“I Will Never Disown You” (Mk. 14:31): A Psychological Perspective on Peter’s Denials

Yong Lu

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/TiCz.2017.046

Abstrakt


“Nie wyprę się Ciebie” (Mk 14,31): Psychologiczne spojrzenie na zaprzeczenia Piotra. W artykule podjęto próbę zbadania efektów zatrzymywania pamięci, wspomnienia fantomowe i porzucenie wspomnień w stosunku do zaprzeczeń apostoła Piotra (Mt 26:31–35, 69–75; Mk 14:27–31, 66–72; Łk 22:31–34, 54–62; J 13:37–38, 18:15–18, 25–27). Pamięć fantomowa odnosi się do tego, że czasami fałszywe wspomnienia oparte na faktach na wysokich poziomach są wystarczająco silne, aby wywoływać fałszywie przywołane doświadczenia. Podczas gdy poszczególne osoby odzyskują prawdziwe rozpoznawanie swoich instancji badanych scenariuszy, a nie przynęty zgodne z fałszywymi, ale zgodnymi z normami, poprzez wykrywanie odpowiedniego sygnału przez operację edycji pamięci zwaną porzuceniem wspomnień. W tym artykule zbadano, w jakim stopniu podtrzymuje pamięć Piotra, a ponadto zakłada, że wspomnienia fantomowe prowadzą Piotra do zignorowania własnej obietnicy, ale z pomocą wykrywania kluczowych sygnałów (tj. kogut zapiał, Mt 26:74b, Mk 14: 72a, Łk 22:60b, J 18:27b; Jezus wprost patrzy na niego, Łk 22:61a), który przywołuje proces porzucenia wspomnień, odzyskuje swoje prawdziwe wspomnienia. Po raz pierwszy, jeśli jakiekolwiek, próba interpretacji perykopy zaprzeczeń Piotra przez pryzmat teorii fałszywej pamięci może wyjaśnić nasze hermeneutyczne rozumienie z perspektywy natury ludzkiej.  


Słowa kluczowe


zaprzeczenia Piotra; fałszywa pamięć; pamięć fantomowa; porzucenie wspomnień

Pełny tekst:

PDF (English)

Bibliografia


Adamczewski, B., Hypertextuality and Historicity in the Gospels, Peter Lang: Frankfurt am Main 2013, pp. 96–117.

Adamczewski, B., The Gospel of Mark: A Hypertextual Commentary, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang 2014, p. 173.

Allison, D.C., Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History, London: SPCK 2010.

Atkinson R.C. and Shiffrin R.M., “Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes”, Psychology of Learning and Motivation 2 (2008), pp. 89–195.

Bailey, K.E., “Informal controlled oral tradition and the synoptic Gospels”, Themelios 20 (1995), pp. 4–11.

Bale, A.J., Genre and Narrative Coherence in the Acts of the Apostles, C. Keith (Ed.), Bloomsbury 2015.

Bauckham, R., Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing 2006.

Bauckham, R., “Eyewitnesses and critical history: A response to Jens Schröter and Craig Evans”, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31 (2008), pp. 221–235.

Bennema, C., “The historical reliability of the Gospel of John”, Foundations 67 (2014), pp. 4–25.

Brainerd, C.J., and Reyna, V.F., “Fuzzy-trace theory and false memory”, Current Directions in Psychological Science 11 (2002), pp. 164–169.

Brainerd, C.J., Wright, R., Reyna, V.F., and Mojardin, A.H., “Conjoint recognition and phantom recollection”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27 (2001), pp. 307–327.

Byrskog, S., Story as History – History as Story. The Gospel Tradition in the Context of Ancient Oral History, Boston: Brill 2002, pp. 65–94.

Byrskog, S. The Meal and the Temple. Probing the Cult-Critical Implications of the Last Supper, in: D. Hellholm and D. Sänger (Eds.), The Eucharist – Its Origins and Contexts, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 2017, pp. 436-452.

Crook, Z.A., “Collective memory distortion and the quest for the historical Jesus”, Journal of the Study of the Historical Jesus 11 (2013), pp. 53–76.

Crook, Z.A., “Matthew, memory theory and the new no quest”, HTS Theological Studies 70 (2014), pp. 1–11.

Dewey, A.J., The Eyewitness of History, [in:] R.T. Fortna and T. Thatcher (Ed.), Jesus in Johannine Tradition, Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox 2001, pp. 59–70.

Dewey, A.J., “The memorable invention of the death of Jesus”, HTS Teologiese/Theological Studies 72 (2016), doi: 10.4102/hts.v72i4.3222.

Dunn, J.D.G., Jesus Remembered, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 2003, pp. 115–124.

Dunn, J.D.G., “Unity and Diversity in the New Testament: An Inquiry into the Character of Earliest Christianity”, SCM Press 2006.

Dunn, J.D.G., “Kenneth Bailey’s theory of oral tradition: Critiquing Theodore Weeden’s critique”, Journal of the Study of the Historical Jesus 7 (2009), pp. 44–62.

Gigerenzer, G. and Goldstein, D.G., “The recognition heuristic: A decade of research”, Judgment and Decision Making 6 (2011), pp. 100–121.

Goldstein, D.G. and Gigerenzer, G., “Models of ecological rationality: The recognition heuristic”, Psychological Review 109 (2002), pp. 75–90.

Guyot, G.H., “Peter denies his Lord”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 4 (1942), pp. 111–118.

Keener, C.S., The Historical Jesus of the Gospels, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing 2009.

Kloppenborg, J.S., “Memory, performance, and the sayings of Jesus”, Journal of the Study of the Historical Jesus 10 (2012), pp. 97–132.

Kümmel, W.G., Introduction to the New Testament, London: SCM 1975, pp. 98, 120, 151, 246.

Lu, Y., “A theological, ancient Hellenistic, and psychological look at the dreams of Pharaoh’s chief cupbearer and chief baker (Gen. 40: 5-13, 16-18)”, International Journal of Dream Research 9 (2016), pp. 46–57.

Lu, Y., “ ‘Love your neighbor as yourself ’ (Lk. 10:27b): The parable of the good Samaritan in the light of regulatory focus theory”, EC Psychology and Psychiatry 5 (2017), pp. 1–6.

Marche, T.A. and Brainerd, C.J., “The role of phantom recollection in false recall”, Memory and Cognition 40 (2012), pp. 902–917.

Mclver, R.K., Memory, Jesus, and the Synoptic Gospels, Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature 2011.

Mclver, R.K., “Eyewitnesses as guarantors of the accuracy of the Gospel tradition in the light of psychological research”, Journal of Biblical Literature 131 (2012), pp. 529–546.

Mills, M.G., “Peter’s denials. Part I: Important background considerations”, Journal of Dispensational Theology 17 (2013), pp. 107–117.

Mills, M.G., “Peter’s denials. Part II: An examination of the narratives”, Journal of Dispensational Theology 17 (2013), pp. 207–226.

Neyrey, J.H., “The apologetic use of the transfiguration in 2 Peter 1: 16–21”, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 42 (1980), pp. 504–519.

Nieznański, M., “The role of reinstating generation operations in recognition memory and reality monitoring”, Polish Psychological Bulletin 45 (2014), pp. 363–371.

Perkins, P., Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 2009, pp. 250–253.

Redman, J., How accurate are eyewitnesses? Bauckham and the eyewitnesses in the light of psychological research, Journal of Biblical Literature 129 (2010), pp. 177–197.

Riesner, R., Paul’s Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1998, pp. 35–58.

Rotello, C.M. and Heit, E., “Two process models of recognition memory: Evidence for recall-to-reject?”, Journal of Memory and Language 40 (1999), pp. 432–453.

Rotello, C.M., Macmillan, N.A., and Reeder, J.A., “Sum-difference theory of remembering and knowing: A two-dimensional signal-detection model”, Psychological Review 111 (2004), pp. 588–616.

Sanders, E.P., The Historical Figures of Jesus, New York: Penguin 1993.

Tulving, E., Elements of Episodic Memory, London: Oxford University Press 1985.

Wickelgren, W.A., “Alcoholic intoxication and memory storage dynamics”, Memory and Cognition 3 (1975), pp. 385–389.

Yonelinas, A.P., Dobbins, I., Szymanski, M.D., Dhaliwal, H.S. and King, L., “Signal-detection, threshold, and dual-process models of recognition memory: ROCs and conscious recollection”, Consciousness and Cognition 5 (1996), pp. 418–441.








p-ISSN 1731-5638
e-ISSN 2391-7598

Partnerzy platformy czasopism