Исторический Иисус

Термин « исторический Иисус » относится к жизни и учениям Иисуса , интерпретированным с помощью критических исторических методов , в отличие от традиционно религиозных интерпретаций . Он также учитывает исторический и культурный контекст, в котором жил Иисус. Практически все ученые античности признают, что Иисус был исторической фигурой , а идея о том, что Иисус был мифической фигурой, последовательно отвергалась научным сообществом как маргинальная теория . Ученые расходятся во мнениях относительно верований и учений Иисуса, а также относительно точности библейских повествований, и только два события поддерживаются почти универсальным научным консенсусом: Иисус был крещен и Иисус был распят .

Реконструкции исторического Иисуса основаны на посланиях Павла и Евангелиях , в то время как несколько небиблейских источников также подтверждают его историческое существование. Начиная с XVIII века, три отдельных научных поиска исторического Иисуса , каждый из которых имел свои особенности и разрабатывал новые и разные критерии исследования. проводились Historical Jesus scholars typically contend that he was a Galilean Jew and living in a time of messianic and apocalyptic expectations. Some scholars credit the apocalyptic declarations of the gospels to him, while others portray his "Kingdom of God" as a moral one, and not apocalyptic in nature.

The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed through history using these processes have often differed from each other, and from the image portrayed in the gospel accounts. Such portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish messiah, prophet of social change, and rabbi. There is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, nor the methods needed to construct it, but there are overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.

Historical existence

Main article: Historicity of Jesus

Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed. Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical criticism are applied to the New Testament, "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." There is no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.

Since the 1970s, various scholars such as Joachim Jeremias, E. P. Sanders and Gerd Theissen have traced elements of Christianity to currents in first-century Judaism and have discarded nineteenth-century minority views that Jesus was based on previous pagan deities. Mentions of Jesus in extra-biblical texts exist and are supported as genuine by the majority of historians. Differences between the content of the Jewish Messianic prophecies and the life of Jesus undermine the idea that Jesus was invented as a Jewish Midrash or Peshar. The presence of details of Jesus' life in Paul, and the differences between letters and Gospels, are sufficient for most scholars to dismiss mythicist claims concerning Paul. Theissen says "there is broad scholarly consensus that we can best find access to the historical Jesus through the Synoptic tradition." Bart D. Ehrman adds: "To dismiss the Gospels from the historical record is neither fair nor scholarly." One book argues that if Jesus did not exist, "the origin of the faith of the early Christians remains a perplexing mystery." Eddy and Boyd say the best history can assert is probability, yet the probability of Jesus having existed is so high, Ehrman says "virtually all historians and scholars have concluded Jesus did exist as a historical figure." Historian James Dunn writes: "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed". In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Ehrman wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees."

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. In the 21st century, there have been a number of books and documentaries on this subject. For example, Earl Doherty has written that Jesus may have been a real person, but that the biblical accounts of him are almost entirely fictional. Many proponents use a three-fold argument first developed in the 19th century: that the New Testament has no historical value with respect to Jesus's existence, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan and/or mythical roots.

Contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and biblical scholars and classical historians view the theories of his nonexistence as effectively refuted. Robert M. Price, an atheist who denies the existence of Jesus, agrees that his perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars. Michael Grant (a classicist and historian) states that "In recent years, no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus, or at any rate very few have, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." 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 anymore."

Sources

Judea Province during the 1st century

Main articles: Sources for the historicity of Jesus and Historical reliability of the Gospels

The New Testament represents sources that have become canonical for Christianity, and there are many apocryphal texts that are examples of the wide variety of writings in the first centuries AD that are related to Jesus.

Non-Christian sources that are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus.

New Testament sources

Synoptic Gospels

An 11th-century Byzantine manuscript containing the opening of the Gospel of Luke

Main article: Synoptic Gospels

The Synoptic Gospels are the primary sources of historical information about Jesus and of the religious movement he founded. These religious gospels – the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark, and the Gospel of Luke – recount the life, ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of a Jew named Jesus who spoke Aramaic and wore tzitzit. There are different hypotheses regarding the origin of the texts because the gospels of the New Testament were written in Greek for Greek-speaking communities, and were later translated into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic.

The fourth gospel, the Gospel of John, differs greatly from the Synoptic Gospels and scholars generally consider it to be less historical than the Synoptic Gospels. As James Crossley and Robert J. Myles explain, John "is of limited use for reconstructing the life of the historical Jesus." However, scholars usually agree that John is not entirely without historical value: certain sayings in John are as old as or older than their synoptic counterparts, his representation of the topography around Jerusalem is often superior to that of the synoptics, his testimony that Jesus was executed before, rather than on, Passover, might well be more accurate, and his presentation of Jesus in the garden and the prior meeting held by the Jewish authorities are more historically plausible than their synoptic parallels.

Historians often study the historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles when studying the reliability of the gospels, as the Book of Acts was seemingly written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke.

Pauline epistles

Further information: Pauline epistles

The Pauline epistles are dated to between AD 50 and 60 (i.e., approximately twenty to thirty years after the generally accepted time period for the death of Jesus), and are the earliest surviving Christian texts that include information about Jesus.

Although Paul the Apostle provides little biographical information about Jesus and states that he never knew Jesus, he does make it clear that he considers Jesus to have been a real person and a Jew. Moreover, he claims to have met with James, the brother of Jesus.

Non-biblical sources

In addition to biblical sources, there are a number of mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources that have been used in the historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.

Thallos

Biblical scholar Frederick Fyvie Bruce says the earliest mention of Jesus outside the New Testament occurs c. 55 AD from a historian named Thallos. Thallos' history, like the vast majority of ancient literature, has been lost but not before it was quoted by Sextus Julius Africanus (c. 160 – c. 240 AD), a Christian writer, in his History of the World (c. 220). This book likewise was lost, but not before one of its citations of Thallos was taken up by the Byzantine historian George Syncellus in his Chronicle (c. 800). There is no means by which certainty can be established concerning this or any of the other lost references, partial references, and questionable references that mention some aspect of Jesus' life or death, but in evaluating evidence, it is appropriate to note they exist.

Josephus and Tacitus

Main articles: Josephus on Jesus and Tacitus on Christ

There are two passages in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one from the Roman historian Tacitus, that are generally considered good evidence.

Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around AD 93–94, includes two references to the biblical Jesus in Books 18 and 20. The general scholarly view is that while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, 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. Of the other mention in Josephus, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 ("the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James"). Paul references meeting and interacting with James, Jesus' brother, and since this agreement between the different sources supports Josephus' statement, the statement is only disputed by a small number of scholars.

Roman historian Tacitus referred to "Christus" and his execution by Pontius Pilate in his Annals (written c. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44. Robert E. Van Voorst states that the very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians makes the passage extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribe and the Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation of Jesus's crucifixion.

Talmud

Main article: Jesus in the Talmud

Other considerations outside Christendom include the possible mentions of Jesus in the Talmud. The Talmud speaks in some detail of the conduct of criminal cases of Israel whose texts were gathered together from 200 to 500 CE. Johann Maier and Bart D. Ehrman argue this material is too late to be of much use. Ehrman explains that "Jesus is never mentioned in the oldest part of the Talmud, the Mishnah, but appears only in the later commentaries of the Gemara." Jesus is not mentioned by name, but there is a subtle attack on the virgin birth that refers to the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier Pantera (Ehrman says, "In Greek the word for virgin is parthenos"), and a reference to Jesus' miracles as "black magic" learned when he lived in Egypt (as a toddler). Ehrman writes that few contemporary scholars treat this as historical.

Mara bar Serapion

Main article: Mara bar Serapion on Jesus

There is only one classical writer who refers positively to Jesus and that is Mara bar Serapion, a Syriac Stoic, who wrote a letter to his son, who was also named Serapion, from a Roman prison. He speaks of the execution of 'the wise king of the Jews' and compares his death to that of Socrates at the hands of the Athenians. He links the death of the 'wise king' to the Jews being driven from their kingdom. He also states that the 'wise king' lives on because of the "new laws he laid down". The dating of the letter is disputed but was probably soon after 73 AD.

Scholars such as Robert Van Voorst see little doubt that the reference to the execution of the "king of the Jews" is about the death of Jesus. Others such as Craig A. Evans see less value in the letter, given its uncertain date, and the ambiguity in the reference.

Critical-historical research

Main articles: Historical criticism, Textual criticism, and Biblical hermeneutics

Historical criticism, also known as the historical-critical method or higher criticism, is a branch of criticism that investigates the origins of ancient texts in order to understand "the world behind the text". The primary goal of historical criticism is to discover the text's primitive or original meaning in its original historical context and its literal sense. Historical criticism began in the 17th century and gained popular recognition in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Historical reliability of the Gospels

Main article: Historical reliability of the Gospels

The historical reliability of the gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Historical reliability is not dependent on a source being inerrant or void of agendas since there are sources that are considered generally reliable despite having such traits (e.g. Josephus). The question of reliability is a matter of ongoing debate.

Historians subject the gospels to critical analysis by differentiating authentic, reliable information from possible inventions, exaggerations, and alterations. Since there are more textual variants (200,000–400,000) than words in the New Testament, scholars use textual criticism to determine which gospel variants could theoretically be taken as original. To answer this question, scholars have to ask who wrote the gospels, when they wrote them, what was their objective in writing them, what sources the authors used, how reliable these sources were, and how far removed in time the sources were from the stories they narrate, or if they were altered later. Scholars may also look into the internal evidence of the documents, to see if, for example, a document has misquoted texts from the Hebrew Tanakh, has made incorrect claims about geography, if the author appears to have hidden information, or if the author has fabricated a prophecy. Finally, scholars turn to external sources, including the testimony of early church leaders, to writers outside the church, primarily Jewish and Greco-Roman historians, who would have been more likely to have criticized the church, and to archaeological evidence.

Quest for the historical Jesus

Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694–1768) studied the historical Jesus.

Main article: Quest for the historical Jesus

Since the 18th century, three scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and based on different research criteria, which were often developed during each specific phase. These quests are distinguished from pre-Enlightenment approaches because they rely on the historical-critical method to study biblical narratives. While textual analysis of biblical sources had taken place for centuries, these quests introduced new methods and specific techniques in the attempt to establish the historical validity of their conclusions.

First quest

The scholarly effort to reconstruct an "authentic" historical picture of Jesus was a product of the Enlightenment skepticism of the late eighteenth century. Bible scholar Gerd Theissen explains that "It was concerned with presenting a historically true life of Jesus that functioned theologically as a critical force over against [established Roman Catholic] Christology." The first scholar to separate the historical Jesus from the theological Jesus in this way was philosopher, writer, classicist, Hebraist and Enlightenment free thinker Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694–1768). Copies of Reimarus' writings were discovered by G. E. Lessing (1729–1781) in the library at Wolfenbüttel where Lessing was the librarian. Reimarus had left permission for his work to be published after his death, and Lessing did so between 1774 and 1778, publishing them as Die Fragmente eines unbekannten Autors (The Fragments of an Unknown Author). Over time, they came to be known as the Wolfenbüttel Fragments after the library where Lessing worked. Reimarus distinguished between what Jesus taught and how he is portrayed in the New Testament. According to Reimarus, Jesus was a political messiah who failed at creating political change and was executed. His disciples then stole the body and invented the story of the resurrection for personal gain. Reimarus' controversial work prompted a response from "the father of historical critical research" Johann Semler in 1779, Beantwortung der Fragmente eines Ungenannten (Answering the Fragments of an Unknown). Semler refuted Reimarus' arguments, but it was of little consequence. Reimarus' writings had already made lasting changes by making it clear criticism could exist independently of theology and faith, and by founding historical Jesus studies within that non-sectarian view.

According to Homer W. Smith, the work of Lessing and others culminated in the Protestant theologian David Strauss's Das Leben Jesu ('The Life of Jesus', 1835), in which Strauss expresses his conclusion that Jesus existed, but that his godship is the result of "a historic nucleus [being] worked over and reshaped into an ideal form by the first Christians under the influence of Old Testament models and the idea of the messiah found in Daniel."

Albert Schweitzer, whose book coined the phrase Quest [for] the Historical Jesus

The enthusiasm shown during the first quest diminished after Albert Schweitzer's critique of 1906 in which he pointed out various shortcomings in the approaches used at the time. After Schweitzer's Von Reimarus zu Wrede was translated and published in English as The Quest of the Historical Jesus in 1910, the book's title provided the label for the field of study for eighty years.

Second quest

The second quest began in 1953 and introduced a number of new techniques, but faded away in the 1970s.

Third quest

In the 1980s a number of scholars gradually began to introduce new research ideas, initiating a third quest characterized by the latest research approaches. One of the modern aspects of the third quest has been the role of archaeology; James Charlesworth states that modern scholars now want to use archaeological discoveries that clarify the nature of life in Galilee and Judea during the time of Jesus. A further characteristic of the third quest has been the interdisciplinary and global nature of its scholarship. While the first two quests were mostly carried out by European Protestant theologians, a modern aspect of the third quest is the worldwide influx of scholars from multiple disciplines. More recently, historicists have focused their attention on the historical writings associated with the era in which Jesus lived or on the evidence concerning his family.

By the end of the twentieth century, scholar Tom Holmén writes that Enlightenment skepticism had given way to a more "trustful attitude toward the historical reliability of the sources ... [Currently] the conviction of Sanders, (we know quite a lot about Jesus) characterizes the majority of contemporary studies." Reflecting this shift, the phrase "quest for the historical Jesus" has largely been replaced by life of Jesus research.

Demise of authenticity and the "Next Quest"

Since the late 1900s, concerns have been growing about the usefulness of the criteria of authenticity. According to Le Donne, the usage of such criteria is a form of "positivist historiography." According to Chris Keith, a historical Jesus is "ultimately unattainable, but can be hypothesized on the basis of the interpretations of the early Christians, and as part of a larger process of accounting for how and why early Christians came to view Jesus in the ways that they did." According to Keith, "these two models are methodologically and epistemologically incompatible," calling into question the methods and aim of the first model.

In 2021, James Crossley (editor of the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus) announced that historical Jesus scholarship now had moved to the era of the Next Quest. The Next Quest has moved on from the criteria, obsessions with the uniqueness of Jesus, and the supersessionism still implicit in scholarly questions of the Jewishness of Jesus. Instead, sober scholarship now focuses on treating the subject matter as part of the wider human phenomenon of religion, cultural comparison, class relations, slave culture and economy, and the social history of historical Jesus scholarship and wider reception histories of the historical Jesus. The book by Crossley and Robert J. Myles, Jesus: A Life in Class Conflict, is indicative of this new tendency.

Methods

Main articles: Criterion of multiple attestation, Criterion of embarrassment, Criterion of dissimilarity, and Koine Greek

Textual, source and form-criticism

The first quest, which started in 1778, was almost entirely based on biblical criticism. This took the form of textual and source criticism originally, which were supplemented with form criticism in 1919, and redaction criticism in 1948. Form criticism began as an attempt to trace the history of the biblical material during the oral period before it was written in its current form, and may be seen as starting where textual criticism ends. Form criticism views Gospel writers as editors, not authors. Redaction criticism may be viewed as the child of source criticism and form criticism. and views the Gospel writers as authors and early theologians and tries to understand how the redactor(s) has (have) molded the narrative to express their own perspectives.

Criteria of authenticity

When form criticism questioned the historical reliability of the Gospels, scholars began looking for other criteria. Taken from other areas of study such as source criticism, the "criteria of authenticity" emerged gradually, becoming a distinct branch of methodology associated with life of Jesus research. The criteria are a variety of rules used to determine if some event or person is more or less likely to be historical. These criteria are primarily, though not exclusively, used to assess the sayings and actions of Jesus.

In view of the skepticism produced in the mid-twentieth century by form criticism concerning the historical reliability of the gospels, the burden shifted in historical Jesus studies from attempting to identify an authentic life of Jesus to attempting to prove authenticity. The criteria developed within this framework, therefore, are tools that provide arguments solely for authenticity, not inauthenticity. In 1901, the application of criteria of authenticity began with dissimilarity. It was often applied unevenly with a preconceived goal. In the early decades of the twentieth century, F. C. Burkitt and B. H. Streeter provided the foundation for multiple attestation. The Second Quest introduced the criterion of embarrassment. By the 1950s, coherence was also included. By 1987, D. Polkow lists 25 separate criteria being used by scholars to test for historical authenticity including the criterion of "historical plausibility".

Criticism

Main articles: Quest for the historical Jesus § Criticism, and Criticism

A number of scholars have criticized the various approaches used in the study of the historical Jesus—on one hand, for the lack of rigor in research methods; on the other, for being driven by "specific agendas" that interpret ancient sources to fit specific goals. By the 21st century, the "maximalist" approaches of the 19th century, which accepted all the gospels, and the "minimalist" trends of the early 20th century, which totally rejected them, were abandoned and scholars began to focus on what is historically probable and plausible about Jesus.

Baptism and crucifixion

The Pilate Stone from Caesarea Maritima, now at the Israel Museum

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. Scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus, but almost all modern scholars consider his baptism and crucifixion to be historical facts.

Baptism

Further information: Baptism of Jesus

The existence of John the Baptist within the same time frame as Jesus, and his eventual execution by Herod Antipas is attested to by 1st-century Roman-Jewish historian Josephus and the overwhelming majority of modern scholars view Josephus' accounts of the activities of John the Baptist as authentic. One of the arguments in favor of the historicity of the Baptism of Jesus by John is the criterion of embarrassment, i.e. that it is a story which the early Christian Church would have never wanted to invent, as it implies that Jesus was subservient to John. Another argument used in favour of the historicity of the baptism is that multiple accounts refer to it, usually called the criterion of multiple attestation. Technically, multiple attestation does not guarantee authenticity, but only determines antiquity. However, for most scholars, together with the criterion of embarrassment it lends credibility to the baptism of Jesus by John being a historical event.

Crucifixion

Further information: Crucifixion of Jesus

John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment, Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader. Meier states that a number of other criteria – the criterion of multiple attestation (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. Eddy and Boyd state that it is now firmly established that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus – referring to the mentions in Josephus and Tacitus.

Most scholars in the third quest for the historical Jesus consider the crucifixion indisputable, as do Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan and James Dunn. Although scholars agree on the historicity of the crucifixion, they differ on the reason and context for it, e.g. both E. P. Sanders and Paula Fredriksen support the historicity of the crucifixion, but contend that Jesus did not foretell his own crucifixion, and that his prediction of the crucifixion is a Christian story. Géza Vermes also views the crucifixion as a historical event but believes this was due to Jesus’ challenging of Roman authority. On the other hand, Maurice Casey and John P. Meier state that Jesus did predict his death, and this actually strengthened his followers' belief in his Resurrection.

Other possibly historical elements

See also: Scholarly interpretation of Gospel elements

In addition to the two historical elements of baptism and crucifixion, scholars attribute varying levels of certainty to various other aspects of the life of Jesus, although there is no universal agreement among scholars on these items:

• Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7 and 2 BC and died 30–36 AD.
• Jesus lived only in Galilee and Judea: Most scholars reject that there is any evidence that an adult Jesus traveled or studied outside Galilee and Judea. Marcus Borg states that the suggestions that an adult Jesus traveled to Egypt or India are "without historical foundation". John Dominic Crossan states that none of the theories presented to fill the 15–18-year gap between the early life of Jesus and the start of his ministry have been supported by modern scholarship. The Talmud refers to "Jesus the Nazarene" several times and scholars such as Andreas Kostenberger and Robert Van Voorst hold that some of these references are to Jesus. Nazareth is not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible and the Christian gospels portray it as an insignificant village, John 1:46 asking "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?" Craig S. Keener states that it is rarely disputed that Jesus was from Nazareth, an obscure small village not worthy of invention. Gerd Theissen concurs with that conclusion.
• Jesus spoke Aramaic and may have also spoken Hebrew and Greek. The languages spoken in Galilee and Judea during the 1st century include the Semitic Aramaic and Hebrew languages as well as Greek, with Aramaic being the predominant language.
• Jesus called disciples: John P. Meier sees the calling of disciples a natural consequence of the information available about Jesus. N. T. Wright accepts that there were twelve disciples, but holds that the list of their names cannot be determined with certainty. John Dominic Crossan disagrees, stating that Jesus did not call disciples and had an "open to all" egalitarian approach, imposed no hierarchy and preached to all in equal terms. However, James Crossley and Robert J. Myles and the emerging consensus disagree with Crossan, arguing that "we should dispel romantic notions that this movement was proudly egalitarian and progressive in the sense of the 'radical liberalism' of today" and instead point out that the core Twelve may have been "a central committee or politburo with membership sometimes changing."
• Jesus caused a controversy at the Temple.
• After his death his disciples continued, and some of his disciples were persecuted.
• Jesus had a Burial.

Some scholars have proposed further additional historical possibilities such as:

• An approximate chronology of Jesus can be estimated from non-Christian sources, and confirmed by correlating them with New Testament accounts.
• Claims about the appearance or ethnicity of Jesus are mostly subjective, based on cultural stereotypes and societal trends rather than on scientific analysis.
• The baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist can be dated approximately from Josephus' references (Antiquities 18.5.2) to a date before AD 28–35.
• The main topic of his teaching was the Kingdom of God, and he presented this teaching in parables that were surprising and sometimes confounding.
• Jesus taught an ethic of forgiveness, as expressed in aphorisms such as "turn the other cheek" or "go the extra mile." Within the traditional ethic of "Christian forgiveness" there are some significantly differing views about exactly what type of forgiveness Jesus taught.
• An emerging scholarly consensus suggests Jesus and his inner-circle claimed "a degree of hardened 'servant' masculinity for themselves as an example to the world."
• The date of the crucifixion of Jesus was earlier than 36 AD, based on the dates of the prefecture of Pontius Pilate who was governor of Roman Judea from 26 AD until 36 AD.

Portraits of the historical Jesus

Scholars involved in the third and next quests for the historical Jesus have constructed a variety of portraits and profiles for Jesus. However, there is little scholarly agreement on the portraits, or the methods used in constructing them. The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in the quest for the historical Jesus have often differed from each other, and from the image portrayed in the gospel accounts. These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish Messiah and prophet of social change, but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, or the methods needed to construct it. There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others. The conception of a "Historical Jesus" is limited to the abductions from modern scholars on the sources and the results can only produce fragments of what the "real Jesus" or "Jesus of history" may have been. Such conceptions are merely a sketch or model which may inform about but never will be the real Jesus of history; similar to how models exist in the natural sciences that inform about phenomena without specifying a particular object. W.R. Herzog has stated that: "What we call the historical Jesus is the composite of the recoverable bits and pieces of historical information and speculation about him that we assemble, construct, and reconstruct. For this reason, the historical Jesus is, in Meier's words, 'a modern abstraction and construct.'"

Contemporary scholarship, representing the "third quest" and the "next quest" places Jesus firmly in the Jewish tradition. Jesus was a Jewish preacher who taught that he was the path to salvation, everlasting life, and the Kingdom of God. A primary criterion used to discern historical details in the "third quest" is that of plausibility, relative to Jesus' Jewish context and to his influence on Christianity. Contemporary scholars of the "third quest" include E. P. Sanders, Géza Vermes, Gerd Theissen, Christoph Burchard, and John Dominic Crossan. In contrast to the Schweitzerian view, certain North American scholars, such as Burton Mack, advocate for a non-eschatological Jesus, one who is more of a Cynic sage than an apocalyptic preacher.

Given that Jesus was poor, long-established historiographical approaches associated with the study of the poor in the past, such as microhistory, are relevant to the study of his life.

Mainstream views

Despite the significant differences among scholars on what constitutes a suitable portrait for Jesus, the mainstream views supported by a number of scholars may be grouped together based on certain distinct, primary themes. These portraits often include overlapping elements, and there are also differences among the followers of each portrait. The subsections below present the main portraits that are supported by multiple mainstream scholars.

Apocalyptic prophet

See also: Apocalypticism and Jewish eschatology

Bart Ehrman

The apocalyptic prophet view primarily emphasizes Jesus preparing his fellow Jews for the End Times. The first proponent of this hypothesis was Albert Schweitzer in his 1906 book The Quest of the Historical Jesus.

The works of E. P. Sanders and Maurice Casey place Jesus within the context of Jewish eschatological tradition. Bart D. Ehrman aligns himself with Schweitzer's view that Jesus expected an apocalypse during his own generation, and he bases some of his views on the argument that the earliest gospel sources (for which he assumes Markan priority) and the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, chapters 4 and 5, probably written by the end of AD 52, present Jesus as far more apocalyptic than other Christian sources produced towards the end of the 1st century, contending that the apocalyptic messages were progressively toned down. Dale C. Allison Jr. does not see Jesus as advocating specific timetables for the End Times, but sees him as preaching his own doctrine of "apocalyptic eschatology" derived from post-exilitic Jewish teachings, and views the apocalyptic teachings of Jesus as a form of asceticism.

Характеристика Иисуса как апокалиптического или милленаристского пророка также может быть объединена с другими категориями, например, в работах Джеймса Кроссли и Роберта Дж. Майлза (см. ниже), которые рассматривают учение Иисуса о последнем времени как культурно заслуживающий доверия способ реагируя на социальные и материальные потрясения в Галилее и Иудее.

Харизматичный целитель

Маркус Борг

Харизматический портрет целителя позиционирует Иисуса как благочестивого и святого человека в глазах Гезы Вермеса, чей профиль основан на талмудических изображениях еврейских деятелей, таких как Ханина бен Доса и Хони Чертящий круг , и представляет Иисуса как хасида. Маркус Борг рассматривает Иисуса как харизматичного «человека духа», мистика или провидца, который действует как проводник «Духа Божьего». Борг видит в этом четко определенный тип религиозной личности, чьи действия часто связаны с исцелением. Борг видит в Иисусе неэсхатологическую фигуру, которая не собиралась основывать новую религию, но его послание поставило его в противоречие с еврейскими властями его времени, основанными на «политике святости». И Сандерс, и Кейси согласны с тем, что Иисус был не только апокалиптическим пророком, но и харизматичным целителем.

Циник-философ

Смотрите также: Цинизм (философия)

Джон Доминик Кроссан

В профиле философа-циника Иисус представлен как циник, странствующий мудрец и философ, проповедующий циничное и радикальное послание о переменах, направленных на отмену существующей иерархической структуры общества его времени. По мнению Джона Доминика Кроссана , Иисус был распят не по религиозным причинам, а потому, что его социальные учения бросили вызов центру власти, принадлежавшему еврейским властям. Кроссан считает, что Галилея была местом тесного взаимодействия греческой и еврейской культур. Гадара , расположенная в дне ходьбы от Назарета , была центром киникической философии. Бертон Мак также считает, что Иисус был циником, чьи учения настолько отличались от учений его времени, что шокировали аудиторию и заставляли их думать, но Мак считает его смерть случайной, а не вызванной им вызовом еврейскому авторитету.

Еврейский Мессия

Смотрите также: Мессия в иудаизме

Портрет еврейского Мессии Н.Т. Райта помещает Иисуса в еврейский контекст «изгнания и возвращения» - понятия, которое он использует, чтобы построить свой взгляд на концепцию надежды I века. Райт считает, что Иисус был Мессией, и утверждает, что Воскресение Иисуса было физическим и историческим событием. Портрет Иисуса Райта ближе к традиционным христианским взглядам, чем у многих других ученых, и даже когда он отходит от христианской традиции, его взгляды все равно близки к ним. Как и Райт, Маркус Бокмюль , Питер Штулмахер и Брант Дж. Питре поддерживают точку зрения, что Иисус пришел объявить об окончании еврейского духовного изгнания и возвестить о новой мессианской эпохе, в которой Бог улучшит этот мир через веру Своего народа.

Пророк социальных перемен

Портрет пророка социальных перемен позиционирует Иисуса прежде всего как человека, бросившего вызов традиционным социальным структурам своего времени. Герд Тайссен видит три основных элемента в деятельности Иисуса, когда он осуществлял социальные изменения: его позиционирование как Сына Человеческого , основную группу учеников, которые следовали за ним, и его местных сторонников во время его путешествия по Галилее и Иудее. Ричард А. Хорсли идет дальше и представляет Иисуса как более радикального реформатора, инициировавшего массовое движение. Идеи Дэвида Кейлора близки к идеям Хорсли, но имеют более религиозную направленность и основывают действия Иисуса на теологии завета и его стремлении к справедливости. Элизабет Фиоренца представила феминистскую точку зрения, которая рассматривает Иисуса как социального реформатора, чьи действия, такие как принятие женщин-последователей, привели к освобождению некоторых женщин его времени. Джеймс Кроссли и Роберт Дж. Майлз отстаивают тонкий исторический материалистический взгляд на Иисуса как на религиозного организатора, который отреагировал на пересекающиеся материальные условия Галилеи и Иудеи культурно заслуживающими доверия способами, например, посредством внутриеврейских юридических дебатов и революционных милленаристских провозглашений.

SGF Брэндон , Фернандо Бермехо Рубио и Реза Аслан утверждают, что Иисус был антиримским революционером, который пытался свергнуть римское правление в Палестине и восстановить Израильское царство .

Раввин

Портрет раввина выдвигает идею о том, что Иисус был просто раввином, который стремился реформировать определенные идеи в иудаизме. Эту идею можно проследить до конца девятнадцатого века, когда различные либеральные евреи стремились подчеркнуть еврейскую природу Иисуса и видели в нем нечто вроде протореформистского еврея . Возможно, самым выдающимся из них был раввин Эмиль Г. Хирш , который в «Учении Иисуса» писал:

Мы цитируем раввинов Талмуда; не должны ли мы тогда также процитировать раввина Вифлеема? Разве не должен ли синагога вернуть себе того, в ком горел, если он горел в ком-либо, дух и свет иудаизма?

Брюс Чилтон в своей книге « Раввин Иисус: интимная биография » изобразил Иисуса как набожного ученика Иоанна Крестителя, который увидел своей миссией восстановление чистоты Храма и очищение его среды от римлян и коррумпированных священников. Ярослав Пеликан в книге «Иллюстрированный Иисус на протяжении веков» заявил:

Наряду с Иммануилом , «Бог с нами» — еврейский титул, данный ребенку в пророчестве Исайи (7:14) и примененный Матфеем (1:23) к Иисусу, но не используемый для обращения к нему, за исключением таких апострофов, как средневековый антифон Вени, Вени, Иммануил, составляющий эпиграф к этой главе – четыре арамейских слова используются в качестве титулов Иисуса: Раввин, или учитель; Аминь, или пророк; Мессия, или Христос; и Мар , или Господь.

Самым нейтральным и наименее спорным из этих слов, вероятно, является «Рабби» вместе с родственным ему «Раббуни». За исключением двух отрывков, в Евангелиях арамейское слово применяется только к Иисусу; и если мы придем к выводу, что титул «учитель» или «учитель» (дидаскалос по-гречески) был задуман как перевод этого арамейского имени, то можно с уверенностью сказать, что Иисуса знали и обращались к нему как к раввину.

Консервативный ученый-евангелист Андреас Дж. Кестенбергер в книге «Иисус как раввин в Четвертом Евангелии» также пришел к выводу, что его современники считали Иисуса раввином.

В 2012 году была опубликована книга Кошерный Иисус» раввина ортодоксального « Шмули Ботича , в которой Ботич придерживается позиции, что Иисус был мудрым и образованным еврейским раввином, соблюдающим Тору . Ботич говорит, что он был любимым членом еврейской общины. В то же время говорят, что Иисус презирал римлян за их жестокость и мужественно сражался с ними. В книге утверждается, что евреи не имели никакого отношения к убийству Иисуса, а, скорее, вина за суд над ним и убийство лежит на римлянах и Понтии Пилате . Ботич ясно заявляет, что он не верит в Иисуса как еврейского Мессию. В то же время Ботич утверждает, что «евреям есть чему поучиться у Иисуса – и у христианства в целом – без признания божественности Иисуса. Есть много причин принять Иисуса как человека великой мудрости, прекрасных этических учений и глубоких знаний». Еврейский патриотизм». В заключение он пишет, что касается иудео-христианских ценностей , что «дефисом между еврейскими и христианскими ценностями является сам Иисус».

Неосновные взгляды

Другие портреты были представлены отдельными учеными:

• Бен Уизерингтон поддерживает точку зрения «Мудрости» и утверждает, что Иисуса лучше всего понимать как учителя мудрости, который видел себя воплощением или воплощением Божьей Мудрости.
• Джона П. Мейера Портрет об Иисусе как маргинальном еврее построен на представлении о том, что Иисус сознательно маргинализировал себя разными способами, сначала оставив свою профессию плотника и став проповедником без средств к существованию, а затем выступив против учения и традиции того времени, хотя у него не было формального раввинского образования.

Два свитка Мертвого моря в пещере были найдены перед тем, как их извлекли археологи.

• Роберт Эйзенман предположил, что Иаков Справедливый был Учителем праведности, упомянутым в свитках Мертвого моря , и что образ евангельского Иисуса был создан апостолом Павлом как проримская пропаганда.
• Хайам Маккоби предположил, что Иисус был фарисеем , что положения, приписываемые фарисеям в Евангелиях, сильно отличаются от того, что мы о них знаем, и на самом деле их мнения были очень похожи на те, которые приписывались Иисусу. Харви Фальк также считает Иисуса протофарисеем или ессеем .
• Мортон Смит рассматривает Иисуса как волшебника , и эта точка зрения основана на представлении Иисуса в более поздних еврейских источниках и на (сомнительных) апокрифических писаниях, таких как Тайное Евангелие от Марка .
• Лев Толстой видел в Иисусе защитника христианского анархизма (хотя Толстой никогда на самом деле не использовал термин «христианский анархизм»; этот термин был придуман в обзорах его книги после ее публикации в 1894 году).
• Это предположили психиатры Оскар Паницца . Джордж де Лоостен, Уильям Хирш, Уильям Саргант , Энтони Сторр , Радж Персо , психолог Шарль Бине-Сангле и другие, что у Иисуса было психическое расстройство или психиатрическое заболевание . Эта теория основана на том факте, что в Евангелии от Марка (Марка 3:21) сообщается: « Когда его семья услышала это, они вышли, чтобы удержать его, ибо сказали: «Он сошел с ума». Психолог Владислав Витвицкий утверждает, что Иисус имел трудности в общении с внешним миром и страдал диссоциативным расстройством личности (ранее известным как расстройство множественной личности), что делало его шизотимическим или даже шизофреническим типом. В 1998–2000 годах польский писатель Лешек Новак (род. 1962) из ​​Познани написал исследование, в котором, основываясь на своей собственной истории заблуждений о миссии и сверхценных идеях, а также информации, изложенной в Евангелиях, предпринял попытку реконструировать психику Иисуса. с точки зрения апокалиптического пророка.

См. также

• Библейская археология
• Библейская рукопись
• Перепись Квириния — перепись населения Иудеи, проведенная Публием Сульпицием Квиринием, римским губернатором Сирии, после установления прямого римского правления в 6 году нашей эры.
• Теория мифа о Христе
• Критерий несходства
• Критика Библии
• Хронология Иисуса
• Евангельская гармония
• Историческая справка Нового Завета
• Историчность Библии
• Иисус в сравнительной мифологии
• Семинар Иисуса
• Жизнь Иисуса в Новом Завете
• Психическое здоровье Иисуса
• Места Нового Завета, связанные с Иисусом
• Раса и внешний вид Иисуса
• Сексуальность Иисуса
• Научная интерпретация элементов Евангелия
• Сын Божий
• Хронология христианства
• Шестнадцать распятых спасителей мира

Ссылки

Источники

• Барнетт, Пол В. (1997). Иисус и логика истории (Новые исследования библейского богословия 3) . Даунерс-Гроув, Иллинойс: InterVarsity Press. ISBN  978-0-85111-512-2 .
• Бокэм, Ричард (2011). Иисус: очень краткое введение . Оксфорд, Великобритания: Издательство Оксфордского университета. ISBN  978-0-19-957527-5 .
• Бейлби, Джеймс К.; Эдди, Пол Роудс (2009), «В поисках исторического Иисуса: Введение», в Бейлби, Джеймс К.; Эдди, Пол Роудс (ред.), Исторический Иисус: пять взглядов , Даунерс-Гроув, Иллинойс: InterVarsity Press, ISBN  978-0-83083-868-4
• Боярин, Даниил (2012). Еврейские Евангелия: история еврейского Христа . Новая Пресса. ISBN  978-1-59558-878-4 .
• Браун, Раймонд Э. (1993). Смерть Мессии: от Гефсимании до могилы . Нью-Йорк: Якорная Библия. ISBN  978-0-385-49449-6 .
• Браун, Раймонд Э. и др. Библейский комментарий Нового Джерома, Прентис Холл, 1990 г. ISBN   0-13-614934-0
• Берридж, Ричард А.; Гулд, Грэм (2004), Иисус сейчас и тогда , Wm. Б. Эрдманс, ISBN  978-0802809773
• Крафферт, Питер Ф. и Бота, Питер Дж. Дж. «Почему Иисус мог ходить по морю, но не умел читать и писать». Неотестаменика . 39.1, 2005.
• Бок, Даррел Л. , Изучение исторического Иисуса: Путеводитель по источникам и методам. . Бейкер Академик: 2002. ISBN   978-0-8010-2451-1 .
• Кроссан, Джон Доминик . Иисус: революционная биография . Харперколлинз: 1994. ISBN   0-06-061661-X .
• Кроссли, Джеймс; Майлз, Роберт Дж. (2023). Иисус: Жизнь в классовом конфликте . Вашингтон (США) и Винчестер (Великобритания): Zer0. ISBN  978-1-80341-082-1 .
• Данн, Джеймс Д.Г. (2005), «Традиция», Данн, Джеймс Д.Г.; Макнайт, Скот (ред.), «Исторический Иисус в недавних исследованиях» , Айзенбраунс
• Эрман, Барт Д. (1999). Иисус: апокалиптический пророк нового тысячелетия . Нью-Йорк: Оксфорд. ISBN  978-0-19-512473-6 .
• Фиенси, Дэвид А.; Иисус Галилеянин: ощущения в жизни первого века , ООО «Горгиас Пресс», 2007 г., ISBN   1-59333-313-7 , ISBN   978-1-59333-313-3 , книги Google
• Фредриксен, Паула (2000). Иисус из Назарета, царь иудейский: еврейская жизнь и возникновение христианства . Нью-Йорк: Винтажные книги. ISBN  978-0-679-76746-6 .
• Гнилка, Иоахим.; Иисус из Назарета: послание и история , Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.
• Гаулер, Дэвид Б.; Что они говорят об историческом Иисусе? , Паулист Пресс, 2007,
• Локи, Эндрю Тер Эрн. Происхождение божественной христологии. Издательство Кембриджского университета. 2017.
• Грант, Майкл . Иисус: обзор Евангелий историком. Скрибнер, 1977. ISBN   0-684-14889-7 .
• Фанк, Роберт В. (1998). Деяния Иисуса: В поисках подлинных деяний Иисуса . ХарперСанФранциско. ISBN  978-0-06-062978-6 .
• Харрис, Уильям В. Древняя грамотность . Издательство Гарвардского университета: 1989. ISBN   0-674-03380-9 .
• Эрнандес Валенсия, Хуан С. и Гомес Эрасо, Мануэль Д. Третье историческое исследование Иисуса и его программы: метакритическая фаза исследования . Теологические вопросы, 51(116) (2024), стр. 1–23. {{doi: 10.18566/cueteo.v51n116.a01.| url = https://revistas.upb.edu.co/index.php/questions/article/view/8185}} .
• Исаак, Бенджамин (2017). Империя и идеология в греко-римском мире . Кембридж : Издательство Кембриджского университета . ISBN  978-1-107-13589-5 . Проверено 3 июня 2020 г.
• Мейер, Джон П. Маргинальный еврей: переосмысление исторического Иисуса , Doubleday,
  • т. 1, Корни проблемы и человек , 1991, ISBN   0-385-26425-9
  • т. 2, Наставник, Послание и Чудеса , 1994, ISBN   0-385-46992-6
  • т. 3, Товарищи и конкуренты , 2001, ISBN   0-385-46993-4
  • т. 4, Закон и любовь , 2009, ISBN   978-0-300-14096-5
  • т. 5, Проверка подлинности притч , 2016, ISBN   978-0-300-21190-0
• О'Коллинз, Дж. Хесус: Портрет . Дартон, Лонгман и Тодд: 2008. ISBN   978-0232527193
• О'Коллинз, Дж. Христология: библейское, историческое и систематическое исследование Иисуса . ОУП: 2009. ISBN   978-0199557875
• Сандерс, Е.П. Иисус и иудаизм . Издательство Аугсбургской крепости: 1987.
• Сандерс, Е.П. Историческая личность Иисуса . Лейн Пингвин Пресс: 1993.
• Швейцер, Альберт (1910). Поиски исторического Иисуса . Лондон: Адам и Чарльз Блэк.
• Тайссен, Герд ; Зима, Дагмар (2002). В поисках правдоподобного Иисуса: вопрос критериев (1-е американское изд.). Луисвилл, Кентукки: Вестминстер Джон Нокс Пресс. ISBN  0-664-22537-3 . OCLC   49805829 .
• Тайссен, Герд; Мерц, Аннет (1998). Исторический Иисус: всеобъемлющее руководство . СКМ Пресс. ISBN  9780334026969 . ОСЛК   38590348 .
• Ван Вурст, Роберт Э. , Иисус вне Нового Завета , 2000, Эрдманс, книги Google. Архивировано 25 декабря 2022 г. в Wayback Machine.
• Вермес, Геза Иисус-еврей : чтение Евангелия историком. Классика СКМ: 2001, ISBN   0-334-02839-6
• Уизерингтон III, Бен (1997) [1995]. Поиски Иисуса: третий поиск еврея из Назарета (2-е изд.). Межвузовская пресса. ISBN  0830815449 . OCLC   33244038 .
• Райт, NT Christian Origins and the Вопрос о Боге, планируемая серия из шести томов, три из которых были опубликованы под подписями:
  • т. 1, Новый Завет и народ Божий. Издательство Аугсбургской крепости: 1992 г.;
  • ст. 2, Иисус и победа Божья. Издательство Аугсбургской крепости: 1997 г.;
  • ст. 3, Воскресение Сына Божия. Издательство Аугсбургской крепости: 2003.
• Райт, Н.Т. Вызов Иисуса: заново открыть, кем был и есть Иисус . ИВП 1996 г.
• Ягджян, Лукреция. «Древнее чтение» в издании Ричарда Рорбо « Социальные науки в интерпретации Нового Завета» . Издательство Хендриксон: 2004. ISBN   1-56563-410-1 .

Внешние ссылки

• «Иисус Христос» . Британская энциклопедия Интернет. 2009. Первый раздел о жизни и служении Иисуса.
• Журнал изучения исторического Иисуса