Jump to content

Books on the historical Jesus?

ghost of miles
 Share

Recommended Posts

ghost of miles Grand Master

ghost of miles

Posted
Posted

Several months ago a poster here sent me some great recommendations in response to an inquiry about good religious-history books. Anybody here (and I think there are several who might be more than capable and willing) care to offer up suggestions for reading about the historical Jesus?

JSngry Grand Master

JSngry

Posted
Posted

Barbara Thiering is somebody who is a nut job taken at face value, but she's also somebody who makes some good, and fascinating, points that aren't as easily discredited in the specific as her theories are as a whole.

Here's a link to an Amazon listing for her writings, as well as those that would appear to be related in them, pro & con: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-h...9691876-0509512

Of course, if you want a look at Early Christianity, there are the Gnostic writings, which are quite a trip. And I'd definitely recommend reading all the so-called "inter-Testamental" writings you can get ahold of. Much of what we read in the New Testament takes on a different meaning once you've read things like the Book of Enoch, which was apparently HUGELY influential in the time of the historical Jesus.

Bottom line for me - it's all speculation. The culture from which most likely sprang the Gospels had such a tradition of shrouding the literal historical truth in deep symbolism and such that unless there's an archeological find of staggering significance, it's going to left to us to believe or disbelieve whatever we want. Lots of kinda "mystical" (to say nothing of "militant") sects in that time and place, and believeing that the historical Jesus did not at least tangentally interesect with them requires a highly literalistic POV, which is cool for those who choose to take it, but I myself am just not able to.

Alexander Newbie

Alexander

Posted
Posted

Well, you all know how I feel about the subject. Jim is absolutely right when he says that its all speculation at this point. But it is also true that no objective historical evidence for the existence of such a person exists. No letters, no eyewitness accounts...nothing at all. And lest you think, "Well, it WAS 2000 years ago. I'm sure written records were pretty sparce back then," think again. Contemporary Roman and Jewish records were excellent. Had such a person as Jesus existed (with a multitude of followers, performing miracles), there would be some record. And yet, nothing exists. Not even a statue. Curious.

JSngry Grand Master

JSngry

Posted
Posted

Had such a person as Jesus existed (with a multitude of followers, performing miracles), there would be some record.  And yet, nothing exists.  Not even a statue.  Curious.

Which is why many of the specifics of Theiring's work make sense, or at the least merit consideration. The historical Jesus may well have been a shadowy figure far outside the mainstream of contemporary Jewish life. There were certainly ample opportunities...

jazzbo Grand Master

jazzbo

Posted
Posted

Crossan's "The Birth of Christianity" is helpful. Grant's book is pretty levelheaded.

"Historical Jesus." Loaded phrase for many (I waffle less frequently these days).

Adam Apprentice

Adam

Posted
Posted (edited)

I co-produced a show for the History Channel called "In the Footsteps of Jesus" in which we went to the sites associated with Jesus and looked at the textual & archaeological evidence behind them. You can rent it to see lots of the places, and we interviewed many of the good experts.

And what are some of the books? The one mentioned by John Dominic Crossan, and others by him, are good. Crossan, and some of these other people, are controversial figures, because of some of their views.

"Rabbi Jesus" by Bruce Chilton is good.

Jonathan Reed has a good book co-written with Dominic Crossan focusing on the archaeology of the Galilee area, with specific discussions of some of the towns that Jesus would have been in, such as Sepphoris. I'm blanking on the exact title, but it is something close to "Archaeology of the Galilee." Reed has another book coming out as well.

Marcus Borg has a good book as well, but I've blanked on that title as well. In fact, as usual, I'm lousy with the titles.

Father Jerome Murphy O'Connor is an expert, but I'm not sure if he's ever written a general book. He's done more technical papers.

Edited by Adam
Matthew Enthusiast

Matthew

Posted
Posted

Two books, both by N.T. Wright, offer a good "traditional" look at the historical Jesus: Jesus and the Victory of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God) & The Resurrection of the Son of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God)

Solid, historical scholarship, that comes to some very interesting conclusions. Both books take up the question about whether Jesus was invented or a real person. Interesting points the Wright makes to prove that the Jesus in scripture could not have been made up -- I would mess it up, if I tried to explain Wright's views on my own. Helpfull if you have a philosophy background because he thinks that a correct epistemology is the key to understanding the evidence regarding Jesus.

ghost of miles Grand Master

ghost of miles

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks a-plenty, one and all. The above titles should keep me occupied in this area for, oh, the rest of my life! I've always been a history buff, and in the past several years I've begun to develop some new interests--Asia being one of them, and the origins of Christianity another (outside the Biblical narrative, with which I'm pretty familiar owing to childhood upbringing. Anybody else ever read the Sunday Pics [Pix], btw? We used to get them in Sunday School--sort of a Classics Illustrated version of the Bible).

jazzypaul Newbie

jazzypaul

Posted
Posted

It's actually Matthew Borg, and from what I've heard, it's supposed to be a fascinating book, though I have not read it yet.

Everything I've read on Thiering has been stuff that Senor Sangrey has posted, and while I can't think it's the solid truth, it IS fascinating. My dad once made the point that someone called Jesus rabbi, and rabbis HAD to be married, and when he realized that, that was when my dad's faith became kinda, well, odd...

Big Al Collaborator

Big Al

Posted
Posted

Hey Ghost, have you read Chris Moore's Lamb? It's a fictionalized account of the life of Jesus (as told by his childhood best friend, Biff) before the time where the Gospels pick up the narrative. It's very imaginative, and the character of Joshua is remarkably consistent with the Christ of the Gospels. It certainly adds a fresh new perspective on a little talked-about portion of Jesus' life.

Plus, it's funny as hell!!! :D

joeface Newbie

joeface

Posted
Posted (edited)

Two books, both by N.T. Wright, offer a good "traditional" look at the historical Jesus:  Jesus and the Victory of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God) & The Resurrection of the Son of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God)

I was about to recommend N.T. Wright (particularly Jesus and the Victory of God) but looks like you beat me to it. Wright's knowledge of 1st century Palestine, second temple Judaism, and pretty much all extant texts and documents relating to Jesus is extremely thorough. That work is large but a must-read for a serious study. In it he spends 100 pages just explaining his historical method explicitly and why it should hold to offer serious conclusions. Wright has dialogued frequently with the more liberal side of contemporary Jesus scholarship (Marcus Borg and Wright even co-authored a two-views book).

For a smaller work to handle basic questions on historical method and textual criticisms, Paul Barnett's Jesus and the Logic of History is the one to get. Too many scholars are logically sloppy in their methodology, likely due to prior commitments, so Barnett lays some groundwork for a level-headed (read: logical) approach to the matter.

The notion of Jesus never actually existing is not taken seriously in any serious scholarly circles that I know of, but unfortunately it still gets a lot of mileage in pop-media scholarship specials and publications. It is provocative and attention-getting enough to gain an audience; to not only completely isolate the "Jesus of History" from the "Christ of faith" (because the Enlightenment taught us that history and faith are necessarily in opposition, right?), but even to boldly conclude there actually was no Jesus of history behind the early Christian movement in the first place.

Other common problems:

- So many new books painting new pictures of the historical Jesus, and we end up getting Jesuses who resemble the author's own life and times, social ethical and theological preferences, or based on seeming arbitrary thematic emphasis extracted from the same source texts everyone else is using. It's Rorscharch scholarship.

- Many scholars labor under the assumption that a successful reconstruction of the socio-political climate of early first century Palestine is enough to reconstruct the person of Jesus as to his psychological make-up and self-awareness. It is ruled out then that Jesus could have (A) brought something new to the table and/or (B) reached back to more traditional, pre-Hellenistic Jewish themes (though he spoke in contemporary terms) and self-consciously appropriated them for his own unique mission.

j

Edited by joeface
joeface Newbie

joeface

Posted
Posted

There's a new movie coming out on DVD this week called The God Who Wasn't There.  It's a documentary explaining that Jesus ws likely fictional, there is no god, and Christians make no sense.

I plan on buying it.

http://www.thegodmovie.com/

Oh yeah,

Bowling for Columbine did it to the gun culture.

Super Size Me did it to fast food.

Now The God Who Wasn't There does it to religion.

So by their own words, the precedent is set with other second-rate documentarians that wouldn't know a well-constructed argument if it bit them in the arse. In other words they're advertising this as pseudo-informative entertainment with little bearing on the actual subject matter.

Alexander Newbie

Alexander

Posted
Posted (edited)

The notion of Jesus never actually existing is not taken seriously in any serious scholarly circles that I know of, but unfortunately it still gets a lot of mileage in pop-media scholarship specials and publications. It is provocative and attention-getting enough to gain an audience; to not only completely isolate the "Jesus of History" from the "Christ of faith" (because the Enlightenment taught us that history and faith are necessarily in opposition, right?), but even to boldly conclude there actually was no Jesus of history behind the early Christian movement in the first place.

And yet, as I said, no historical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus exists. So what are we supposed to think? "Gosh, everybody seems to *think* this guy was real. There has to be *something* to it." Bull. Cite one piece of unbiased original empirical data proving the existence of Jesus, and I'll eat my hat.

Edited by Alexander
Alexander Newbie

Alexander

Posted
Posted

Cite one piece of unbiased original empirical data proving the existence of Jesus, and I'll eat my hat.

First I want to see proof that you own a hat.

It's a very nice hat, made entirely out of chocolate cake! Yum! :P

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...