|
Portraits of the historical Jesus refers to the various portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in the three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus that have taken place in the past two centuries, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.〔〔''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell (1 Jan 1999) ISBN 0664257038 pages 19-23〕 The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the dogmatic 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.〔〔〔 By the 21st century scholars began to focus on what is historically probable and plausible about Jesus.〔John P. Meier "Criteria: How do we decide what comes from Jesus?" in ''The Historical Jesus in Recent Research'' by James D. G. Dunn and Scot McKnight (Jul 15, 2006) ISBN 1575061007 page 124 "Since in the quest for the historical Jesus almost anything is possible, the function of the criteria is to pass from the merely possible to the really probable, to inspect various probabilities, and to decide which candidate is most probable. Ordinarily the criteria can not hope to do more."〕〔''The Historical Jesus of the Gospels'' by Craig S. Keener (13 Apr 2012) ISBN 0802868886 page 163〕〔''Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship'' by Marcus J. Borg (1 Aug 1994) ISBN 1563380943 pages 4-6〕 ==Historical elements== Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.〔In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 ''Forged : writing in the name of God'' ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285〕〔Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in ''Jesus'' by Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200〕〔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 any more." in ''Jesus Now and Then'' by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34〕〔Robert E. Van Voorst ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"〕〔James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in ''Sacrifice and Redemption'' edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"〕〔''The Gospels and Jesus'' by Graham Stanton, 1989 ISBN 0192132415 Oxford University Press, p. 145: "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".〕 We have no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.〔''Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi'' by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6 pages 730-731〕〔Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence''. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9-page 15〕 There is, however, 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,〔''Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee'' by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 181〕 and historians tend to look upon supernatural or miraculous claims about Jesus as questions of faith, rather than historical fact.〔"What about the resurrection? ... Some people believe it did, some believe it didn't. ... But if you do believe it, it is not as a historian" Ehrman, B. ''Jesus, Interrupted'', pg 176 HarperOne; 1 Reprint edition (2 February 2010)〕 There is no physical or archeological evidence for Jesus, and all the sources we have are documentary. The sources for the historical Jesus are mainly Christian writings, such as the gospels and the purported letters of the apostles. The authenticity and reliability of these sources has been questioned by many scholars, and few events mentioned in the gospels are universally accepted.〔Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee by Mark Allan Powell 1998 ISBN 0-664-25703-8 page 181〕 In conjunction with Biblical sources, three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources have been used in the historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.〔''Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey'' by Craig L. Blomberg 2009 ISBN 0-8054-4482-3 pages 431-436〕 These are two passages in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one from the Roman historian Tacitus.〔〔Van Voorst (2000) pp. 39-53〕 Although the authenticity of all three passages has been disputed to varying degrees, most biblical scholars believe that all three are at least partially authentic. The historical analysis techniques used by Biblical scholars have been questioned,〔〔Clive Marsh, "Diverse Agendas at Work in the Jesus Quest" in ''Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus'' by Tom Holmen and Stanley E. Porter (Jan 12, 2011) ISBN 9004163727 pages 986-1002〕 and according to James Dunn it is not possible "to construct (from the available data) a Jesus who will be the real Jesus."〔''Jesus Remembered'' Volume 1, by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 pp. 125-126: "the historical Jesus is properly speaking a nineteenth- and twentieth-century construction using the data supplied by the Synoptic tradition, ''not'' Jesus back then," (the Jesus of Nazareth who walked the hills of Galilee), "and ''not'' a figure in history whom we can realistically use to critique the portrayal of Jesus in the Synoptic tradition." 〕〔Meir, ''Marginal Jew'', 1:21-25〕〔T. Merrigan, ''The Historical Jesus in the Pluralist Theology of Religions,'' in ''The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for Unity in Contemporary Christology'' (ed. T. Merrigan and J. Haers). Princeton-Prague Symposium on Jesus Research, & Charlesworth, J. H. ''Jesus research: New methodologies and perceptions : the second Princeton-Prague Symposium on Jesus Research, Princeton 2007,'' p. 77-78: "Dunn points out as well that 'the Enlightenment Ideal of historical objectivity also projected a false goal onto the quest for the historical Jesus,' which implied that there was a 'historical Jesus,' objectively verifiable, 'who will be different from the dogmatic Christ and the Jesus of the Gospels and who will enable us to criticize the dogmatic Christ and the Jesus of the Gospels.' (''Jesus Remembered'', p. 125)."〕 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.'"〔Herzog, W. R. (2005). Prophet and teacher: An introduction to the historical Jesus. Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press. p. 6〕 The Christ myth theory, namely 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, has very little scholarly support.〔Bart Ehrman, ''Did Jesus Exist?'' Harper Collins, 2012, p. 12, ""In simpler terms, the historical Jesus did not exist . Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." further quoting as authoritative the fuller definition provided by Earl Doherty in ''Jesus: Neither God Nor Man.'' Age of Reason, 2009, pp. vii–viii: it is "the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."〕 Nonetheless, despite divergent scholarly opinions on the construction of portraits of the historical Jesus, almost all modern scholars consider his baptism and crucifixion to be historical facts.〔''Jesus Remembered'' by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".〕〔''Jesus of Nazareth'' by Paul Verhoeven (Apr 6, 2010) ISBN 1583229051 page 39〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Portraits of the historical Jesus」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|