The criterion of multiple attestation. A saying or story could be authentic if it appears in most of the sources behind the gospels. Results here depend on your conclusion concerning the synoptic problem. A scholar who accepts the four-source theory would say that a teaching which appears in Mark, Q, and L or M is likely to be authentic.
You can learn more about Dr. The criterion of embarrassment. One problem with this criterion is that things that seem embarrassing to us may not have been embarrassing to the early church.
The criterion of Semitic flavor. This would include sayings which contain Aramaic words or which envisage Palestinian social conditions. This criterion also has problems. While an Aramaic word suggests that a saying came from a Semitic context, an authentic saying could have lost its Semitic flavor through translation into Greek.
Nor can this criterion prove authenticity, since the saying could be traced to the Aramaic-speaking church, rather than to Jesus himself. The criterion of divergent traditions. When an author preserves traditions which do not serve his purpose, this criterion claims they are probably authentic. To some this would suggest it is pre-Matthean, and so probably authentic. Events which seem to conflict with the narrative may actually be an important part of it.
Taken together, the criteria of authenticity have other problems, too. Still, they can help us piece together a portrait of the historical Jesus. The historical Jesus—what we know about him through historical research—is only part of the real Jesus. We can know much about the person of Jesus without knowing everything. Learn more about the Bible. Get started with a free online course. The 3 "Quests" for the Historical Jesus. Due to the word limitation, this part of his thinking has not been explored in relation to his understanding of Jesus.
More than Kierkegaard, though, Bultmann was heavily influenced by the existentialism of Martin Heidegger, who was a colleague of his. It is in this vein that Bultmann sought to de-historicize the kerygma of the church. The historical fact simply is unimportant for Bultmann only present and future matter. It also sought to bring together biblical studies and theology something Bultmann, paradoxically, opposed. Though, my German is still pretty uneven.
Overall a great post thought good thorough treatment. Thanks very much for your comments Trey. I printed off this article more than a month ago and I finally got around to reading it.
My only response, really, is I am impressed with the analysis. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. This was an essay that I wrote as an undergraduate a number of years ago and have not really delved into these topics in more detail since. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account.
Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Blog at WordPress. Follow: RSS Twitter. Ben's Blog. Tags albert schwietzer , christ of faith , demythologization , form criticism , historical jesus , jesus of history , karl barth , rudolf bultmann.
Introduction Among the most influential theologians of the twentieth century stands Rudolf Bultmann In the most frequently quoted statement from Jesus and the Word , he wrote: I do indeed think that we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus, since the early Christian sources show no interest in either, are moreover fragmentary and often legendary; and other sources about Jesus do not exist.
Thus, the very nature of Christian faith and theology basically leaves the historical Jesus irrelevant, though not completely forgotten: Of course the doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. Share this: Twitter Facebook. Like this: Like Loading First, it is clear that the standard histories of New Testament research have not adequately dealt with this aspect of the Quest for various reasons. For a recent protest at the effects of such labelling, but which thereby reveals the extent to which such labels have become common parlance, see S.
See G. Theissen and D. Wright nevertheless argues that E. Weaver, Historical Jesus, back cover. Weaver, Historical Jesus, p. Head The Nazi Quest for an Aryan Jesus 59 As of old Jacob wrestled with the angel, so German theology wrestles with Jesus of Nazareth and will not let him go until he blesses it—that is, until he consents to serve it and suffers himself to be drawn by the Germanic spirit into the midst of our time and our civilization.
But when the day breaks, the wrestler must let him go. He will not cross the ford with us. Jesus of Nazareth will not let himself be modernized…. This was done because it was what German Christians needed. Equally clearly, we can see that the quest of the historical Jesus is a quest to avoid him. Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus.
First Complete Edition ET; ed. Both of these passages are quoted in A. An early and rather sketchier version of this paper hardly more than a survey of the literature was presented to the Jesus Seminar of the British New Testament Conference in ; more recently a fuller version was presented at the Senior New Testament Seminar in Cambridge. Questions and comments on both occasions served to stimulate further exploration and reflection. I would also like to acknowledge the warm personal encouragement of two scholars who have done the fundamental research in this area, Susannah Heschel and Robert Ericksen.
Crossan one of the leading lights of the seminar. Take, for example, the following, from Birger A. To put it metaphorically, the Seminar has performed a forcible epispasm on the historical Jesus, a surgical proce- dure removing the marks of his circumcision.
The association has a rhetorical force, but no substance, as Pearson offers noth- ing more than a footnote reference to Grundmann; but it is a metaphorical asso- ciation which serves to rule the Jesus Seminar out of consideration. Somewhat more seriously, Sean Freyne closes his response to J. He wrote further: The reflections of the Jesus Seminar are focused in R.
Funk, R. Responses have been many and varied and are not our concern here, see B. Arnal and M. Desjardins eds. Edinburgh: T. Chilton and C. Evans eds. Fornberg and D. Hellholm eds. Biblical Texts in their Textual and Situational Contexts. Mohr, Meyers ed. For the most recent treatment see M. This attempts a critique of the view that Galilee was predominantly or substantially Gentile from the historical and archae- ological evidence. It makes no attempt at any broader ideological critique, and Grundmann and the non-Jewish Jesus school are mentioned only briefly on p.
As will be obvious, the description depends on and draws attention to the founda- tional research of a range of other scholars, as indicated in the notes. Altmann ed. Head The Nazi Quest for an Aryan Jesus 63 Mirabeau, initiated the emancipation of Jews in and imposed Jewish equality on those lands conquered during their Napoleonic successes; combined with rising German nationalism, provided a potent seed bed for anti-Semitic ideas.
In —81 anti-Semitic leagues and politicians attempted, in the context of numerous violent episodes, to introduce anti-Jewish legislation, albeit without success. Jesus was himself not Jewish but Man For Stoecker see esp. Gutteridge, Open Thy Mouth for the Dumb! For Treitschke see Gutteridge, Open thy Mouth, pp. Poliakov, The History of Anti-Semitism. Suicidal Europe, — 5 vols. See also I. Mit einer welt- geschichtlichen Antwort Karlsruhe and Leipzig: H. Reuther, Later editions focused on the threat posed to German national culture e.
Citations from Gutteridge, Open Thy Mouth, pp. The Germans were the best representatives of the western Aryan peoples and those best placed to establish a new European order. Fischer [articles first published together in ]; Munich: J. Lehmann, ; and reprints , pp. Munich, New York: Howard Fertig, For the broader picture see P. For all these themes in Wagner see M. Graetz as well as Ewald and Renan in support of his argument. The different character of Galileans is revealed in their propen- sity to rebellion e.
Judas the Galilean, the Sicarii, Menahem, the sons of Judas, John of Gischala, Eleazar ; they spoke Greek rather than Hebrew due to the physical difference in the formation of the larynx. Goerlitz and H. Chamberlain, Foundations, p.
Chamberlain, Foundations, pp. This consists of sayings under six headings presented with a page to each saying, but without references, contexts or separate introductions. The selection highlights a purely general and internal sort of piety 1.
Habt Glauben an Gott! Chertkov; Moscow, n. Have faith in God. Do not be afraid, only believe. If you believe, you can be anything. Despite Hermann L. Beck, see also Gutteridge, Open Thy Mouth, pp. Mein Kampf, p. Mein Kampf cited here from H.
They have no future— certainly none for the Germans…for our people it is decisive whether they acknowl- edge the Jewish Christ-creed with its pity-ethics, or a strong, heroic belief in God in Nature, God in our own people, in our destiny, in our blood.
Leave the hair-splitting to others. It will not make us free. A German Church, a German Christianity, is distortion.
One is either a German or a Christian. You cannot be both. You can throw the epileptic Paul out of Christianity—others have done so before us. What Chamberlain wrote in his Principles is, to say the least, stupid. For Rosenberg, the racial theory enunciated by Chamberlain was
0コメント