Misplaced Pages

Historicity of Jesus: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:39, 1 October 2014 editCinteotl (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,603 edits rv BOLD edit. See talk page discussion← Previous edit Revision as of 18:45, 1 October 2014 edit undoRobert McClenon (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers197,110 edits Undid revision 627845714 by Fearofreprisal (talk) restore disambig because revert was not explained on talk pageNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
'''''This is a disambiguation article.'''''
{{POV|date=October 2013}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2013}}
{{pp-pc1}}
{{Jesus}}
The '''historicity of Jesus''' is the question whether ] existed as a ], whether any of the major milestones in his life as portrayed in the ] can be confirmed as historical events as opposed to ], ], or ], and the weighing of the evidence relating to his life.<ref>], ''Did Jesus Exist?'' Harper Collins, 2012</ref> {{failed verification|date=September 2014}}(The historicity of Jesus is distinct from the related study of the ], which refers to scholarly reconstructions of the life of Jesus based primarily on ] analysis of the gospel texts).<ref name=AmyJill1>] in the ''The Historical Jesus in Context'' edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 pages 1-2</ref><ref name=Bart411>''Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium'' by Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731 Oxford Univ Press pages ix-xi</ref><ref>''Jesus Remembered'' Volume 1, by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 pp. 125-127</ref>


The theory that Jesus never existed at all (the ]) has very little scholarly support.<ref name="voorst16"/><ref name=CambridgeJesus >''The Cambridge companion to Jesus'' by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 Cambridge University Press ISBN 978-0-521-79678-1 pages 123-124. Page 124 state that the "farfetched theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention are highly implausible."</ref><ref name="powell168">{{Cite book| last=Powell | first =Mark Allan |url = http://books.google.com/?id=IJP4DRCVaUMC&pg=PA168 | title=Jesus as a figure in history: how modern historians view the man from Galilee | year=1998 | publisher=Westminster John Knox Press | location=Louisville, KY | isbn= 978-0-664-25703-3 | page=168}}</ref><ref name= Houlden660 >''Jesus in history, thought, and culture: an encyclopedia, Volume 1'' by James Leslie Houlden 2003 ISBN 1-57607-856-6-page 660</ref><ref name= VVoorst14 >] p. 14</ref> Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts,<ref name=MAPowell168 >''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 181</ref> but most scholars agree that Jesus was a ] ] who was born between 7-4 BC and died 30–36 AD,<ref name=ChronosPaul >] "The Date of the Nativity and Chronology of Jesus" in ''Chronos, kairos, Christos: nativity and chronological studies'' by Jerry Vardaman, Edwin M. Yamauchi 1989 ISBN 0-931464-50-1 pages 113-129</ref><ref name="Kostenberger114">''The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament'' by ], L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3 page 114</ref><ref name=AmyJill4>Many scholars agree that Jesus debated with fellow Jews on how best to live according to God's will, engaged in healings and exorcisms, taught in parables, gathered male and female followers in Galilee, went to Jerusalem, and was crucified by Roman soldiers during the governorship of Pontius Pilate" ''The Historical Jesus in Context'' edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. Princeton University Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 page 4</ref> that Jesus was baptized by ], that he was crucified by the order of the ] ]<ref name=JDunn339>''Jesus Remembered'' by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".</ref><ref name=Hertzog1/><ref name="autogenerated145">{{cite book |author=Crossan, John Dominic |title=Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography |isbn=0-06-061662-8 |year=1995 |publisher=HarperOne |quote=That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus...agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact. |page=145}}</ref> and that he lived in Galilee and Judea.<ref name=KGreen442>Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, I. Howard Marshall, ''Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels'' (InterVarsity Press, 1992), page 442</ref><ref name=Dunn303>''The Historical Jesus in Recent Research edited by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight'' 2006 ISBN 1-57506-100-7 page 303</ref><ref name=Dominic28>''Who Is Jesus?'' by John Dominic Crossan, Richard G. Watts 1999 ISBN 0664258425 pages 28-29</ref> The historical analysis techniques used by Biblical scholars have been questioned.<ref name=Akenson539>{{cite book | last1 = Akenson | first1 = Donald | title = Surpassing wonder: the invention of the Bible and the Talmuds | publisher = University of Chicago Press | year = 1998 | pages = 539–555 | url = http://books.google.com/books?id=40E8am9SlwgC&pg=538&dq=%22appeals+to+consensus%22#v=onepage&q=%22appeals%20to%20consensus%22&f=false | accessdate = Jan 8, 2011 | quote = ...&nbsp;The point I shall argue below is that, the agreed evidentiary practices of the historians of Yeshua, despite their best efforts, have not been those of sound historical practice&nbsp;... | isbn = 978-0-226-01073-1}}</ref> However the majority viewpoint among those scholars of various disciplines who have commented on the subject is that Jesus existed, although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels.<ref name=fox>{{cite book|last=Fox|first=Robin Lane|title=The Classical World: An Epic History from Homer to Hadrian|year=2005|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0465024971|page=48}}</ref><ref name=nobbs>{{cite web|last1=Dickson|first1=John|title=Best of 2012: The irreligious assault on the historicity of Jesus|url=http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2012/12/24/3660194.htm|website=Abc.net.au|accessdate=17 June 2014}}</ref><ref name=Ehrman285>While discussing the "striking" fact that "we don't have any Roman records, of any kind, that attest to the existence of Jesus," Ehrman dismisses claims that this means Jesus never existed, saying, "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence." B. Ehrman, 2011 ''Forged : writing in the name of God'' ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285</ref><ref>] (a former fundamentalist apologist turned atheist who says the existence of Jesus cannot be ruled out, but is less probable than non-existence) 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, ISBN 028106329X page 61</ref><ref name="Grantmajority">] (a ]) 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 ISBN 1898799881 page 200</ref><ref name=Burridge34>] 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 any more." in ''Jesus Now and Then'' by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34</ref><ref name=JDunn339>''Jesus Remembered'' by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".</ref><ref name=Hertzog1>''Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus'' by William R. Herzog (4 Jul 2005) ISBN 0664225284 pages 1-6</ref><ref name="autogenerated145">{{cite book |author=Crossan, John Dominic |title=Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography |isbn=0-06-061662-8 |year=1995 |publisher=HarperOne |quote=That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus&nbsp;... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact. |page=145}}</ref><ref name=MAPowell168 >''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 pages 168–173</ref>


Since the 18th century a number of ] have taken place, and historical critical methods for studying the historicity of Jesus have been developed. Unlike for some figures in ancient history, the available sources are all documentary. In conjunction with Biblical sources such as the ] and the ], three passages in non-Christian works have been used to support the historicity of Jesus. These are two passages in the writings of the Jewish historian ], and one from the Roman historian ]. Although the authenticity of all three passages has been disputed to varying degrees, most biblical scholars believe that all three are at least partially authentic.


''Readers might find the information they seek on this topic at one of the following related articles:
The historical analysis techniques used by Biblical scholars have been questioned.<ref name=Akenson539>{{cite book | last1 = Akenson | first1 = Donald | title = Surpassing wonder: the invention of the Bible and the Talmuds | publisher = University of Chicago Press | year = 1998 | pages = 539–555 | url = http://books.google.com/books?id=40E8am9SlwgC&pg=538&dq=%22appeals+to+consensus%22#v=onepage&q=%22appeals%20to%20consensus%22&f=false | accessdate = Jan 8, 2011 | quote = ...&nbsp;The point I shall argue below is that, the agreed evidentiary practices of the historians of Yeshua, despite their best efforts, have not been those of sound historical practice&nbsp;... | isbn = 978-0-226-01073-1}}</ref> However the majority viewpoint among those scholars of various disciplines who have commented on the subject is that Jesus existed, although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels.<ref name="fox"/><ref name="nobbs"/><ref name=Ehrman285>While discussing the "striking" fact that "we don't have any Roman records, of any kind, that attest to the existence of Jesus," Ehrman dismisses claims that this means Jesus never existed, saying, "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence." B. Ehrman, 2011 ''Forged : writing in the name of God'' ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285</ref><ref>] (a former fundamentalist apologist turned atheist who says the existence of Jesus cannot be ruled out, but is less probable than non-existence) 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, ISBN 028106329X page 61</ref><ref name="Grantmajority">] (a ]) 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 ISBN 1898799881 page 200</ref><ref name=Burridge34>] 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 any more." in ''Jesus Now and Then'' by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34</ref><ref name=JDunn339>''Jesus Remembered'' by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".</ref><ref name=Hertzog1/><ref name="autogenerated145">{{cite book |author=Crossan, John Dominic |title=Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography |isbn=0-06-061662-8 |year=1995 |publisher=HarperOne |quote=That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus&nbsp;... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact. |page=145}}</ref><ref name=MAPowell168 >''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 pages 168–173</ref>
''


*]: '''Historical Jesus''' refers to scholarly reconstructions of the life of ],<ref name=AmyJill1>] in the ''The Historical Jesus in Context'' edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 pages 1-2</ref><ref name=Bart411>''Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium'' by Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731 Oxford Univ Press pages ix-xi</ref><ref>''Jesus Remembered'' Volume 1, by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 pp. 125-127</ref> based on critical methods including ] analysis of gospel texts as the ] for his biography, along with consideration of the ] in which he lived.<ref name=AmyJill1>] in the ''The Historical Jesus in Context'' edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 pages 1-2</ref><ref name=Bart411>''Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium'' by Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731 Oxford Univ Press pages ix-xi</ref><ref>]. ''The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.'' New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-515462-2, chapters 13, 15</ref>
==Historicity==
] is the historical actuality<ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/historicity</ref> or historical authenticity<ref>http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/historicity</ref> of a person or event, as opposed to being a ], ], or ]. Historicity focuses on the ] of knowledge claims about the past (denoting historical actuality, authenticity, and factuality.) The historicity of a claim about the past is its factual status.<ref>Wandersee, J. H. (1992), The historicality of cognition: Implications for science education research. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 29: 423–434. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660290409</ref><ref>Harre, R., & Moghaddam, F.M. (2006). Historicity, social psychology, and change. In Rockmore, T. & Margolis, J. (Eds.), History, historicity, and science (pp. 94-120). London: Ashgate Publishing Limited., </ref>


*]: The '''Christ myth theory''' (also known as the '''Jesus myth theory''', '''Jesus mythicism''' or simply '''mythicism''') is the proposition that ] never existed, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of ] and the accounts in the ].<ref>], ''Did Jesus Exist?'' Harper Collins, 2012, p. 12, ""In simpler terms, the historical Jesus did not exist. Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." further quoting as authoritative the fuller definition provided by ] in ''Jesus: Neither God Nor Man.'' Age of Reason, 2009, pp. vii-viii: it is "the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."</ref>
Questions regarding historicity concern not just the issue of "what really happened," but also the issue of how modern observers can come to know "what really happened."<ref>], professor of history at Brigham Young University. Two part article on historicity, and </ref> This second issue is closely tied to historical research practices and methodologies for analyzing the reliability of ] and other evidence.<ref name="Hall1">Hall, J. (2007). ''Historicity and Sociohistorical Research.'' In W. Outhwaite, & S. Turner (Eds.), ''The SAGE Handbook of Social Science Methodology.'' (pp. 82-102). London, England: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848607958.n5</ref><ref name="Hall2">Hall, J. (2007). ''History, methodologies, and the study of religion.'' In J. Beckford, & N. Demerath (Eds.), ''The SAGE handbook of the sociology of religion.'' (pp. 167-189). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848607965.n9</ref>


*]: The '''historical reliability of the Gospels''' refers to the reliability and historic character of the ] as historical documents. Although some claim that all four ] meet the five criteria for historical reliability,<ref name = "Sanders">Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993.</ref> others say that little in the gospels is considered to be historically reliable.<ref>The Myth about Jesus, Allvar Ellegard 1992,</ref><ref>Craig Evans, "Life-of-Jesus Research and the Eclipse of Mythology," Theological Studies 54 (1993) p. 5,</ref><ref name="Charles H. Talbert pg 42">Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels pg 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).</ref><ref name="Jesus 1995">“The Historical Figure of Jesus," Sanders, E.P., Penguin Books: London, 1995, p., 3.</ref><ref name="ReferenceC">Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Vol. II): Meditations on the Gospel According to St. Matthew – Dr Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, Introduction</ref><ref name="religion-online.org">Grant, Robert M., "A Historical Introduction to the New Testament" (Harper and Row, 1963) http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1230</ref>
==Evidence of Jesus==
{{main|Historical reliability of the Gospels|Sources for the historicity of Jesus|Josephus on Jesus|Tacitus on Christ}}
] during the first century.]]
The sources for the historicity of Jesus are mainly Christian sources, such as the ]s and the purported ]. The authenticity and reliability of these sources has been questioned by many scholars, and few events mentioned in the gospels are universally accepted.<ref>Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 181</ref>


There are three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources, which have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.<ref name= Blomberg431 >''Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey'' by Craig L. Blomberg 2009 ISBN 0-8054-4482-3 pages 431-436</ref> These are two mentions in the works of 1st-century Roman historian ] and one mention in the works of the 2nd-century Roman historian ].<ref name="Blomberg431"/><ref>] pp. 39-53</ref> *]: The '''sources for the historicity of Jesus''' are mainly Christian sources, such as the New Testament books in the Christian Bible. These include detailed stories about Jesus but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus.<ref name=MAPowell168 >''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 181</ref> There are three non-Christian sources used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus - two mentions in the work of the Jewish historian ], and one mention by the Roman historian ].<ref name="Camber121">''The Cambridge Companion to Jesus'' by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 ISBN 0521796784 pages 121-125</ref><ref name=Chil460>''Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research'' by Bruce Chilton, Craig A. Evans 1998 ISBN 9004111425 pages 460-470</ref> The authenticity of all three mentions is disputed to a degree.


*]: Most scholars who study the ] and ] believe that the ] and life of ] must be viewed as firmly placed within his historical and cultural context, rather than purely in terms of Christian ].<ref>Fredriksen, Paula (1988). ''From Jesus to Christ'' ISBN 0-300-04864-5 pp. ix-xii</ref><ref>Sanders, E.P. (1987). ''Jesus and Judaism'', Fortress Press ISBN 0-8006-2061-5 pp. 1-9</ref> They look at the "forces" such as the ] which were in play regarding the Jewish culture at that time, and the tensions, trends, and changes in the region under the ] and the ].
Josephus' '']'', written around 93–94&nbsp;AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books ] and ]. The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the ], 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 or forgery.<ref>{{cite book|last=Schreckenberg|first=Heinz|title=Jewish Traditions in Early Christian Literature|year=1992|isbn=90-232-2653-4|author2=Kurt Schubert}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Kostenberger|first=Andreas J.|title=The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament|year=2009|isbn=0-8054-4365-7|author2=L. Scott Kellum |author3=Charles L. Quarles }}</ref> Of the other mention in Josephus, Josephus scholar ] has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in ] and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.<ref name=JospehusM662 >''The new complete works of Josephus'' by Flavius Josephus, William Whiston, Paul L. Maier ISBN 0-8254-2924-2 pages 662-663</ref><ref>''Josephus XX'' by ] 1965, ISBN 0674995023 page 496</ref><ref>Van Voorst, Robert E. (2000). ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' ISBN 0-8028-4368-9. page 83</ref><ref>Flavius Josephus; Maier, Paul L. (December 1995). ''Josephus, the essential works: a condensation of Jewish antiquities and The Jewish war'' ISBN 978-0-8254-3260-6 pages 284-285</ref>


*]: The '''quest for the historical Jesus''' refers to academic efforts to provide a ].<ref name=AlanP13>''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by ] (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038 pages 13-15</ref> Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place.<ref name=BenQ9>''The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth by Ben Witherington (May 8, 1997) ISBN 0830815449 pages 9-13</ref><ref name=DThiessen6>''The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria'' by Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373 pages 1-6</ref><ref name=AlanP19>''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038 pages 19-23</ref>
] ] referred to Christus and his execution by ] in his '']'' (written ''ca.'' AD 116), ].<ref>P.E. Easterling, E. J. Kenney (general editors), ''The Cambridge History of Latin Literature'', page 892 (Cambridge University Press, 1982, reprinted 1996). ISBN 0-521-21043-7</ref> The very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians make the passage extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribe<ref name=VVoorst39 >Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'', Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000. p 39- 53</ref> and the Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation of Christ's crucifixion,<ref name=EddyB127>Eddy, Paul; Boyd, Gregory (2007). ''The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition'' Baker Academic, ISBN 0-8010-3114-1 page 127</ref> although some scholars question the ] on various different grounds.<ref name=VVoorst39 /><ref>F.F. Bruce,''Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament'', (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) p. 23</ref><ref>{{Cite book| author=Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette | authorlink= | coauthors= | title=The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide |url = http://books.google.com/?id=3ZU97DQMH6UC&pg=PA83| year=1998 | publisher=Fortress Press | location=Minneapolis | isbn=978-0-8006-3122-2 | page=83}}</ref><ref>The Case Against Christianity, By Michael Martin, pg 50-51, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=wWkC4dTmK0AC&pg=PA52&dq=historicity+of+jesus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o-_8U5-yEtTH7AbBpoCoAg&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=tacitus&f=false</ref><ref>The Historical Jesus in the Twentieth Century: 1900-1950, By Walter P. Weaver, pg 53, pg 57, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=1CZbuFBdAMUC&pg=PA45&dq=historicity+of+jesus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o-_8U5-yEtTH7AbBpoCoAg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=tacitus&f=false</ref><ref name="books.google.co.za">Secret of Regeneration, By Hilton Hotema, pg 100, at http://books.google.co.za/books?id=jCaopp3R5B0C&pg=PA100&dq=interpolations+in+tacitus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CRf-U9-VGZCe7AbxrIDQCA&ved=0CCAQ6AEwATge#v=onepage&q=interpolations%20in%20tacitus&f=false</ref><ref name="books.google.co.za"/><ref>''Jesus'', University Books, New York, 1956, p.13</ref><ref>{{Cite book|authorlink=RT France|last=France|first=RT|title=Evidence for Jesus (Jesus Library)|publisher=Trafalgar Square Publishing|year=1986|isbn=0-340-38172-8|pages=19–20}}</ref>


*]: The study of '''Jesus Christ in comparative mythology''' is the examination of the narratives of the life of Jesus in the ]s, ] and ], as it relates to ] and other religions. Various authors have drawn a number of parallels between the ] and other religious or mythical domains.<ref name=sandmel >{{cite journal|first=S|last=Sandmel|title=Parallelomania|journal=]|volume=81|issue=1|year=1962|doi=10.2307/3264821|pages=1–13|ref=harv|jstor=3264821}}</ref> These include ], ancient ] and more general analogies involving ] patterns of ]s in the context of ].<ref name=Campbell362>Campbell, Joseph (2003) ''The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology'' Vol. 3 ISBN 978-0-14-019441-8 pg 362</ref>
] historian ] wrote that: {{quote|If we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, 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.<ref name="Grant1977">Michael Grant (1977), ''Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels''</ref>}}

==Widely accepted historical events==
Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most ]s and ] see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.<ref name=Ehrman285/><ref name="Grantmajority"/><ref name=Burridge34/><ref name=voorst16 >] ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 p. 16, Referring to G.A. Wells: "The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted"</ref><ref name=DunnPaul35>] (1974) ''Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus'' in ''Reconciliation and Hope. New Testament Essays on Atonement and Eschatology Presented to L.L. Morris on his 60th Birthday.'' Robert Banks, ed., Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, pp. 125-141, Citing G.A. Wells (''The Jesus of the Early Christians'' (1971)): "Perhaps we should also mention that at the other end of the spectrum Paul’s apparent lack of knowledge of the historical Jesus has been made the major plank in an attempt to revive the nevertheless thoroughly dead thesis that the Jesus of the Gospels was a mythical figure." An almost identical quotation is included in Dunn, James DG (1998) ''The Christ and the Spirit: Collected Essays of James D.G. Dunn, Volume 1'', Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., p. 191, and Sykes, S. (1991) ''Sacrifice and redemption: Durham essays in theology.'' Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. p. 35-36.</ref> There is no evidence today that the existence of Jesus was ever denied in antiquity by those who opposed Christianity.<ref name=Rahner730>''Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi'' by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6 pp. 730-731: "The few non-Christian sources merely comfirm that in antiquity it never occurred to any one, even the bitterest enemies of Christianity, to doubt the existence of Jesus"</ref><ref name=voorst15 >Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence''. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9-page 15: Referring to G.A. Wells (''The Jesus of the Early Christians'' (1971)): "Fourth, Wells cannot explain to the satisfaction of historians why, if Christians invented the historical Jesus around the year 100, no pagans and Jews who opposed Christianity denied Jesus' historicity or even questioned it." (Van Voorst refutes his own point in footnote 35, citing Justin's ], Chapter 8)</ref> ] notes that "a few scholars argue that Jesus... did not even exist," and that they "rightly point out that contemporary references to him were extremely rare."<ref>Geoffrey Blainey; '']''; Viking; 2011; p.xix-xx</ref> There is widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings.<ref name=MAPowell168 />

According to New Testament scholar ], nearly all modern scholars consider the ] and ] to be historically certain.<ref name=JDunn339/> He states that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical 'facts' they are obvious starting points for an attempt to clarify the what and why of Jesus' mission." that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus.<ref name=JDunn339>''Jesus Remembered'' by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2-page 339</ref>

] states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources including Josephus and Tacitus.<ref>''The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings'' by ] 1999 ISBN 0-19-512639-4-page 248</ref>{{request quotation|date=September 2014}} ] views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the '']'' Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.<ref name=JMeier126>John P. Meier "How do we decide what comes from Jesus" in ''The Historical Jesus in Recent Research'' by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight 2006 ISBN 1-57506-100-7 pages 126-128</ref>{{failed verification|date=September 2014}} Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g. the criterion of '']'' (i.e. confirmation by more than one source), the ''criterion of coherence'' (i.e. that it fits with other historical elements) and the ''criterion of rejection'' (i.e. that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.<ref name=JMeier132>John P. Meier "How do we decide what comes from Jesus" in ''The Historical Jesus in Recent Research'' by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight 2006 ISBN 1-57506-100-7 pages 132-136</ref>{{failed verification|date=September 2014}} Biblical scholar ], highly skeptical with regard to the Gospel accounts of miracles, wrote in 1995
{{quote|That (Jesus) was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact.<ref>Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. ISBN 0-06-061662-8 page 145</ref>}}

One of the arguments in favour of the historicity of the baptism of Jesus by John is that it is a story which the ] would have never wanted to invent, typically referred to as the ] in historical analysis.<ref name="Powell47" /><ref name=Whois31 >''Who Is Jesus?'' by John Dominic Crossan, Richard G. Watts 1999 ISBN 0664258425 pages 31-32</ref><ref name="Casey35">''Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian's Account of His Life and Teaching'' by Maurice Casey 2010 ISBN 0-567-64517-7 page 35</ref> Based on this criterion, given that John baptised for the remission of ]s, and Jesus was viewed as without sin, the invention of this story would have served no purpose, and would have been an embarrassment given that it positioned John above Jesus.<ref name="Powell47">''Jesus as a figure in history: how modern historians view the man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 47</ref><ref name="Casey35" /><ref>''The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide'' by Gerd Theissen, Annette Merz 1998 ISBN 0-8006-3122-6 page 207</ref> The Gospel of Matthew attempts to offset this problem by having John feel unworthy to baptise Jesus and Jesus giving him permission to do so in {{bibleref2|Matthew|3:14-15|NIV|Matthew 3:14–15}}.<ref name=Murphy29 >''John the Baptist: prophet of purity for a new age'' by Catherine M. Murphy 2003 ISBN 0-8146-5933-0 pages 29-30</ref>

Historian of ancient history ] states "Jesus was born in Galilee".<ref name=fox>{{cite book|last=Fox|first=Robin Lane|title=The Classical World: An Epic History from Homer to Hadrian|year=2005|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0465024971|page=48}}</ref>{{failed verification|date=September 2014}} Co-director of Ancient Cultures Research Centre at ], Sydney, Australia ]<ref>{{cite web|title=Professor Alana Nobbs|url=http://www.mq.edu.au/about_us/faculties_and_departments/faculty_of_arts/department_of_ancient_history/staff/professor_alanna_nobbs/|website=Mq.edu.au|publisher=Macquarie University|accessdate=17 June 2014}}</ref> has stated "While historical and theological debates remain about the actions and significance of this figure, his fame as a teacher, and his crucifixion under the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate, may be described as historically certain."<ref name=nobbs>{{cite web|last1=Dickson|first1=John|title=Best of 2012: The irreligious assault on the historicity of Jesus|url=http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2012/12/24/3660194.htm|website=Abc.net.au|accessdate=17 June 2014}}</ref>{{clarify|date=September 2014}}

] has summarized the situation by stating that "there is a consensus of sorts on the basic outline of Jesus' life" in that most scholars agree that Jesus was baptized by ], and over a period of one to three years debated Jewish authorities on the subject of God, gathered followers, and was crucified by Roman prefect ] who officiated 26-36 AD.<ref name=AmyJill4 /> There is much in dispute as to his previous life, childhood, family and place of residence, of which the ] are almost completely silent. This silence is a problematic fact in explaining the historiography of Jesus. It has been suggested that it was the result of a conflict between the ] Jewish followers of Jesus, led by his brother ], and the nascent Gentilic Christians led by the ].<ref>Eisenmann, Robert, (2001), "James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls"</ref><ref>Butz, Jeffrey (2005), "The Brother of Jesus and the Lost Traditions of Christianity" (Inner Traditions)</ref><ref>Tabor, James (2012), "Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity" (Simon and Shuster)</ref>

Scholars attribute varying levels of certainty to other episodes. ] and ] independently state that there are two other incidents in the life of Jesus that can be considered historical: that Jesus ], and that he caused a ].<ref name=Evans37>''Authenticating the Activities of Jesus'' by Bruce Chilton and Craig A. Evans 2002 ISBN 0391041649 pages 3-7</ref>{{failed verification|date=September 2014}} This extended view assumes that there are eight elements about Jesus and his followers that can be viewed as historical facts—four episodes in the life of Jesus and four about him and his followers, namely:<ref name=Hertzog1/><ref name=Evans37/>

* Jesus was baptized by ]. He called disciples. He had a controversy at the Temple. Jesus was crucified by the Romans near Jerusalem.<ref name=Hertzog1/><ref name=Evans37/>

* Jesus was a Galilean. His activities were confined to Galilee and Judea. After his death his disciples continued. Some of his disciples were persecuted.<ref name=Hertzog1/><ref name=Evans37/>

Scholarly agreement on this extended list is not universal.<ref name=Hertzog1>''Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus'' by William R. Herzog (4 Jul 2005) ISBN 0664225284 pages 1-6</ref><ref name=Evans37/><ref name=MAPowell117>''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell (1 Nov 1998) ISBN 0664257038 page 117</ref>

The ] ({{circa}} 200) ] and reflect the early Jewish traditions of portraying Jesus as a sorcerer or magician.<ref name=Bammel393/><ref name=Leslie693>In ''Jesus: The Complete Guide'' edited by J. L. Houlden (8 Feb 2006) ISBN 082648011X pages 693-694</ref><ref name=PeterS141>''Jesus in the Talmud'' by Peter Schäfer (24 Aug 2009) ISBN 0691143188 page 141 and 9</ref><ref name=Blom280>''Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey'' by Craig L. Blomberg (1 Aug 2009) ISBN 0805444823 page 280</ref> Other possible references to Jesus and his execution may exist in the ], but they also aim to discredit his actions, not deny his existence.<ref name=Bammel393>''Jesus and the Politics of his Day'' by E. Bammel and C. F. D. Moule (30 Aug 1985) ISBN 0521313449 page 393</ref><ref name=Kellum107 >Kostenberger, Andreas J.; Kellum, L. Scott; Quarles, Charles L. (2009). ''The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament'' ISBN 0-8054-4365-7. pages 107-109</ref>

==Methods of research==
{{see also|Quest for the historical Jesus|Historical reliability of the Gospels}}
], whose book coined the term ]]]
When judging the historical reliability of the gospels, scholars ask if the accounts in the gospels are, when judged using normal standards that historians use on other ancient writings, reliable or not.<ref>"Historicity", ''''.</ref> The main issues are what are the 'original' gospels, whether the original gospel works were accurate eyewitness accounts, and whether those original versions have been transmitted accurately through the ages to us. In evaluating the historical reliability of the Gospels, scholars consider a number of factors. These include authorship and date of composition,<ref name="ReferenceB">Craig L. Blomberg, ''Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey'' (2nd Edition).425.</ref> intention and genre,<ref name="Rhodes-Eddy08">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.</ref> gospel sources and oral tradition,<ref>Craig L. Blomberg, ''Historical Reliability of the Gospels'' (1986, Inter-Varsity Press).19-72.</ref><ref>Paul Rhodes Eddy & Gregory A. Boyd, ''The Jesus Legend:A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition.'' (2008, Baker Academic).237-308.</ref> textual criticism,<ref>], ''Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey'' (2nd Edition).424.</ref> and historical authenticity of specific sayings and narrative events.<ref name="ReferenceB"/>

The genre of the gospels is essential in understanding the intentions of the authors regarding the historical value of the texts. New Testament scholar ] states that "the gospels are now widely considered to be a sub-set of the broad ancient literary genre of biographies."<ref>Graham Stanton, ''Jesus and Gospel.'' p.192.</ref> Charles H. Talbert agrees that the gospels should be grouped with the Graeco-Roman biographies, but adds that such biographies included an element of mythology, and that the synoptic gospels also included elements of mythology.<ref name="Charles H. Talbert pg 42">Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels pg 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).</ref> E.P. Sanders states that “these Gospels were written with the intention of glorifying Jesus and are not strictly biographical in nature.”<ref name="Jesus 1995">“The Historical Figure of Jesus," Sanders, E.P., Penguin Books: London, 1995, p., 3.</ref> Ingrid Maisch and Anton Vögtle writing for Karl Rahner in his encyclopedia of theological terms indicate that the gospels were written primarily as theological, not historical items.<ref>Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6 pages 730-741</ref> Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis notes that "we must conclude, then, that the genre of the Gospel is not that of pure 'history'; but neither is it that of myth, fairy tale, or legend. In fact, 'gospel' constitutes a genre all its own, a surprising novelty in the literature of the ancient world."<ref name="ReferenceC">Meier 1994 v.2 ch. 17; Ehrman 1999 p.227-8</ref> Some critics have maintained that Christianity is not founded on a historical figure, but rather on a ].<ref>Examples of authors who argue the ]: ] ''The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David '' (Jonathan Cape, Publisher, 2006); ], ''The Case Against Christianity'' (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 36–72; ]</ref> This view proposes that the idea of Jesus was the Jewish manifestation of a pan-Hellenic cult, known as ],<ref>Freke, Timothy and Gandy, Peter (1999) The Jesus Mysteries. London: Thorsons (Harper Collins)</ref> which acknowledged the non-historic nature of the figure, using it instead as a teaching device.

Scholars tend to consider Luke's works (]) to be closer in genre to "pure" history,<ref name="religion-online.org">Grant, Robert M., "A Historical Introduction to the New Testament" (Harper and Row, 1963), </ref><ref name="religion-online.org"/><ref>Richard Bauckham, ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses''. 117.</ref> although they also note that “This is not to say that he was always reliably informed, or that - any more than modern historians - he always presented a severely factual account of events.”<ref name="religion-online.org"/>
New Testament scholar, ] believes that "the earliest tradents within the Christian churches preservers more than innovators...seeking to transmit, retell, explain, interpret, elaborate, but not create ''de novo''...Through the main body of the Synoptic tradition, I believe, we have in most cases direct access to the teaching and ministry of Jesus as it was remembered from the beginning of the transmission process (which often predates Easter) and so fairly direct access to the ministry and teaching of Jesus through the eyes and ears of those who went about with him."<ref>James D.G. Dunn, "Messianic Ideas and Their Influence on the Jesus of History," in ''The Messiah'', ed. James H. Charlesworth. pp. 371-372. Cf. James D.G. Dunn, ''Jesus Remembered''.</ref> Nevertheless, ], a former Anglican Bishop of Durham and university professor, has stated that “Certainly not! There is absolutely no certainty in the New Testament about anything of importance.”<ref>, retrieved 15nov2010</ref>

Critical scholars have developed a number of criteria to evaluate the probability, or historical authenticity, of an attested event or saying represented in the gospels. These criteria are applied to the gospels in order to help scholars in reconstructions of the ]. The ] argues that if a saying or action is dissimilar to, or contrary to, the views of Judaism in the context of Jesus or the views of the early church, then it can more confidently be regarded as an authentic saying or action of Jesus.<ref>Norman Perrin, ''Rediscovering the Teaching of Jesus'' 43.</ref><ref>], "Sources and Method" in ''The Cambridge Companion to Jesus.'' ed. Markus Bockmuehl. 132.</ref> One commonly cited example of this is Jesus' controversial reinterpretation of the ] in his Sermon on the Mount, or Peter's decision to allow ] into what was, at the time, a ]. The ] holds that the authors of the gospels had no reason to invent embarrassing incidents such as the denial of Jesus by ], or the fleeing of Jesus' followers after his arrest, and therefore such details would likely not have been included unless they were true.<ref name="A Marginal Jew">Meier, John P., '']'', Doubleday: 1991. vol 1: pp. 168–171.</ref> Bart Ehrman, using the criterion of dissimilarity to judge the historical reliability of the claim Jesus was baptized by ], notes that "it is hard to imagine a Christian inventing the story of Jesus' baptism since this could be taken to mean that he was John's subordinate."<ref>Bart D. Ehrman, ''The New Testament:A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.''194-5.</ref>

The ] says that when two or more independent sources present similar or consistent accounts, it is more likely that the accounts are accurate reports of events or that they are reporting a tradition which pre-dates the sources themselves.<ref>The criteria for authenticity in historical-Jesus research: previous discussion and new proposals, by Stanley E. Porter, pg. 118</ref> This is often used to note that the four gospels attest to most of the same events, but that Paul's epistles often attest to these events as well, as do the writings of the early church, and to a limited degree non-Christian ancient writings. The criterion of cultural and historical congruency says that a source is less credible if the account contradicts known historical facts, or if it conflicts with cultural practices common in the period in question.<ref>The criteria for authenticity in historical-Jesus research: previous discussion and new proposals, by Stanley E. Porter, pg. 119</ref> It is, therefore, more credible if it agrees with those known facts. For example, this is often used when assessing the reliability of claims in Luke-Acts, such as the official title of ]. Through linguistic criteria a number of conclusions can be drawn. The criterion of "Aramaisms" as it is often referred<ref>Bart D. Ehrman, ''The New Testament:A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.''193.</ref> holds that if a ], reflecting Jesus' Palestinian context, the saying is more likely to be authentic.<ref>Stanley E. Porter, ''The Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: previous discussion and new proposals.''127.</ref>

Since the 18th century, scholars have taken part in three separate "quests" for the historical Jesus, attempting to reconstruct various portraits of his life using ]s.<ref name=BenQ9>''The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth'' by Ben Witherington (May 8, 1997) ISBN 0830815449 pages 9-13</ref><ref name=DThiessen6>''The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria'' by Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373 pages 1-6</ref> Although ] of Biblical sources had been practiced for centuries, these quests introduced new methods and specific methodologies to determine the historical validity of their conclusions.<ref name=criteria100>''Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research'' by Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606 pages 100-120</ref>

While ] (or lower criticism) had been practiced for centuries, a number of approaches to ] and a number of criteria for evaluating the historicity of events emerged as of the 18th century, as a series of "Quests for the historical Jesus" took place. At each stage of development, scholars suggested specific forms and methodologies of analysis and specific criteria to be used to determine historical validity.<ref name=criteria100 />

The first Quest, which started in 1778, was almost entirely based on ]. This was supplemented with ] in 1919 and ] in 1948.<ref name=criteria100>''Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research'' by Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606 pages 100-120</ref> Form criticism began as an attempt to trace the history of the biblical material before it was written down, and may thus be seen as starting when textual criticism ends.<ref name=Westdic215>''The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology'' by Alan Richardson 1983 ISBN 0664227481 pages 215-216</ref> Form criticism looks for patterns within units of biblical text and attempts to trace their origin based on the patterns.<ref name=Westdic215 /> Redaction criticism may be viewed as the child of text criticism and form criticism.<ref name=DHar96>''Interpreting the New Testament'' by Daniel J. Harrington (Jun 1990) ISBN 0814651240 pages 96-98</ref> This approach views an author as a "redactor" i.e. someone preparing a report, and tries to understand how the redactor(s) has molded the narrative to express their own perspectives.<ref name=DHar96/>

At the end of the first Quest (c. 1906) the criterion for ] was used and was the major additional element up to 1950s.<ref name=criteria100 /> The concept behind multiple attestation is simple: as the number of independent sources that vouch for an event increases, confidence in the historical authenticity of the event rises.<ref name=criteria100 />

Other criteria were being developed at the same time, e.g. "double dissimilarity" in 1913, "least distinctiveness" in 1919 and "coherence and consistency" in 1921.<ref name=criteria100 /> The criterion of double dissimilarity views a reported saying or action of Jesus as possibly authentic, if it is dissimilar from both the Judaism of his time and also from the traditions of the ] that immediately followed him.<ref>''The Historical Jesus and the Final Judgment Sayings in Q'' by Brian Han Gregg (30 Jun 2006) ISBN 3161487508 page 29</ref> The least distinctiveness criterion relies on the assumption that when stories are passed from person to person, the peripheral, least distinct elements may be distorted, but the central element remains unchanged.<ref>''Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research'' by Stanley E. Porter 2004 ISBN 0567043606 pages 77-78</ref> The criterion of "coherence and consistency" states that material can be used only when other material has been identified as authentic to corroborate it.<ref name=criteria100 />

The second Quest was launched in 1953, and along with it the ] was introduced.<ref name=criteria100 /> This criterion states that a group is unlikely to invent a story that would be embarrassing to themselves.<ref name=criteria100 /> The criterion of "historical plausibility" was introduced in 1997, after the start of the third Quest in 1988.<ref name=criteria100 /> This principle analyzes the plausibility of an event in two separate components: contextual plausibility and consequential plausibility, i.e. the historical context needs to be suitable, as well as the consequences.<ref name=criteria100 />

Currently modern scholarly research on the historical Jesus focuses on what is historically probable, or plausible about Jesus.<ref>''John, Jesus, and History'' Volume 1 by Paul N. Anderson, Felix Just and Tom Thatcher (14 Nov 2007) ISBN 1589832930 page 131</ref><ref>] "Criteria: How do we decide what comes from Jesus?" in ''The Historical Jesus in Recent Research'' by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight (15 Jul 2006) ISBN 1575061007 page 124 "Since in the quest for the historical Jesus almost anything is possible, the function of the criteria is to pass from the merely possible to the really probable, to inspect various probabilities, and to decide which candidate is most probable. Ordinarily the criteria can not hope to do more."</ref> More recently historicists have focused their attention on the historical writings associated with the period in which Jesus lived<ref>Mason, Steve (2002), "Josephus and the New Testament" (Baker Academic)</ref><ref>Tabor, James (2012)"Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity" (Simon & Schuster)</ref> or on the evidence concerning his family.<ref>Eisenman, Robert (1998), "James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls" (Watkins)</ref><ref>Butz, Jeffrey "The Brother of Jesus and the Lost Teachings of Christianity" (Inner Traditions)</ref><ref>Tabor, James (2007), "The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity"</ref>

==Myth theory==
{{Main|Christ myth theory}}
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.<ref>], ''Did Jesus Exist?'' Harper Collins, 2012, p. 12, "In simpler terms, the historical Jesus did not exist . Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." further quoting as authoritative the fuller definition provided by ] in ''Jesus: Neither God Nor Man.'' Age of Reason, 2009, pp. vii-viii: it is "the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."</ref> The theory that Jesus never existed at all has very little scholarly support.<ref name="voorst16"/><ref name=CambridgeJesus >''The Cambridge companion to Jesus'' by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 Cambridge University Press ISBN 978-0-521-79678-1 pages 123-124. Page 124 state that the "farfetched theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention are highly implausible."</ref><ref name="powell168">{{Cite book| last=Powell | first =Mark Allan |url = http://books.google.com/?id=IJP4DRCVaUMC&pg=PA168 | title=Jesus as a figure in history: how modern historians view the man from Galilee | year=1998 | publisher=Westminster John Knox Press | location=Louisville, KY | isbn= 978-0-664-25703-3 | page=168}}</ref><ref name= Houlden660 >''Jesus in history, thought, and culture: an encyclopedia, Volume 1'' by James Leslie Houlden 2003 ISBN 1-57607-856-6-page 660</ref><ref name= VVoorst14 >] p. 14</ref>

==Criticism of Jesus research methods==

A number of scholars have criticised Historical Jesus research for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness. Nevertheless, with very few exceptions, they do support the historicity of Jesus and reject the Christ Myth Theory. For details, see ].

== See also ==
* ]
* ], the enrollment of the Roman provinces of Syria and Judaea for tax purposes taken in the year 6/7.
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]

==Notes==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}


==References== ==References==
{{Refbegin|colwidth=30em}} {{Refbegin|colwidth=30em}}

*{{Cite book
|last = Brown
|first = Raymond E.
|title = An Introduction to the New Testament
|publisher = Doubleday
|year = 1997
|url =
|ref = harv
}}
*Daniel Boyarin (2004). ''Border Lines. The Partition of Judaeo-Christianity''. University of Pennsylvania Press.
*Doherty, Earl (1999). ''The Jesus Puzzle. Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? : Challenging the Existence of an Historical Jesus''. ISBN 0-9686014-0-5
*Drews, Arthur & Burns, C. Deslisle (1998). ''The Christ Myth'' (Westminster College-Oxford Classics in the Study of Religion). ISBN 1-57392-190-4
*] ''Jesus – One Hundred Years Before Christ: A Study in Creative Mythology'', (London 1999).
*France, R.T. (2001). ''The Evidence for Jesus''. Hodder & Stoughton.
*Freke, Timothy & Gandy, Peter. ''The Jesus Mysteries - was the original Jesus a pagan god?'' ISBN 0-7225-3677-1
*George, Augustin & Grelot, Pierre (Eds.) (1992). ''Introducción Crítica al Nuevo Testamento''. Herder. ISBN 84-254-1277-3
*{{Cite book|first=Helmut|last=Koester|title=Ancient Christian Gospels|location= Harrisburg, PA|publisher=Continuum|isbn=0-334-02450-1|year=1992}}
*Gowler, David B. (2007). ''What Are They Saying About the Historical Jesus?''. Paulist Press.
*], ''Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels'', Scribner, 1995. ISBN 0-684-81867-1
*Meier, John P., '']'', ], Doubleday
: (1991), v. 1, ''The Roots of the Problem and the Person'', ISBN 0-385-26425-9
: (1994), v. 2, ''Mentor, Message, and Miracles'', ISBN 0-385-46992-6
: (2001), v. 3, ''Companions and Competitors'', ISBN 0-385-46993-4
: (2009), v. 4, ''Law and Love'', ISBN 978-0-300-14096-5
*Mendenhall, George E. (2001). ''Ancient Israel's Faith and History: An Introduction to the Bible in Context''. ISBN 0-664-22313-3
*] (1977). ''Jesus hypotheses''. St Paul Publications. ISBN 0-85439-154-1
*New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version. (1991) New York, Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-528356-2
*{{Cite book|last=Price|first=Robert M.|authorlink=Robert M. Price|title=Deconstructing Jesus|year=2000|publisher=Prometheus Books|location=Amherst, N.Y.|isbn=1-57392-758-9}}
*{{Cite book|last=Price|first=Robert M.|authorlink=Robert M. Price|title=The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man: How Reliable is the Gospel Tradition?|year=2003|publisher=Prometheus Books|location=Amherst, N.Y.|isbn=1-59102-121-9}}
*Wells, George A. (1988). ''The Historical Evidence for Jesus''. Prometheus Books. ISBN 0-87975-429-X
*Wells, George A. (1998). ''The Jesus Myth''. ISBN 0-8126-9392-2
*Wells, George A. (2004). ''Can We Trust the New Testament?: Thoughts on the Reliability of Early Christian Testimony''. ISBN 0-8126-9567-4
*Wilson, Ian (2000). ''Jesus: The Evidence'' (1st ed.). Regnery Publishing.
{{Refend}}

{{Jesus footer}}
{{The Bible and history}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Historicity of Jesus}}
]
]
]
]
]

Revision as of 18:45, 1 October 2014

This is a disambiguation article.

The historical analysis techniques used by Biblical scholars have been questioned. However the majority viewpoint among those scholars of various disciplines who have commented on the subject is that Jesus existed, although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels.


Readers might find the information they seek on this topic at one of the following related articles:

  • Christ Myth Theory: The Christ myth theory (also known as the Jesus myth theory, Jesus mythicism or simply mythicism) 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.
  • Sources for the historicity of Jesus: The sources for the historicity of Jesus are mainly Christian sources, such as the New Testament books in the Christian Bible. These include detailed stories about Jesus but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus. There are three non-Christian sources used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus - two mentions in the work of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one mention by the Roman historian Tacitus. The authenticity of all three mentions is disputed to a degree.

References

  1. Akenson, Donald (1998). Surpassing wonder: the invention of the Bible and the Talmuds. University of Chicago Press. pp. 539–555. ISBN 978-0-226-01073-1. Retrieved Jan 8, 2011. ... The point I shall argue below is that, the agreed evidentiary practices of the historians of Yeshua, despite their best efforts, have not been those of sound historical practice ...
  2. Fox, Robin Lane (2005). The Classical World: An Epic History from Homer to Hadrian. Basic Books. p. 48. ISBN 978-0465024971.
  3. Dickson, John. "Best of 2012: The irreligious assault on the historicity of Jesus". Abc.net.au. Retrieved 17 June 2014.
  4. While discussing the "striking" fact that "we don't have any Roman records, of any kind, that attest to the existence of Jesus," Ehrman dismisses claims that this means Jesus never existed, saying, "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence." B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285
  5. Robert M. Price (a former fundamentalist apologist turned atheist who says the existence of Jesus cannot be ruled out, but is less probable than non-existence) 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, ISBN 028106329X page 61
  6. 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 ISBN 1898799881 page 200
  7. 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 any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34
  8. Jesus Remembered by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".
  9. Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus by William R. Herzog (4 Jul 2005) ISBN 0664225284 pages 1-6
  10. Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. p. 145. ISBN 0-06-061662-8. That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus ... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact.
  11. ^ Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 pages 168–173 Cite error: The named reference "MAPowell168" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  12. ^ Amy-Jill Levine in the The Historical Jesus in Context edited by Amy-Jill Levine et al. 2006 Princeton Univ Press ISBN 978-0-691-00992-6 pages 1-2
  13. ^ Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman (Sep 23, 1999) ISBN 0195124731 Oxford Univ Press pages ix-xi
  14. Jesus Remembered Volume 1, by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 pp. 125-127
  15. Ehrman, Bart. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-515462-2, chapters 13, 15
  16. Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist? Harper Collins, 2012, p. 12, ""In simpler terms, the historical Jesus did not exist. Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." further quoting as authoritative the fuller definition provided by Earl Doherty in Jesus: Neither God Nor Man. Age of Reason, 2009, pp. vii-viii: it is "the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."
  17. Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993.
  18. The Myth about Jesus, Allvar Ellegard 1992,
  19. Craig Evans, "Life-of-Jesus Research and the Eclipse of Mythology," Theological Studies 54 (1993) p. 5,
  20. Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels pg 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).
  21. “The Historical Figure of Jesus," Sanders, E.P., Penguin Books: London, 1995, p., 3.
  22. Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Vol. II): Meditations on the Gospel According to St. Matthew – Dr Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, Introduction
  23. Grant, Robert M., "A Historical Introduction to the New Testament" (Harper and Row, 1963) http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1230
  24. The Cambridge Companion to Jesus by Markus N. A. Bockmuehl 2001 ISBN 0521796784 pages 121-125
  25. Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research by Bruce Chilton, Craig A. Evans 1998 ISBN 9004111425 pages 460-470
  26. Fredriksen, Paula (1988). From Jesus to Christ ISBN 0-300-04864-5 pp. ix-xii
  27. Sanders, E.P. (1987). Jesus and Judaism, Fortress Press ISBN 0-8006-2061-5 pp. 1-9
  28. Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038 pages 13-15
  29. The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth by Ben Witherington (May 8, 1997) ISBN 0830815449 pages 9-13
  30. The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria by Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter (Aug 30, 2002) ISBN 0664225373 pages 1-6
  31. Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038 pages 19-23
  32. Sandmel, S (1962). "Parallelomania". Journal of Biblical Literature. 81 (1): 1–13. doi:10.2307/3264821. JSTOR 3264821. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  33. Campbell, Joseph (2003) The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology Vol. 3 ISBN 978-0-14-019441-8 pg 362