DOCSLIB.ORG

CONTEXT and TEXT in HISTORICAL JESUS METHODOLOGY John

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CONTEXT and TEXT in HISTORICAL JESUS METHODOLOGY John CONTEXT AND TEXT IN HISTORICAL JESUS METHODOLOGY John Dominic Crossan Th e classic distinction between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith has never been for me either informative or normative. Th at distinc- tion, separation, or even opposition may be the conclusion of historical research but how can it be the presumption with which it begins? Short of a priori prejudice, how do I know before I begin that the Christ of faith is not exactly the same as the Jesus of history? Short of a priori bias, how do I know that there was not historically a Jesus of faith, that is, an individual who made fundamental claims about the meaning of his life and the destiny of his people?1 Th at classic distinction may once have been necessary to release historical research from dogmatic constraint but, having served that inaugural purpose, it should now be honorably buried. By the historical Jesus, therefore, I mean our best present reconstruc- tion of that individual’s life within the accepted procedures of historical study. No more and no less. History is the past reconstructed interactively by the present through argued evidence in public discourse. Th at is still my defi nition.2 Interactive research is distinct from, on the one hand, narcissistic research and, on the other, positivistic research. Narcissism is an illusion claiming to see the past while only seeing the refl ected present. Positivism is a delusion claiming to see the past without any interference from its own viewing eyes. Interactivism is our destiny. It is a conversation between past and present in which neither should ever be monologue but both form a constant dialogue. 1 For example, how can John P. Meier take as his fi ft h criterion for deciding historic- ity that “of Rejection and Execution”—how does one know that Jesus was rejected and executed before one begins research? Th at can be, at best, a retrojective confi rmation showing that reconstructed life and reconstructed death are coherent and even unifi ed (that is, if they are). See vol. 1, Th e Roots of the Problem and the Person (1991), 177, and vol. 2, Mentor, Message, and Miracles (1994), 6, in A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, 3 vols., ABRL (New York: Doubleday). Furthermore, criteria, no matter how many or how correct, are ambiguous unless organized into a method based on a methodology. 2 Th e Birth of Christianity (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998), 20. 160 john dominic crossan Th at is why methodology is so important. Unlike an ordinary conversa- tion in which the dominant partner may at least be interrupted by the other one, the past can only be as interactive as our historical conscience will allow. Method is how you do something and methodology is why you do it that way and not some other way. Th e function of methodol- ogy is at least to give interactivity an honest chance, at least to let the past challenge the present from the silence of its grave. Th ere are times we can only get alternative perspectives on the same event. And there are always alternative perspectives even when we do not hear them. But history as argued public reconstruction is possible because it is necessary. We reconstruct our past to project our future. And it is, unfortunately, not possible not to do it. In historical study or on jury duty. Finally, I presume that every scholar must have a position on all those questions of dependence and independence among intra-canonical and extra-canonical gospel texts raised within the last two hundred years. For example, I agree that Mark and Q are the basic sources for Matthew and Luke. On still disputed matters, I consider that John has its own independent saying and miracle tradition but that the Gospel’s start with John the Baptist and end with Death-Resurrection are under syn- optic infl uence; and that the Gospel of Th omas is basically independent from the canonical gospels.3 If two hundred years of scholarship had concluded that the four canonical gospels were completely independent versions, my methodology would be completely diff erent. Th at would probably demand a presumption, for example, that the best data was to be found where all four agreed. But, to the contrary, my methodology presumes texts that are especially characterized not by independent trajectories but by a dependent stream of tradition. 1. Formal Procedures and Material Investments My methodological basis is to separate formal procedures from material investments so that they can be debated separately. It is possible for others to agree on the former, on the latter, on both, or on neither. By formal procedures I mean something like due processes in legal proceedings. 3 I disagree with any attempt to ignore all those preliminary decisions. N. T. Wright has claimed that one can and should “bypass” all those problems and simply work with the four canonical gospels as independent sources. For our debate about methodology, see J. D. Crossan, “What Victory? What God? A Review Debate with N. T. Wright on Jesus and the Victory of God,” SJT 50 (1997): 345–358; N. T. Wright, “Doing Justice to Jesus: A Response to J. D. Crossan: ‘What Victory? What God’,” SJT 50 (1997): 359–379..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Who Holds the Power?
    WHO HOLDS THE POWER? A Reflection for the Fourth Sunday of Our National Emergency Palm Sunday, April 5, 2020 Bethany Congregational Church, United Church of Christ Foxborough, Massachusetts Rev. Bruce A. Greer, Interim Pastor Scripture Readings: Psalm 118:1-2, 19-29; Isaiah 50:4-9a; Philippians 2:5-11; Matthew 21:1-11. Text: Philippians 2:8 “…he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death —even death on a cross.” I. Almost three weeks ago, as we entered this long, open-ended season called COVID-19, I found myself asking the question: “Who holds the power?” It reminds me of those times when we are participating in a group exercise or game at a retreat or party; when the leader shows us a picture and asks: “What’s the first thing that comes to mind when you look at this picture?” That’s literally what happened to me when we announced the shut-down of our church on March 12th and as I watched the proverbial cascade of COVID-19-related events come at me, like in an incoming tsunami. As Tom Hanks and his wife, Rita Wilson, tested positive for the virus in Australia, and then, as sports leagues at every level – high school to college to professional – cancelled games, tournaments and seasons, I found myself asking: “Who holds the power?” Do the nations of the world, the United Nations, and World Health Organization alone hold the power? Does President of the United States and the Executive Branch alone hold the power? Do Congress and the Courts hold the power? Do the many departments and agencies of our government, including the military, hold the power? No! None of them do…on their own.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jesus Seminar Revealed 1 of 32
    The Jesus Seminar Revealed !1 of !32 By Mark McGee The Jesus Seminar Revealed !2 of !32 The Jesus Seminar Revealed !3 of !32 Part One The Jesus Seminar was a group of “scholars and specialists” interested in renewing “the quest of the historical Jesus.” The name Jesus Seminar would imply that this group had good credentials and would reveal something important about the real life and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. That didn’t happen. According to The Jesus Seminar – “Among the findings is that, in the judgment of the Jesus Seminar Fellows, about 18 percent of the sayings and 16 percent of the deeds attributed to Jesus in the gospels are authentic.” Another way of understanding that statement is that 82 percent of the sayings and 84 percent of the deeds attributed to Jesus in the Gospels are NOT authentic. Let that sink in for a minute …. The Jesus Seminar Revealed !4 of !32 The Jesus Seminar would have us believe that the vast majority of what’s written about the sayings and deeds of Jesus Christ in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) are NOT authentic – not true – never said – never done. Was The Jesus Seminar right? If you’ve read other articles on the FaithandSelfDefense and GraceLife blogs, you know I think The Jesus Seminar was wrong – very wrong. To understand how so-called scholars and specialists reached their conclusions about Jesus and the four Gospels, we need to know a little about how The Jesus Seminar started. It began in Berkeley, California in 1985 as the brain child of Robert W.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Perspective on John the Baptist's Failure to Support Jesus
    A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON JOHN THE BAPTIST'S FAILURE TO SUPPORT JESUS Laurent Guymot At the heart of all dialogues between Christians and Jews there is, inevitably, the question of the Messiah: "Are you he who is to come, or shall we wait for another?" —Jürgen Moltmann pplied to the New Testament, some of the tasks of the historical- critical method are to separate layers of redaction work in the Gospels, to Adetermine the oldest strata of tradition, and to present the most probably authentic words of Jesus and the events of his life. Conservative evangelical Christians are generally hostile to such an approach and insist that the complete New Testament is inspired and historically true. One possible meeting point between conservatives and historically-minded liberals which has gained some recent support is, to assert that since Christianity is founded on the resurrected Jesus, it need not be threatened by historical inquiry into Jesus' earthly ministry. One reason is sufficient, in my eyes, to justify the historical-critical method as part of Unificationist studies. Unificationism claims to rely not only on revelation but also on science, and it cannot be denied that archeology and critical exegesis, the basic tools of historical research, are scientific in nature. Beyond the polemic that they generate, most scholars involved in the "quest Laurent Guyénot graduated from the Unification Theological Seminary in 1990. He is presently director of Editions Exergue, a French publishing company. He is the author of three books, one of which, Le roi sans prophète (The King without Prophet) is about the relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist.
    [Show full text]
  • John Dominic Crossan's Responses to Questions 15 & 17–36
    John Dominic Crossan’s Responses to Questions 15 & 17–36 Not Answered during the Westar Webinar, “Jesus: Ascension or Resurrection,” September 30, 2020 Question 15 Mathew says: ἠγέρθη γὰρ, καθὼς εἶπεν (“He is not here for he has risen,” RSV), but you don't address the Gospel use of the word resurrection. Could you? Answer: Your quote from Matthew 28:6 and its use of the verb egeirō in the passive is not in question and neither, as we saw, is the use of that same verb in Paul’s 1 Cor 15:12–15, with its reciprocity between Jesus’ resurrection and the universal resurrection of the dead (anastasis nekrōn). The point is whether those first Messianic/Christic-Jewish companions of Jesus could have ever imagined resurrection as an individual resurrection for Jesus alone rather than as the start of the universal resurrection now, as an ongoing and developing through-time process rather than as a single end-time product. My argument is that they could not do so, did not do so, and would have found the consequent Western iconographic tradition (were they to have seen it!) to be individual Ascension not Universal Resurrection. Question 17 I had associated the word Ascension with Acts 1:10 (“And while they were gazing into heaven as he went…”, RSV). Answer: You are correct that we have a standard first-century Ascension described both in Luke 24:51 (“was carried up”) and Acts 1:9 (“he was lifted up”) so that Luke-Acts, and Luke-Acts alone, makes a clear and chronological distinction between Resurrection (“was raised up”) and Ascension.
    [Show full text]
  • An Unanswered Question: Apocalyptic Expectation and Jesus' Basileia Proclamation
    Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 8 (2010) 67–79 brill.nl/jshj An Unanswered Question: Apocalyptic Expectation and Jesus’ Basileia Proclamation Stephen J. Patterson Eden Theological Seminary St. Louis, MI, USA [email protected] Abstract Th e several sayings from the Jesus tradition which explicitly deny an apoca- lyptic interpretation of the message of Jesus are surveyed, with the conclusion that this sentiment is to be found at every layer of the tradition, including its earliest. At the same time, it is acknowledged that apocalyptic materials are also to be found throughout the tradition. Th is conclusion is ventured: perhaps the tradition is authentically ambiguous about this issue because Jesus himself was undecided about this notion, which he inherited from John the Baptist. Keywords apocalyptic , apocalypticism , Gospel of Th omas , historical Jesus , John , John the Baptist , Luke , Mark , Paul , Q , Sayings Gospel Th e Question of Apocalyptic<Th e Apocalyptic Question?> Th ough the Jesus debate seems fi nally to have abated a little, there is still one question about which scholars remain quite divided: when Jesus spoke of a new reign of God, was he speaking apocalyptically or did he have something else in mind, say, God ruling here and now, ‘in your midst’ (Lk. 17.21)? Was Jesus’ reign of God a thing that God would initiate as a kind of cosmic battle between the forces of good and evil, that would remake the world and return it to its divinely ordained perfection, or was it a way of acting in accord with God’s will on the © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI 10.1163/174551909X12607965419630 68 S.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Approaching Jerusalem Preacher: Rev
    Approaching Jerusalem Preacher: Rev. Lauren Lorincz Date: March 29, 2015 00:00 "Approaching Jerusalem” Pilgrim Church UCC, March 29, 2015—Palm Sunday (Mark 11:1-11) Holy Week always begins on a high note—Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In some ways, we act it out every year. We begin outside waving our palm branches and process inside the sanctuary to contemplate the events of Jesus' final days. The trick of Holy Week is to be present in this moment while allowing yourself to be immersed in this story that happened 2,000 years ago. Time can stand still in these days as we stand in the places of our story's characters. I need your help to tell the story, and need to leave the pulpit for a little while to do it. No, I’m not feeling sick or out of sorts or anything like that. Now in order for us to be immersed in the story, I’m going to need your wholehearted participation. Let’s prove the stereotype that New England Congregationalists are “the frozen chosen” wrong. Please close your eyes to begin our story. Imagine that you are in the crowd in Jerusalem the day that Jesus enters the city in triumph. You are poor. You struggle to feed yourself and your family. You are Jewish. You live in a land that your ancestors fought for that is no longer your own. Your home is occupied by Rome, and they are always watching for any sign of rebellion. You need a Savior. Please open your eyes.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus: History, Theology, and Evolution an Online Program with John Dominic Crossan
    Jesus: History, Theology, and Evolution An online program with John Dominic Crossan Registration Theology is the transcendental interpretation of history but how does Visit www.pendlehill.org any such reading intersect with human evolution? We will address to register. For questions, contact this question by focusing on Jesus’ life, his message then and now as [email protected] we explore the following topics: Basic Fee $ 125 Fee Plus $150 Lectures will occur on Thursdays from 7:30—9:00 p.m. via Zoom Subsided Fee $ 100 Individual Lectures* $ 35 Lecture 1: The World of Jesus - April 22, 2021 *Individual Lecture registrations Lecture 2: The Vision of Jesus - April 29, 2021 will be available after April 5th, Lecture 3: The Execution of Jesus - May 6, 2021 based on capacity limitations. Lecture 4: The Resurrection of Jesus - May 13, 2021 If you need financial assistance, please complete our online Financial Assistance Application. Join us in a probing exploration of the meaning of Jesus’ life as interpreted over the centuries in both Eastern and Western traditions, This program will be online and as we re-discover Jesus’ teaching in today’s world. via Zoom John Dominic Crossan is an Irish-American biblical scholar. He has been a mendicant friar and a catholic priest, a co-chair of the Jesus Seminar, and a president of the Society of Biblical Literature. In all his work Crossan focuses on the historical Jesus as the norm and criterion for the entire Christian Bible. His reconstructed Jesus incarnates nonviolent resistance to the Romanization of his Jewish homeland and the Herodian commercialization of his Galilean lake as present program and future hope of a transformed world and This program is made possible transfigured earth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Two Parades Palm Sunday, 2009 Caldwell Memorial Presbyterian Church Rev
    The Two Parades Palm Sunday, 2009 Caldwell Memorial Presbyterian Church Rev. John M. Cleghorn Scripture: Micah 3:1-2, 9-10 Mark 11:1-10 Don’t you just love the pageantry and tradition of Palm Sunday? It’s impossible not to be uplifted by the sight of the palm fronds waving and the spectacle of the parade. Perhaps some of us have participated as children – or even adults – in a reenactment of what scripture calls “the triumphal entry” in the Holy City of Jerusalem, In Mark’s version, as we read a moment ago: “Many people spread their cloaks on the road and others spread leafy branches that they had cut in the fields” as Christ made his entry on a donkey that had never been ridden. The scene appears in all four gospel accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry. It makes for a great vision, a memorable image. But there is a lot more than meets the eye. Biblical scholars Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan explain that Jesus’ triumphal entry may not have been the only parade that day.1 Jesus and the disciples were coming to Jerusalem, after all, for Passover, the most sacred week of the Jewish year. The population of the City of David multiplied two-to three-fold each year for this high festival as believers from across the region came to worship. So, the Romans knew that a show of force was needed – not only to protect Pontius Pilate as he made his own entry to reinforce his secular power, but to show the Jews that any protest or demonstration would be met with overwhelming military force.
    [Show full text]
  • Representations of Jesus As Laborer in the Masses (1911-1917), the Politics of Jesus’ Profession, and Historical Jesus Debates
    Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies Volume 5 Number 1 Spring 2014 Article 2 2014 “The Workingman of Nazareth”: Representations of Jesus as Laborer in The Masses (1911-1917), the Politics of Jesus’ Profession, and Historical Jesus Debates Michael Casey W. Woolf Harvard Divinity School Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/imwjournal Recommended Citation Woolf, Michael Casey W. "“The Workingman of Nazareth”: Representations of Jesus as Laborer in The Masses (1911-1917), the Politics of Jesus’ Profession, and Historical Jesus Debates." Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies 5, no. 1 (2014). https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/imwjournal/vol5/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Michael Casey W. Woolf: “The Working Man of Nazareth” 2 MICHAEL CASEY W. WOOLF is a Master of Divinity candidate and Ministry Fellow at Harvard Divinity School. A candidate for ordination in the American Baptist Churches USA, Michael graduated from the University of Tennessee - Knoxville in 2011 with a BA in Religious Studies. While he will be completing his MDiv in May of 2014, his academic journey has only just begun, and he will begin doctoral work (ThD) at Harvard Divinity School in the fall. 3 IMW Journal of Religious Studies Vol. 5:1 ‡ “The Workingman of nazareTh”: represenTaTions of Jesus as Laborer in The Masses (1911-1917), The poliTics of Jesus’ profession, and Historical Jesus Debates ‡ In Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3, Jesus is identified as a son of a tekton and a tekton in his own right respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • The Burial of Jesus and Its Relation and Importance to the Gospel Message
    The American Journal of Biblical Theology Volume 20(11). March 17, 2019 The Burial of Jesus and Its Relation and Importance to the Gospel Message Tony Costa, Ph.D. ******* “And that He was Buried…” (1 Cor 15:4a) Abstract: The burial of Jesus is sometimes an event in the Easter story that is usually left by the wayside as peripheral as it tends to be usually eclipsed by the two great events of the death of Jesus on the cross and the resurrection of Jesus. The burial as the middle point in the Easter narrative is of tremendous importance as it establishes the location of the tomb where Jesus was interred and subsequently the discovery of the empty tomb which was one factor among many which served as a catalyst for belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Early Christian writers understood that if there was no resurrection from the dead, there was no Christianity. The push by some liberal scholars to cast doubt on the reliability of the burial of Jesus vis-à-vis the gospels and opt for the likelihood that the body of Jesus after death was thrown into a common criminal’s grave, seems to be an attempt at undermining the entire Easter story which birthed early Christianity. The accounts of the burial of Jesus are reliable as set out in the gospels and the earliest Christian creed, and they are further buttressed by external factors as well. Keywords: burial, Easter, empty tomb, resurrection ******* 1. The Burial of Jesus and the Earliest Creed The Christian faith bases its raison d'être on the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
    [Show full text]
  • New Testament As Counter-Imperial: a Review of Horsley, Crossan And
    Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Richard Horsley, ed. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1997. Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. John Dominic Crossan. San Francisco, California: Harper Collins Publishers Inc., 1994. Jesus and the Politics of Interpretation. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. New York and London: Continuum, 2001. The political interpretations and implications of the New Testament – including the gospels and letters and presumed actions of Paul of Tarsus and Jesus of Nazareth – have been largely left unstudied. The majority of New Testament and Christian Origins scholars assert that Paul was not political, but theological, that Paul was concerned with matters of the next world rather than this one, and that Paul conveniently fits into imperial structures and ideology. Most scholars have painted a picture of Jesus as a successful, well-educated man who challenged Jewish hierarchy but was supportive of the Roman order. Many Christian congregations believe that Christianity was always the religion of the Roman Empire, the Roman Empire itself was benevolent, and there existed no conflict of interest when Constantine made the empire Christian. In recent decades, however, some scholars – in particular Richard Horsley, Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, and John Dominic Crossan – have begun to look at early “Christianity” as a transformative and counter-imperial movement. These scholars and their published books such as Crossan’s, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, Horsley’s, Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society, and Schüssler Fiorenza’s, Jesus and the Politics of Interpretation, describe the early Christian movement – called the Jesus Movement, the basileia movement, or Christ Cults by different scholars – as a social movement to transform the violent and impoverishing empire into an egalitarian society.
    [Show full text]
  • Theology (Jesus Christ)
    Theology (Jesus Christ) Barnett, Paul W. Jesus and the Logic of History. Downers Grove, IL : IVP, 2000. Barnett, Paul W. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity. Downers Grove, IL : IVP, 1999. Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses; The Gospels and eyewitness testimony. Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 2006. Blomberg, Craig L. Jesus and the Gospels; An Introduction and Survey. Nashville : Broadman & Holman, 1997. Bock, Darrell and Daniel Wallace. Dethroning Jesus; Exposing popular culture's quest to unseat the biblical Christ. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 2007. Bock, Darrell L. Jesus According to Scripture; Restoring the Portrait from the Gospels. Baker, 2002. Bock, Darrell L. Studying the Historical Jesus; A Guide to Sources and Methods. Grand Rapids, MI : Baker, 2002. Bockmuehl, Marcus, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Jesus. New York : Cambridge University Press, 2001. Bruggen, Jakob van. Jesus the Son of God; The Gospel Narratives as Message. Grand Rapids, MI : Baker, 1999. Copan, Paul and Ronald K. Tacelli, eds. Jesus’ Resurrection, Fact or Figment?; A Debate Between William Lane Craig & Gerd Ludemann. Downer’s Grove, IL : Intervarsity Press, 2000. Craig, William Lane and John Dominic Crossan. Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up. Grand Rapids : Baker, 1998. Dunn, James D.G. Jesus Remembered. Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 2003. Eddy, Paul Rhodes and Gregory Boyd. The Jesus Legend; A Case for the historical reliability of the Synoptic Jesus tradition. Grand Rapids : Baker, 2007. Evans, C. Stephen. Historical Christ and the Jesus of Faith. New York : Oxford University Press, 1996. Evans, Craig, ed. Encyclopedia of the Historical Jesus. New York : Routledge, 2008. Evans, Craig. Fabricating Jesus; How modern scholars distort the Gospels.
    [Show full text]