
Archaelogy and the Bible: Karin Sowada
Review: Roy Williams' book God Actually
Justine Toh on the U.S. Elections
CPX Podcast - iTunes - Non iTunes
The ‘Jesus Seminar’ and the Second Quest
| There are still scholars operating today in the mode of the Second
Quest. The so called Jesus Seminar is a group of American scholars led
by Robert Funk. Members of the Seminar continue to apply the criterion
of dissimilarity and other tests, and then vote on whether a certain
saying or deed of Jesus is authentic (they literally get together and
take votes). The result is a conglomerate of the Gospels published for
the popular market in 1993, complete with colour-coding: black text for
the parts that definitely did not come from Jesus, grey for those that
probably did not, pink for the things that may well correspond to
something he said and red lettering for ‘the authentic words of Jesus.’
Needless to say, very little red ink was required in the printing. In a manner that few mainstream scholars would accept, the Seminar also emphasizes alternative Gospels, particularly the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas. In these Gnostic Gospels, which we will explore later, Jesus is stripped of his Jewish identity and his preaching of a future kingdom and appears instead as a simple teacher of universal wisdom. Unsurprisingly, the Jesus that emerges from the Jesus Seminar is un-Jewish, uninterested in a future kingdom and a perfect model of democracy, equality and freedom. He very much resembles the neo-liberal Christian academics who have devised him. The Jesus Seminar should be haunted by Albert Schweitzer’s critique of 19th-century versions of Jesus—‘a figure designed by rationalism, endowed with life by liberalism, and clothed by modern theology in an historical gab’—but it isn’t. ‘Jesus has once again been modernized,’ writes Professor James Dunn of Durham University reflecting on the efforts of the Jesus Seminar, ‘or should we rather say, post-modernized!’ |
|
|
Over the last 30 years a massive industry of academic literature has
sprung up around the figure of Jesus. It does not all speak with one
voice but there is a wide consensus on at least one significant thing.
The surest first-step toward discovering the historical reality about
the man from Nazareth is to locate him firmly in his first century
Palestinian environment. The publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls—first found in 1947 but becoming widely available during the 1980s and 90s—has aided this effort to see Jesus in his Jewish context. The Scrolls have deepened and widened our picture of Judaism in a way that was impossible before. Two scholars deserve special mention, and many others stand in their wake: Martin Hengel (born 1926) Martin Hengel has been Professor of New Testament and Ancient Judaism at Germany’s prestigious University of Tübingen since 1972 (he is still there as Professor Emeritus). |
|
| In some ways Hengel was part of the mid-20th century quest launched by
Ernst Käsemann. In writing after writing he has applied a rigorous
historical method to uncovering the connections between the Jesus of
history and the Christ of faith. But there is one major difference.
Whereas others in the 20th Century Quest downplayed the connections
between Jesus and Judaism, and still others sought to play up the
connections between Jesus and pagan religion, Hengel resolutely set out
to clarify our picture of first century Palestine, and then to set
Jesus and the Gospels within that assured context. It was Hengel who
wrote the definitive account of the rise of Jewish revolutionaries in
the first century (known as the Zealots). It was Hengel who wrote the
brief but unsurpassed history of crucifixion in the New Testament
period. And it was Hengel who clarified for scholars the relationship
between first century Judaism and the surrounding Greco-Roman
environment. Because of his peerless knowledge of the Jewish (and Greco-Roman) context Hengel has also been able to write books of lasting significance directly on the topic of Jesus. In The Charismatic Leader and his Followers he refuted the suggestion of theologians like Rudolf Bultmann that the early church proclamation of Christ had little to do with the historical ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. In The Son of God he overturned the notion, popular at the time, that Christian beliefs about a ‘divine son’ derived from pagan myths. He demonstrated that all of the New Testament descriptions of Jesus come from Jewish traditions (not pagan ones) current in Jerusalem in the period of Jesus himself. |
|