Introduction
Jesus of Nazareth is a central figure in religious and multicultural history. However, it was not until the first half of the eighteenth century that research interest in reconstructing the historical fate of this legendary figure emerged in the humanities (Brown 2017). Researchers began to analyze the historical facts about Jesus of Nazareth. Thus, it is essential to establish the emergence of questions about Jesus of Nazareth and the theological significance of this historical information.
The Historical Jesus of Nazareth and Emerging Questions
The quest for the historical Jesus in academic backgrounds is divided into several phases. Herman Reimarus was the first to produce a portrait of Jesus that differs from the evangelical image of Christ. With Reimarus begins a period called the “First Quest” (Dawes 2019). Albert Schweitzer outlined all the features of the “First Quest” in work “The Quest for the Historical Jesus,” published in 1910 (Dawes 2019). The author described the questions that arose and established the problem for researchers of this period in Schweitzer, indicating that attempts at reconstruction were highly subjective and were a projection of various cultural biases. Next, one can identify a new stage, Schweitzer, who rejected the position of liberal theology and the scholar could not recognize in Jesus the incarnate Theophany (Dawes 2019). Schweitzer questions the gospel tradition, concluding that the real Jesus would remain forever inaccessible to humans.
However, another scholar of this period, William Wrede, should be mentioned. The historian’s conclusions suggested that the four canonical Gospels needed to be viewed as a product of faith. A study of a particular Gospel passage suggested that it reflected the author’s theological view (Dawes 2019). Significantly, in an essay on “The New Testament and Mythology,” written in 1941, Bultmann popularized a theological methodology of demythologization (Dawes 2019). From this perspective, biblical descriptions of supernatural events were a key component of early Christian faith, but today they cannot be understood literally. In 1953 Keseman presented to a group of former students of Bultmann a famous lecture on “The Problem of the Historical Jesus” (Habermas 2020). It initiated a “New Quest” for the historical Jesus. Keseman believed that faith could not remain indifferent: it demands the identity of the earthly Jesus and the glorified Lord (Habermas 2020). Recognizing that gospel sources are not solid biographical facts, the historian offered criteria to separate authentic gospel traditions from unreliable ones.
During the “First Quest” period, authors attempted to portray Jesus not only as a Jew. Bultmann considered the historical Jesus the first-century Jew but did not observe the significance of the Cross in non-Jewish features (Kloppenborg and Verheyden 2020). This line was continued by the renewed “New Quest,” which often downplayed specifically Jewish elements and emphasized those traits of Jesus that were close to Mediterranean cultures. This quest also downplayed the significance of Jesus’ death. The “Third Quest” started in 1980, one manifestation of which was the so-called “Jesus Seminar” (Kloppenborg and Verheyden 2020). They are distinguished from Bultmann by their attempt to learn about Jesus, about what Christ said. They need to consider Jesus in his social and cultural context.
It is also worth noting that unlike “The New Quest”, in the “Third Quest,” the understanding of the Judaism of the second temple has changed fundamentally. Likewise, the “Third Quest” emphasizes Judaism’s substantive pluralism and regional particularities. In this way, questions arise about the authors’ different perceptions of theological texts, ranging from mystification of the life of Jesus and distrust of the text of the Gospel (Kloppenborg and Verheyden 2020). As concepts of the quest for historical truth about Jesus evolve, authors point to the Jewish origin of Christ or focus on the socio-cultural characteristics of Jesus. Consequently, the texts contradict each other, indicating their unreliability.
The Reliability of the Jesus Testimony in the Synoptic Gospels and the Theological Significance of the Issues
Significantly, many documents testify about Jesus, although there are no completely historical sources. Generally, historians have the following problems in the historical reconstruction of life and analysis of sources. The first is the temporal distance, even the Gospel of Mark, the oldest surviving Gospel, was not written until 40 years after the time of Jesus. (Cadoux 2022, 88). Most of the witnesses were dead by then, and the memories of the few remaining eyewitnesses were not accurate. The next issue is linguistic distance; the native language of Jesus and the apostles was Aramaic, while the Gospels were written in Greek (Cadoux 2022). In translating Aramaic to Greek, some distortions could have appeared. Therefore, this caused theological concepts and opinions to change, producing fiction.
The Gospels contain contradictory data; even in the earlier sources, there are inconsistencies. For example, according to John’s Gospel, Jesus was crucified on the eve of the Passover, but based on the synoptic Gospels, Jesus was crucified on the Passover itself. Likewise, the congregation’s needs are the next problem indicating the unreliability of the Gospels (Cadoux 2022). The evangelists did not believe that Jesus’ offerings were of purely archival interest. These propositions were thought of as the source of life, yet it is clear that the audience of the evangelists was significantly different from that of Jesus. Hence the modifications to which the traditions were subjected to actualize them are inevitable (Cadoux 2022). Accordingly, theological concepts are presented according to the needs of the age rather than reflecting the true thoughts of Jesus.
The older the source, the closer in time to the life of Jesus and the more theological significance it deserves. This is why the Gospel of Mark, Matthew, and Luke become prominent (Zeichmann 2017). Much less credibility is given to the Gospels of John and Thomas, which were compiled over a long period and, in their present form, reflect a relatively late revision. In addition, it is not enough to isolate the oldest early Christian texts about Jesus. If the Synoptic Gospels contain parallel accounts of the same events, one should consider whose testimony is earlier and who transcribed information from whom. For instance, the baptism of Jesus is covered in Mark’s, Matthew’s, and Luke’s gospels (Zeichmann 2017). However, Matthew and Luke relied on Mark, which is why Mark’s testimony is the most valuable.
In contrast, the extensions of Matthew and Luke cause some doubt since the additions to the parallel narratives often reflect the ideological interests of the authors rather than resistance to the actual traditions. Thus, these questions call into question the facts and stories in the Gospel (Zeichmann 2017). This is important for theology because it relies on sacred texts as information sources and shapes ideas about Christ. Accordingly, conflicts in the texts or the authors’ differing promotion of Jesus’ teachings lead to questions concerning the validity of the theological tradition.
Conclusion
Thus, it can be argued that the historical facts about Jesus refer to everything people can learn about the life of Jesus of Nazareth by applying modern document research criteria. The results of such a quest will inevitably become minimal because of the absence of reliable and initial facts about Jesus of Nazareth. The authors’ perceptions of the facts, the long time frame, and the various currents of scholarship that have shaped the perceptions of Jesus’ life have influenced the inaccuracy of the theological documents.
References
Brown, Colin. 2017. Quests of the Historical Jesus. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Limited.
Cadoux, Cecil John. 2022. The Historic Mission of Jesus: A Constructive Re-examination of the Eschatological Teaching in the Synoptic Gospels. Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press.
Dawes, Gregory. 2019. The Historical Jesus Quest: A Foundational Anthology. Leiden: BRILL.
Habermas, Gary. 2020. Evidence for the Historical Jesus: Is the Jesus of history the Christ of Faith. Tennessee: Abingdon Press.
Kloppenborg, John, and Joseph Verheyden. 2020. Theological and Theoretical Issues in the Synoptic Problem. London: Bloomsbury Publishing
Zeichmann, Christopher. 2017. “Capernaum: A ‘Hub’ for the Historical Jesus or the Markan Evangelist?” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 15 (1): 147-165.