Portraits of the historical Jesus

The term "historical Jesus" refers to the reconstruction of the life and teachings of Jesus by critical historical methods, in contrast to religious interpretations. It also considers the historical and cultural contexts in which Jesus lived.
Virtually all scholars of antiquity accept that Jesus was a historical figure, and attempts to deny his historicity have been consistently rejected by the scholarly consensus as a fringe theory.In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on certain and clear evidence." B. Ehrman, 2011 ''Forged: writing in the name of God'' . pp. 256–257 Robert M. Price (an atheist who denies the existence of Jesus) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in ''The Historical Jesus: Five Views'' edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, p. 61 Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in ''Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels'' by Michael Grant (2004) p. 200

Reconstructions of the historical Jesus are based on the Pauline epistles and the gospels, while several non-biblical sources also support his historical existence. Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria. Scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, with two events being supported by nearly universal scholarly consensus: Jesus was baptized and crucified.''Jesus Remembered'' by James D. G. Dunn 2003 p. 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".''Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus'' by William R. Herzog (2005) pp. 1–6''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 pp. 168–173 Historical Jesus scholars typically contend that he was a Galilean Jew and living in a time of messianic and apocalyptic expectations. Some scholars credit the apocalyptic declarations of the gospels to him, while others portray his "Kingdom of God" as a moral one, and not apocalyptic in nature.

The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed through history using these processes have often differed from each other, and from the image portrayed in the gospel accounts. Such portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish messiah, prophet of social change,''The Cambridge History of Christianity'', Volume 1 by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young (2006) p. 23 and rabbi. There is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, nor the methods needed to construct it,''Jesus Research: An International Perspective (Princeton–Prague Symposia Series on the Historical Jesus)'' by James H. Charlesworth and Petr Pokorny (2009) pp. 1–2''Images of Christ'' (Academic Paperback) by Stanley E. Porter, Michael A. Hayes and David Tombs (2004) T&T Clark p. 74 but there are overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.''Familiar Stranger: An Introduction to Jesus of Nazareth'' by Michael James McClymond (2004) pp. 16–22

Historical existence

Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed. Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical criticism are applied to the New Testament, "we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned." There is no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.''Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi'' by Karl Rahner 2004 pp. 730–731Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence''. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 15

Since the 1970s, various scholars such as Joachim Jeremias, E. P. Sanders and Gerd Theissen have traced elements of Christianity to diversity in first-century Judaism and discarded nineteenth-century views that Jesus was based on previous pagan deities. Mentions of Jesus in extra-biblical texts do exist and are supported as genuine by the majority of historians. Historical scholars see differences between the content of the Jewish Messianic prophecies and the life of Jesus, undermining views Jesus was invented as a Jewish Midrash or Peshar. The presence of details of Jesus' life in Paul, and the differences between letters and Gospels, are sufficient for most scholars to dismiss mythicist claims concerning Paul. Theissen says "there is broad scholarly consensus that we can best find access to the historical Jesus through the Synoptic tradition." Bart D. Ehrman adds: "To dismiss the Gospels from the historical record is neither fair nor scholarly." One book argues that if Jesus did not exist, "the origin of the faith of the early Christians remains a perplexing mystery." Eddy and Boyd say the best history can assert is probability, yet the probability of Jesus having existed is so high, Ehrman says "virtually all historians and scholars have concluded Jesus did exist as a historical figure." Historian James Dunn writes: "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".''The Gospels and Jesus'' by Graham Stanton, 1989 Oxford University Press, p. 145: In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Ehrman wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees." James Crossley and Robert J. Myles admit they "are sceptical about what we can know ''with confidence''" but they do not deny the existence of Jesus and instead "prefer to think in terms of whether ideas about Jesus were early or late and whether they were particular to his geographical location or beyond."

The Christ myth theory is the proposition that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity and the accounts in the gospels. In the 21st century, there have been a number of books and documentaries on this subject. For example, Earl Doherty has written that Jesus may have been a real person, but that the biblical accounts of him are almost entirely fictional. Did Jesus exist?, Bart Ehrman, 2012, Chapter 1 Many proponents use a three-fold argument first developed in the 19th century: that the New Testament has no historical value, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan and/or mythical roots.

Contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and biblical scholars and classical historians view the theories of his nonexistence as effectively refuted. Robert E. Van Voorst ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. p. 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in ''Sacrifice and Redemption'' edited by S. W. Sykes (2007) Cambridge University Press pp. 35–36 states that the theories of the non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis" Robert M. Price, an atheist who denies the existence of Jesus, agrees that his perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars. Michael Grant (a classicist and historian) states that "In recent years, no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus, or at any rate very few have, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." Richard A. Burridge states, "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church's imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that anymore."

Sources

The New Testament represents sources that have become canonical for Christianity, and there are many apocryphal texts that are examples of the wide variety of writings in the first centuries AD that are related to Jesus.

Non-Christian sources that are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus.

New Testament sources

Synoptic Gospels

The Synoptic Gospels are the primary sources of historical information about Jesus and of the religious movement he founded.Sanders, E. P. ''The historical figure of Jesus''. Penguin, 1993.Vermes, Geza. The authentic gospel of Jesus. London, Penguin Books. 2004. These religious gospelsthe Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark, and the Gospel of Lukerecount the life, ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of a Jew named Jesus who spoke Aramaic and wore tzitzit. There are different hypotheses regarding the origin of the texts because the gospels of the New Testament were written in Greek for Greek-speaking communities, and were later translated into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic.

The fourth gospel, the Gospel of John, differs greatly from the Synoptic Gospels and scholars generally consider it to be less historical than the Synoptic Gospels. As James Crossley and Robert J. Myles explain, John "is of limited use for reconstructing the life of the historical Jesus." However, scholars usually agree that John is not entirely without historical value: certain sayings in John are as old or older than their synoptic counterparts, his representation of the topography around Jerusalem is often superior to that of the synoptics, his testimony that Jesus was executed before, rather than on, Passover, might well be more accurate, and his presentation of Jesus in the garden and the prior meeting held by the Jewish authorities are more historically plausible than their synoptic parallels.

Historians often study the historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles when studying the reliability of the gospels, as the Book of Acts was seemingly written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke.

Pauline epistles

The Pauline epistles are dated to between AD 50 and 60 (''i.e.'', approximately twenty to thirty years after the generally accepted time period for the death of Jesus), and are the earliest surviving Christian texts that include information about Jesus.Edward Adams in ''The Cambridge Companion to Jesus'' by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 pp. 94–96.

Although Paul the Apostle provides relatively little biographical information about Jesus and states that he never knew Jesus personally, he does make it clear that he considers Jesus to have been a real person and a Jew.''Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making'' by James D. G. Dunn (2003) p. 143''Jesus Christ in History and Scripture'' by Edgar V. McKnight 1999 p. 38''Jesus according to Paul'' by Victor Paul Furnish 1994 pp. 19–20 Moreover, he claims to have met with James, the brother of Jesus.

Non-biblical sources

In addition to biblical sources, there are a number of mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources that have been used in the historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.''Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey'' by Craig L. Blomberg 2009 pp. 431–436

Thallos

Biblical scholar Frederick Fyvie Bruce says the earliest mention of Jesus outside the New Testament occurs around 55 CE from a historian named Thallos. Thallos' history, like the vast majority of ancient literature, has been lost but not before it was quoted by Sextus Julius Africanus (c. 160c. 240 CE), a Christian writer, in his ''History of the World'' (c. 220). This book likewise was lost, but not before one of its citations of Thallos was taken up by the Byzantine historian George Syncellus in his ''Chronicle'' (c. 800). There is no means by which certainty can be established concerning this or any of the other lost references, partial references, and questionable references that mention some aspect of Jesus' life or death, but in evaluating evidence, it is appropriate to note they exist.

Josephus and Tacitus

There are two passages in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one from the Roman historian Tacitus, that are generally considered good evidence.

Josephus' ''Antiquities of the Jews'', written around AD 93–94, includes two references to the biblical Jesus in Books 18 and 20. The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the '' Testimonium Flavianum'', is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation. Of the other mention in Josephus, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 ("the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James"). Paul references meeting and interacting with James, Jesus' brother, and since this agreement between the different sources supports Josephus' statement, the statement is only disputed by a small number of scholars.''The new complete works of Josephus'' by Flavius Josephus, William Whiston, Paul L. Maier pp. 662–663

Roman historian Tacitus referred to "Christus" and his execution by Pontius Pilate in his ''Annals'' (written c. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44. Robert E. Van Voorst states that the very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians makes the passage extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribeRobert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'', Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000. pp. 39–53 and the Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation of Jesus's crucifixion.

Talmud

Other considerations outside Christendom include the possible mentions of Jesus in the Talmud. The Talmud speaks in some detail of the conduct of criminal cases of Israel whose texts were gathered together from 200 to 500 CE. Johann Maier and Bart D. Ehrman argue this material is too late to be of much use. Ehrman explains that "Jesus is never mentioned in the oldest part of the Talmud, the Mishnah, but appears only in the later commentaries of the Gemara." Jesus is not mentioned by name, but there is a subtle attack on the virgin birth that refers to the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier Panthera (Ehrman says, "In Greek the word for virgin is ''parthenos"''), and a reference to Jesus' miracles as "black magic" learned when he lived in Egypt (as a toddler). Ehrman writes that few contemporary scholars treat this as historical.

Mara bar Serapion

There is only one classical writer who refers positively to Jesus and that is Mara bar Serapion, a Syriac Stoic, who wrote a letter to his son, who was also named Serapion, from a Roman prison. He speaks of the execution of 'the wise king of the Jews' and compares his death to that of Socrates at the hands of the Athenians. He links the death of the 'wise king' to the Jews being driven from their kingdom. He also states that the 'wise king' lives on because of the "new laws he laid down". The dating of the letter is disputed but was probably soon after 73 AD.

Scholars such as Robert Van Voorst see little doubt that the reference to the execution of the "king of the Jews" is about the death of Jesus.''Jesus outside the New Testament: an introduction to the ancient evidence'' by Robert E. Van Voorst 2000 pp. 53–55 Others such as Craig A. Evans see less value in the letter, given its uncertain date, and the ambiguity in the reference.''Jesus and His Contemporaries: Comparative Studies'' by Craig A. Evans 2001 p. 41

Critical-historical research

Historical criticism, also known as the historical-critical method or higher criticism, is a branch of criticism that investigates the origins of ancient texts in order to understand "the world behind the text". The primary goal of historical criticism is to discover the text's primitive or original meaning in its original historical context and its literal sense. Historical criticism began in the 17th century and gained popular recognition in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Historical reliability of the Gospels

The historical reliability of the gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Little in the four canonical gospels is considered to be historically reliable.Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels p. 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).“The Historical Figure of Jesus," Sanders, E.P., Penguin Books: London, 1995, p. 3.Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Vol. II): Meditations on the Gospel According to St. Matthew – Dr Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, Introduction

Historians subject the gospels to critical analysis by differentiating authentic, reliable information from possible inventions, exaggerations, and alterations. Since there are more textual variants (200,000–400,000) than words in the New Testament, scholars use textual criticism to determine which gospel variants could theoretically be taken as 'original'. To answer this question, scholars have to ask who wrote the gospels, when they wrote them, what was their objective in writing them,Paul Rhodes Eddy & Gregory A. Boyd, ''The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition.'' (2008, Baker Academic). 309-262. what sources the authors used, how reliable these sources were, and how far removed in time the sources were from the stories they narrate, or if they were altered later. Scholars may also look into the internal evidence of the documents, to see if, for example, a document has misquoted texts from the Hebrew Tanakh