100 likes | 335 Views
Topic 2 Quests for the Historical Jesus. Pre-Quest (before 1778) Pre-critical period: No quest – no problem. Produced “harmonies” of the gospels (e.g., Tatian’s). “Old Quest” (1778-1906) H. S. Reimarus (d. 1768) First attempt at strictly historical reconstruction (1778).
E N D
Topic 2 Quests for the Historical Jesus • Pre-Quest (before 1778) • Pre-critical period: No quest – no problem. • Produced “harmonies” of the gospels (e.g., Tatian’s). • “Old Quest” (1778-1906) • H. S. Reimarus (d. 1768) • First attempt at strictly historical reconstruction (1778). • Distinguished the teaching of the Jewish Jesus from the later Christian doctrine of the apostles and church fathers. • Jesus taught coming K of G with himself as political messiah; expected popular uprising; died in failure. • Rationalism (1700-1850) • Wanted a rational religion compatible with scientific worldview. • Eliminated supernatural elements; contrived rational explanations for miracles.
“Old Quest” (cont.) 3. D. F. Strauss (1835) • Supernatural elements must not be discarded but interpreted “mythologically” – symbolic of spiritual truth. • First to insist that Synoptics, not John, are primary sources for historical Jesus. (Showed that Jn. is more “mythologically” developed.) • “Liberal Lives of Jesus” movement (1850-1935) • Numerous reconstructions; most popular was E. Renan’s The Life of Jesus (1863); known as the first “biography” of Jesus. • Sought to put Christianity on firm historical foundation • Used “two-source” theory as basis for “reliable” account (cf. Holtzmann). • Divided Jesus’ ministry into periods and showed chronological development (“chronologizing”). • Saw development in Jesus’ own “messianic self-consciousness” (“psychologizing”). • Jesus’ teaching mirrors “Liberal Protestant” theology: universal Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man; etc. • Viewed Kingdom of God as inward, spiritual, ethical kingdom; attained through cultural progress.
“End” of the Quest (1906-53) A period of “no quest” was initiated by A. Schweitzer and consolidated by R. Bultmann (along with a supporting cast). • Johannes Weiss (1892) – Showed that “Kingdom of God” is a concept of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology. • W. Wrede (1901) – Showed that “messianic secret” motif is not historical but a literary device of Mark; led to historical skepticism. • A. Schweitzer (The Quest of the Historical Jesus, 1906) • Detailed critique of “the quest,” showing how scholars had “modernized” Jesus (found in Jesus their own theology). • Confirmed Weiss’ placement of Jesus in context of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology. • Produced a “thoroughgoing eschatological” account of Jesus: • Preached imminent K of G; kept secret that he will be messiah. • Turning point: failure of K to appear after mission of 12. • Went to Jerusalem to die and force K to come – failed. • Often credited with bringing an end to the historical quest. • Historically reconstructed Jesus cannot be object of faith. • Sure foundation of Christianity is the “living spirit of Jesus.”
“End” of the Quest (1906-53) – cont. 4. M. Kähler (The So-Called Historical Jesus and the Historic Biblical Christ, 1892) – evangelical scholar who anticipated Bultmann • Sources inadequate for historical reconstruction: • Gospels are not Historie (bare facts), • but Geschichte (meaning/ significance of an event). • Faith has no interest in a historically reconstructed Jesus.
“End” of the Quest (1906-53) – cont. • R. Bultmann – Most influential NT scholar of 20th cent.; greatest advocate of the “no quest” position. • Historical quest is methodologically impossible. • Sources do not permit us to write a biography of Jesus. • Form criticism (1921) shows creativity of church, fragmentary nature of traditions, etc. • Wrote a book on Jesus’ message (Jesus and the Word). • Historical quest is theologically unnecessary (illegitimate). • Faith arises in response to the kerygma (“preaching”). • Faith does not need to be verified by historical research (historical quest amounts to seeking false security). • Kerygma of early church was a response to the death & resurrection of Jesus, not to teaching of historical Jesus. • Drew sharp distinction between the message of Jesus and the preaching of the early church. • A decisive “shift” took place at Easter. • “The Proclaimer became the Proclaimed.”
“New Quest” (1953-85) • Leading figures – mostly pupils of Bultmann who took new direction. • E. Käsemann (1953) – Opened the “new quest” with lecture calling for resumption of historical quest. • G. Bornkamm, Jesus of Nazareth (1956) – first book on Jesus from this perspective. • J. Robinson, A New Quest of the Historical Jesus (1959) – gave name to new movement; analyzed rationale.
“New Quest” (1953-85) – cont. 2. Key positions: • Historical quest is methodologically possible. • Confident in identifying sufficient authentic material to produce a coherent picture. • Still can’t write a “biography.” • Historical quest is theologically necessary. • The risen Lord proclaimed by the church is none other than Jesus of Nazareth. • Otherwise, Christian faith dissolves into timeless myth. • By combining proclamation of faith with historical memory of Jesus, the gospels demand inquiry into historical Jesus. • Emphasized continuity between message of Jesus and faith of early church. • The “shift” at Easter largely made explicit what was already implicit before Easter. • Jesus never explicitly claimed to be Messiah, but he acted with messianic authority (“implicit Christology”). • After Easter, this became explicit when church applied titles.
Recent trends (after 1985) • The Jesus Seminar: “New Quest Renewed” • Leading scholars: • Robert W. Funk – founder • John Dominic Crossan – co-chair • Marcus Borg • Characteristic features: • High public profile (press releases; voting on authenticity with colored beads; color-coded edition of The Five Gospels). • Tendency to credit Thomas as independent, early witness. • Reconstructs history of Q, separating into earlier and later layers. • Minimalist approach to authenticity (Wredebahn). • Reconstructs a non-eschatological Jesus. • Tendency to view Jesus less in context of Jewish eschatology and more of Cynic philosophy. • John Dominic Crossan: Jesus as peasant Jewish Cynic; radical social critic; advocated radically egalitarian society. • Marcus Borg: Jesus as Jewish mystic/healer, wisdom teacher, and social prophet. http://www.united.edu/portrait/pre1.shtml
Recent trends (after 1985) – cont. • “Third Quest” (counting “Old Quest” and “New Quest” as first two) • Leading scholars • N. T. Wright – coined term “Third Quest” • E. P. Sanders • John Meier • Ben Witherington • Characteristic features: • Views Jesus in context of 1st-century Judaism. • Views Jesus as eschatological (Schweitzerstrasse). • Takes narrative material more seriously. • More confident of producing a historically plausible account of Jesus’ agenda. • E. P. Sanders: Jesus as eschatological prophet; imminent Kingdom of God will bring the restoration of Israel, a new Temple, and a reign of peace and justice. • N. T. Wright: Jesus as eschatological prophet/Messiah; announces end of exile, forgiveness of sins, and restoration of Israel; dies as Israel’s representative, taking Israel’s fate upon himself.