popular work of A. M. Hunter, According to John (1968), pp. 78–89.

Since the advent of Hans Conzelmann's book The Theology of St Luke it has become a byword of New Testament studies that Luke is a man with a theological axe to grind. He is pictured as one who has systematically manipulated and recast his sources down to the smallest detail, in order to squeeze them into his over-all theological framework. Before this, Luke was thought of as a sort of homely old Hellenist; doctor, author, friend of Paul, he was seen as a man of wide sympathies but of no great theological depth—hence the traditional reference to his interest in women, Gentiles and the poor and outcast.

It is said that Jesus’ comments (Matt. xv. 4_6, Mark vii. 9_13) are unfair, or incompetently reported.2 It is desirable to clarify the practice and the law to which he referred.