Historical Jesus Course

[ulcseminary]

This is an essay on a course about the Historical Jesus that I thought I'd share:

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]

Master of the Historical Jesus
​

[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]

By Michael Barth​

[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]

​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] The Master of the historical Jesus course is a really intriguing course. This course goes through the process of how we know Jesus existed and how we know what he said. It also explains the different time periods (quests) involved with this process.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This course starts off by looking at other sources including the Gospels to find out what Jesus really said and did during his life here on Earth. This course uses the Gospel, pagan sources, Jewish sources, and other miscellaneous sources. This course does rely heavily on the canonical Gospels since there is little in the way of other sources such as pagan sources and Jewish sources. This course also gives a brief description on each of the synoptic Gospels in lesson 1. It is important that these descriptions appear because this course does deal with the Q (German for Quelle) document. Lesson 1 also deals with the Messianic Secret.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This course also puts Jesus into context meaning that this course looks at how Jesus lived in the first century A.D. This is one way to look at how Jesus might have been influenced. Some things that are looked at are the languages he spoke such as Hebrew, Aramaic, and some Greek. The looked briefly into how Jesus was probably a disciple of John the Baptist who was the forerunner to Jesus. Also, you get a glimpse of the different sections of first century Palestine such as the Pharisees, Sadducees, and the Essenes because Jesus was probably an Essene.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] There are five different historical quests that look into the Historical Jesus or as the course says Jesus Studies. The five different historical quests are the pre-quest (before 1778), the old quest (1778 to 1906), the no quest (1906 to 1953), the second quest (1953 to 1985), and the third quest (1985 to current). These quests used historical search criteria in relation to Jesus. The historical search criteria are criterion of independent attestation, criterion of dissimilarity, criterion of coherence, and criterion of language and environment.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] The different quest looks at things during that happened during the time period too. The pre-quest looks the Protestant Reformation and the Enlightenment. In the Old Quest, Hermann Samuel Reimarus' life is looked at how he contributed to the Old Quest. The No Quest time period looks at Albert Schweitzer's "In Quest of the Historical Jesus" and how Rudolf Bultmann postulated that the Gospels need to be "demythologized" to get the "existential meaning". The Second quest was a call for a new in-depth historical look into Jesus. The Third quest extended the method used in the second quest and used "Q" (Quelle) and "Thomas" as a main concentration.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This course also uses texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi Library, and the Quelle "Q" Document. Also, the author will take you through a look of first century Palestine. Different parables and sayings from Jesus are used in the later half of this course.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This course was one of the tougher courses that the ULC Seminary offers. While challenging, it was worth the effort. The author gives you good background knowledge on how people explore the Historical Jesus. The author seems really knowledgeable about this subject. The time you put into this course is worthwhile. I do recommend this course for any ULC Minister.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]

 

[ulcseminary]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]

Master of Historical Jesus[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]

Rev. Justin Oles[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
This course, Master of the Historical Jesus, is rather intriguing but is certainly not what I expected. I was expecting more of a scientific look at the life of Jesus. Instead it is a course that demonstrates the proof of Jesus’ existence through the gospels, both canonical and Gnostic, through analysis of the texts. The author goes through the various ancient texts and by comparison is able to show what Jesus may have actually said or done and not just what the Bible says he did. It also explains the different periods of learning and research (“quests”) during which Christ was studied and the rationale behind it.

The course begins by trying to help you understand the world Jesus must have lived in (historically, anthropologically and socially) during the first century of the Common Era (CE). Then it goes on to explain how common words or phrases had different meanings. For example, in Jesus’ day the word “time” meant something more like “age” or “era” now. That is to say that time was not a precise measure of minutes and seconds but rather a length of time during which a discernable and important even was taking place, a time for grieving for example. There is no set length of minutes and seconds during which one might grieve the loss of a loved one and everyone deals with its separately. Therefore when Christ said things like “the time of the Kingdom is here”, he meant not literally now, or even in the next few hours, days, weeks of months. He meant that this was the age or era in which it was to take place.

Further, the course explained where Christ might have gotten his ideas and why the translations should not be taken at face value. Christ lived during a time when almost all Jews, Christ was undoubtedly a Jew, fell into one of three categories (the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes). Christ was most likely an Essenes based on the area he lived, his upbringing, etc. This would have influenced his beliefs. He also chronologically came after John the Baptist and was most likely a follower of his teachings or at least affected by them. Lastly, the gospels were originally written in Aramaic, Hebrew, and some Greek. Later these were translated into Hebrew, Greek and Latin and some information was lost or changed, this was further compounded when they were later translated into the modern languages.

Research on Christ has been broken into five difference periods or quests. The first period, called the “pre-quest”, occurred before 1778; the main theory behind this period was that the Jesus of the bible was the Jesus of history. People felt that although there were discrepancies in the gospels that this must be allegorical, or simply to test the faith of the believer. The “first quest” or “old quest” lasted from 1778 – 1906. This period falls into the lanes of conspiracy theory, it postulates that Christ never actually intended to die and did not expect it. It goes on to think that in all likelihood the disciples stole Jesus’ body off the cross and hid it in order to fake the resurrection. The third period is referred to the “no quest” period and went from 1906 – 1953. During this period went the opposite way from the last and simply said that since he had risen the historical story and context didn’t matter, all that mattered was the spiritual Jesus himself. The second quest went from 1953 – 1985 and never got very in-depth.

The theory being that while the quest was necessary all that was need was to prove the historical accuracy of the Christ sayings but that it fell solely on the historian to prove it was so. And the last period is referred to as the third quest and goes from 1985 to the present. This last quest follows the finding of the Lost Sea Scrolls and the gospels of Q and Thomas thereby leading to a more in depth historical analysis of the gospels with relationship to the time of each gospels creation as well as its interrelation with the other gospels. One can only guess where this might go from here or what further research might prove about the actual Jesus of Nazareth in the future.

Rev. Justin Oles

 

[cyberlizard]

wow - this course uses the 'Q' - Quelle document...


if this course used the Q document, scholars around the globe would be beating a path to his (university) door.

to date, this document has never been found and probably never will be, it is merely an academic possibility.



Steve

 

[Rahm]

wow - this course uses the 'Q' - Quelle document...


if this course used the Q document, scholars around the globe would be beating a path to his (university) door.

to date, this document has never been found and probably never will be, it is merely an academic possibility.



Steve

You're right that the 'Q' has never been found. However--scholars from the Jesus Seminar have 're-created' it in their best educated opinions of what it most likely contained. It's an intersting read and if I may be so bold to say this--inspiring too.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

So how would this course help me out any more than with these from my library ?

Erdmans handbook to Christianity
The Life and Time of Jesus the Messiah by Edersheim
A Guide to the Gospels by William Graham Scroggie
Lord Jesus Christ, Devotion to Jesus in Early Christianity by Hurtado
The 2 Nature in Christ by Chemnitz's

thanks for your comments they are appreciated !

 

[OzSpen]

So how would this course help me out any more than with these from my library ?

Erdmans handbook to Christianity
The Life and Time of Jesus the Messiah by Edersheim
A Guide to the Gospels by William Graham Scroggie
Lord Jesus Christ, Devotion to Jesus in Early Christianity by Hurtado
The 2 Nature in Christ by Chemnitz's

thanks for your comments they are appreciated !

It sounds to me like that course would baptise you into some of the scepticism like those from the Jesus Seminar. The original OP stated:

Further, the course explained where Christ might have gotten his ideas and why the translations should not be taken at face value. Christ lived during a time when almost all Jews, Christ was undoubtedly a Jew, fell into one of three categories (the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes). Christ was most likely an Essenes based on the area he lived, his upbringing, etc. This would have influenced his beliefs. He also chronologically came after John the Baptist and was most likely a follower of his teachings or at least affected by them. Lastly, the gospels were originally written in Aramaic, Hebrew, and some Greek. Later these were translated into Hebrew, Greek and Latin and some information was lost or changed, this was further compounded when they were later translated into the modern languages.

This is not promoting biblical Christianity but doubting, liberal, super-critical views of the Bible and Jesus.

There are many other resources besides the ones that you mentioned. These scholars expose the weaknesses of the contemporary liberal views of Jesus and the Bible:

• Robert L. Thomas & F. David Farnell (eds) 1998. The Jesus Crisis (Kregel Publications);
• Paul Rhodes Eddy & Gregory A. Boyd 2007. The Jesus Legend (Baker Academic);
• Michael J. Wilkins & J. P. Moreland (eds) 1995. Jesus under Fire (Zondervan);
• Ben Witherington III 1997. The Jesus Quest (IVP);
• Darrell L. Bock 2002. Jesus according to Scripture (Baker Academic).

There are some excellent refutations from evangelicals of the Jesus Seminar type of liberalism and denigration of Jesus and the NT documents.


In Christ, Oz

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Thanks for the info. I will look into the books you listed below. I'm not interested in the writings of liberals, skeptics and the likes of those from the jesus seminars.

It sounds to me like that course would baptise you into some of the scepticism like those from the Jesus Seminar. The original OP stated:

This is not promoting biblical Christianity but doubting, liberal, super-critical views of the Bible and Jesus.

There are many other resources besides the ones that you mentioned. These scholars expose the weaknesses of the contemporary liberal views of Jesus and the Bible:

• Robert L. Thomas & F. David Farnell (eds) 1998. The Jesus Crisis (Kregel Publications);
• Paul Rhodes Eddy & Gregory A. Boyd 2007. The Jesus Legend (Baker Academic);
• Michael J. Wilkins & J. P. Moreland (eds) 1995. Jesus under Fire (Zondervan);
• Ben Witherington III 1997. The Jesus Quest (IVP);
• Darrell L. Bock 2002. Jesus according to Scripture (Baker Academic).

There are some excellent refutations from evangelicals of the Jesus Seminar type of liberalism and denigration of Jesus and the NT documents.


In Christ, Oz

 

[ebedmelech]

This is just bad stuff. One should be able to smell it a mile away! Just WOW!

 

[Biblewriter]

This is just bad stuff. One should be able to smell it a mile away! Just WOW!

For once, I completely agree with you.

 

[OzSpen]

This is just bad stuff. One should be able to smell it a mile away! Just WOW!

We may be able to 'smell' liberalism a mile away, but I have not found many evangelical churches who try to prepare their young people for the encounters with this in university and even theological college/seminary.

You're right that the 'Q' has never been found. However--scholars from the Jesus Seminar have 're-created' it in their best educated opinions of what it most likely contained. It's an intersting read and if I may be so bold to say this--inspiring too.

The 'Lost Sayings Gospel - Q' was a 2-source theory around before the time of the Jesus Seminar. It's only an hypothesis, but it is accepted by many scholars, both liberal and evangelical.

Since Mark is regarded as the earliest Gospel written, the Q (Quelle) source examines the material in Matthew and Luke and asks the question: From where did this material come? Thus Q is hypothesised as a possible source document.

I ask you: From where did the extra material in Matthew and Luke come - material that is not in Mark?

 

[Shane R]

. . .I ask you: From where did the extra material in Matthew and Luke come - material that is not in Mark?

What if one were to affirm Matthean primacy and Q (or Matthew-Aramaic) as this author proposes: http://www.amazon.com/Jonas-Genre-O...id=1458455481&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Jonas+Genre

 

[OzSpen]

What if one were to affirm Matthean primacy and Q (or Matthew-Aramaic) as this author proposes: http://www.amazon.com/Jonas-Genre-O...id=1458455481&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Jonas+Genre

Please tell us the thesis of Paul Hubbard's book so that we have something to discuss. I don't plan on reading the book before I comment.

Hubbard would not be the first to suggest the primacy of Matthew. Papias, back in the 1st-2nd centuries, suggested it, but it has been pooh-poohed by some ancient and more recent critical scholarship.

Oz

 

[Shane R]

Please tell us the thesis of Paul Hubbard's book so that we have something to discuss. I don't plan on reading the book before I comment.

Hubbard would not be the first to suggest the primacy of Matthew. Papias, back in the 1st-2nd centuries, suggested it, but it has been pooh-poohed by some ancient and more recent critical scholarship.

Oz

Hubbard supposes that it took 30 years or more for the early Christian community to reach a consensus as to the meaning of the events surrounding Jesus; to divorce themselves fully from Rabbinic Judaism. In the early days, Matthew had written an Aramaic Gospel which we might think of as the Q source. After absorbing the message of St. Paul, he re-wrote his Gospel in Greek and thoroughly fleshed out his theology to be inclusive of the Gentiles. This was the first of the Gospels and Mark and Luke were familiar with it and borrowed heavily from it. But it was more than a simple history, it was the prototype of a genre: the Jonas genre. A genre that is theatrical as well as historical, thus the chronology is secondary to the underlying message. The book explores a wealth of groundbreaking statistical analysis of the Greek Synoptic texts and concludes with some thoughts on St. Peter as perhaps the slowest learner of the Apostles, but ultimately vindicated within the orthodox camp by his Second Epistle.

 

[OzSpen]

Hubbard supposes that it took 30 years or more for the early Christian community to reach a consensus as to the meaning of the events surrounding Jesus; to divorce themselves fully from Rabbinic Judaism. In the early days, Matthew had written an Aramaic Gospel which we might think of as the Q source. After absorbing the message of St. Paul, he re-wrote his Gospel in Greek and thoroughly fleshed out his theology to be inclusive of the Gentiles. This was the first of the Gospels and Mark and Luke were familiar with it and borrowed heavily from it. But it was more than a simple history, it was the prototype of a genre: the Jonas genre. A genre that is theatrical as well as historical, thus the chronology is secondary to the underlying message. The book explores a wealth of groundbreaking statistical analysis of the Greek Synoptic texts and concludes with some thoughts on St. Peter as perhaps the slowest learner of the Apostles, but ultimately vindicated within the orthodox camp by his Second Epistle.

Thanks, Shane.

I notice that Hubbard published this book with Create Space, an Amazon company, but it is not recognised as an academic publisher. Many people go with Create Space when they can't find a regular publisher to accept what they have written. I did find the price of $44.50 for a paperback of just over 200pp to be an exorbitant price.

However, that does not detract from the content of what he has written. I have browsed some of the material in the limited amount available online. He has made a reasonable case for his thesis, but I wouldn't know the details because I haven't read all of it.

What is Hubbard's concluding view of Scripture? Does he conclude where he began that Albert Schweitzer's, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, concluded that the historical Christ simply could not be found (p. 7)?

Even though he maintains that Matthew had some theatrical dynamics, are these from Jesus and the situations in which Jesus ministered, or are they created by Matthew?

As for the historical aspects in Matthew, can they be trusted as reliable history? What is Hubbard's view?

Do you know Paul Hubbard?

Oz

 

[miamited]

Hi all,

Well, you know what they say, garbage in, garbage out.

God bless.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Shane R]

Thanks, Shane.

I notice that Hubbard published this book with Create Space, an Amazon company, but it is not recognised as an academic publisher. Many people go with Create Space when they can't find a regular publisher to accept what they have written. I did find the price of $44.50 for a paperback of just over 200pp to be an exorbitant price. . .

As for the historical aspects in Matthew, can they be trusted as reliable history? What is Hubbard's view?

Do you know Paul Hubbard?

Oz

He is the President of the seminary I attend as well as the canon for the diocese of the Anglican church with which we are affiliated. I know him well. The seminary is a small institution which is not capable of supporting a publishing house; thus the independent publishing arrangement. I agree that the price is exorbitant but the proceeds go into the seminary's general scholarship fund.

Hubbard's point was not so much to answer Albert Schweitzer or any other theory of the historical Jesus, but to examine the basic genre of the Synoptic Gospels and come to a proper reading of them. He does accept the historicity of the Gospels - they are not merely allegory.