Finding the Historical Jesus

By -
This is an blogpost that BK published several years ago. The original posting has somehow been deleted, but it is the original piece. Please note that the links are from the original, and the links may not all work as of today's date.

=======

Bill Tammeus, a columnist for The Kansas City Star, has written an interesting piece entitled "For all we know, Jesus may have been apocalyptic prophet", in which he opines on the work of historians seeking the historical Jesus starting with Albert Schweitzer. After noting that Schweitzer concluded (wrongly, in my opinion) that history can tell us nothing about the historical Jesus, Mr. Tammeus then makes a rather interesting observation.

The authors of [Jesus biographies based upon a search for the "historical" Jesus], it turned out, were using new scholarly tools called historical and textual criticism — ways to dig beneath the words to understand more about their historical context.

But there was something odd about the Jesus these writers found: He very much resembled them. This Jesus easily could have taught theology in a German seminary and fit right in.

In other words, historians looking for the historical Jesus inevitably found, instead, the historian’s Jesus. And that Jesus might not have much to do with the person Christians call son of God, lord and savior.

So scholars began to divide Jesus. They spoke of the Jesus of history on one hand and the Christ of faith on the other, as though the two had precious little to do with one another.

This is a remarkably accurate assessment. Marcus Borg, one of the scholars in the process of redefining Jesus, talks about his own struggles with orthodox Christianity in his book Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time : The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary Faith . In this book, Borg admits that he is not a Christian in any orthodox sense of the word. Borg is quoted on Faith Future's Marcus Borg biography page as saying:

When I was a child, I thought that being a Christian was about "believing," and belief was no problem. When I was an adolescent and young adult, I struggled with trying to believe, and finally was no longer able to do so. Now I see that it is not a question of belief, and there is much that I do not believe. I do not believe that Christianity is the only way of salvation, or that the Bible is the revealed will of God, or that Jesus was the unique Son of God. Rather, I now see that the Christian tradition—including its claims about Jesus—is not something to be believed, but something to be lived in. I see the Bible and the tradition as "icons," mediators of the sacred. The point is not to believe them, but to be in relationship to that which they mediate: God, the Spirit, the sacred. My own journey has thus been "beyond belief." It has moved from belief through doubt and disbelief to relationship. For me, to be a Christian is to be part of a community that tells these stories and sings these songs. It feels like home.

Apparently, Borg didn't like Christianity as it has been passed down through the ages, but he wanted to continue to be associated with the Lutheran Church where he was raised. Thus, being unable to broaden his mind enough to intellectually reconcile his doubts with the Jesus taught in the Bible, he began the process of redefining that historical Jesus in order to justify his "faith" in whatever it is he has faith in. By redefining Jesus as something other than the unique Son of God (as clearly taught in the Bible), Borg is able to create God in his own image. Or, to paraphrase Mr. Tammeus, "Borg looking for the historical Jesus inevitably found, instead, Borg's Jesus. And that Jesus did not have much to do with the person Christians call son of God, lord and savior."

In my view, Marcus Borg -- like all of the scholars of the Jesus Seminar vein -- is not really interested in the historical Jesus. He is interested in reinventing the Jesus of the Bible -- who is the historical Jesus -- in order that he can pick and choose from His teachings while still being able to sit around the campfire and sing "Kum Ba Ya". The only trouble is that the Jesus he is calling upon, if he is as Marcus Borg claims, is incapable of kum ba yahing because the Jesus of Marcus Borg was just another human being who could do nothing to save himself or Borg.

Comments

The Pixie said…
Joe/BK: By redefining Jesus as something other than the unique Son of God (as clearly taught in the Bible), Borg is able to create God in his own image.

Where is that taught in the Bible?

Paul for one believed God would adopt everyone (or the righteous anyway) as his sons, just as he had for Jesus. Jesus was the prototype - the first fruits - for what would happen to all the faithful. Borg's position is closer to Paul's than modern Christianity is.

Joe/BK: In my view, Marcus Borg -- like all of the scholars of the Jesus Seminar vein -- is not really interested in the historical Jesus. He is interested in reinventing the Jesus of the Bible -- who is the historical Jesus -- in order that he can pick and choose from His teachings while still being able to sit around the campfire and sing "Kum Ba Ya".

Borg has done for himself what Christianity has done collectively. Christianity is not interested in the historical Jesus either, it is just interested in the Jesus it has invented, that it has massaged into the image that it wants.

Jesus instructed his followers to give away all their worldly goods. Christians do not want to do that, so Christianity has contrived reasons for Christians to ignore what Jesus said. Just like Borg, Christians pick and choose from Jesus' teaching. The only difference is that Christianity did it en masse a long time ago.
6/18/2019 01:09:00 AM
Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said…
The Pixie said…
Joe/BK: By redefining Jesus as something other than the unique Son of God (as clearly taught in the Bible), Borg is able to create God in his own image.

Where is that taught in the Bible?

John 3:16 for one place.Matthew 3:17,Hebrews 1:5,Matthew 17:5, if you want more I can give you a long list,



Paul for one believed God would adopt everyone (or the righteous anyway) as his sons, just as he had for Jesus. Jesus was the prototype - the first fruits - for what would happen to all the faithful. Borg's position is closer to Paul's than modern Christianity is.

It is orthodox teaching to say we are adored as sons of God, Adoption ecclesiology is sophistical and orthodox, the only difference is Paul did not say Jesus was adopted.

Joe/BK: In my view, Marcus Borg -- like all of the scholars of the Jesus Seminar vein -- is not really interested in the historical Jesus. He is interested in reinventing the Jesus of the Bible -- who is the historical Jesus -- in order that he can pick and choose from His teachings while still being able to sit around the campfire and sing "Kum Ba Ya".

I had nothing to do with writing the paper, that;s all Bills ideas I do agree qiththis

Borg has done for himself what Christianity has done collectively. Christianity is not interested in the historical Jesus either, it is just interested in the Jesus it has invented, that it has massaged into the image that it wants.

There is a grain of truth in that. But doctrines that embrace you such as quire SN elements are not latter inventions, They were from earliest times, Jesus as Son, deity of Christ, death, burial, and resurrection. These are not the historical Jesus,by that I not mean they were not part of historical Christina faith they were there from the beginning and I affirmed their truth, But they are not part of the picture of Jesus that is possible to paint historically, These fall into Moltmann's category as history making." That means some realities cannot be admitted by historians but they are true and shaped the history of the faith,

Jesus instructed his followers to give away all their worldly goods. Christians do not want to do that, so Christianity has contrived reasons for Christians to ignore what Jesus said. Just like Borg, Christians pick and choose from Jesus' teaching. The only difference is that Christianity did it en masse a long time ago.

No Jesus never did that,He told a rich guy to give his goods because that guy needed to,he told another to give half his goods because he was not making a rule He was giving advice,
6/18/2019 04:16:00 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Many Children in Bethlehem Did Herod Kill?

By -
A couple of months ago, I wrote a post about the Gospel of Matthew’s account of the slaughter of the innocents. Therein, I argued that some of the skepticism about the account was unjustified. One argument I made was that the number of children killed in Bethlehem would likely have been no more than 20. Though obviously an act of great evil, the killing of 20 children would be much less likely to be noticed by historians of the time than the slaughter of thousands as later traditions speculated. In response to the post, Peter Kirby asked a few questions. He has patiently waited my response, continuously delayed by work, family, and the completion of my Acts article . Two of the questions had to do with how the amount of 20 was determined. Others with the omission of the account by Luke and the reliability of the tradition recounted by Macrobius. Peter also mentioned that there were other reasons to doubt the story's historicity beyond just the silence of other sources. I
Read more

The Bogus Gandhi Quote

By J. P Holding -
Image
I first made this post in 2012, and since then I've made a sort of mini-career out of tracking down bogus quotes like this one (including a video version below). It's a sort of fun microcosm of the way information is mishandled in the Information Age. ** I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. – Mahatma Gandhi A Christian can probably expect to get this quote thrown at them at least once in their lifetime, and waved in their face many more. I had it put to me recently, but my experience with this sort of thing immediately led me to wonder -- is it real? The evidence at this point seems to be no. The first signal of a problem was that anywhere I found it, no source was given. That's often a sign that something is being passed around uncritically. Whether online sources or books, no one seemed to have a source for this quote. A second warning was that the quote has been given more than one context. As
Read more

Where did Jesus say "It is better to give than receive?"

By -
A visitor to the CADRE site recently sent a question about Paul's statement in Acts 20:35 which records Paul as saying, "And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is better to give than to receive'." The reader wanted to know where Jesus said this. This was my answer: You are correct in noting that this saying of Jesus quoted by Paul is not found anywhere in the four Gospels. My own study Bible says "This is a rare instance of a saying of Jesus not found in the canonical Gospels." Does the fact that it isn't stated in the Gospels mean that it isn't reliably from the lips of Jesus? I don't think so. The Apolstle John said at the end of his Gospel (John 21:25): "Jesus did many other things as well.If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." Obviously, this is exaggeration for the sake of making a point, but it means that Jesus
Read more

Discussing Embryonic Stem Cell Research

By -
Stand to Reason has published a list of "talking points" that can be used as a quick reference sheet for answering questions about embryonic stem cell research and why people ought to oppose this procedure. The piece, entitled "Are you against stem cell research and cloning?" give good, concise answers to some of the questions that arise concerning why Christians would oppose this procedure when it supposedly holds such great promise. For example, consider the following from the "talking points": Where do we get human embryonic stem cells? We can only derive human embryonic stem cells by killing a human embryo. Removing its stem cells leaves it with no cells from which to build the organs of its body. What is the embryo? An embryo is a living, whole, human organism (a human being) in the embryonic stage. All the embryo needs to live is a proper environment and adequate nutrition, the very same thing all infants, toddlers, adolescents, and adults need.
Read more

Revamping and New Articles at the CADRE Site

By -
We have changed the Christian History page at the CADRE site from the old design to the new one. The focus of the revamped page has expanded, with many new articles: This page provides links to websites and articles relating to Christian history, including theological development, notable figures, contributions of Christianity to society and culture, and the archaeological evidence for the facts of the Bible. We have also added four new articles by Darin Wood, PhD: John Chrysostum: His Life, Legacy, and Influence Dr. Wood provides an informative sketch of Chrysostum's life, as well as an exploration into his writings and impact on church evangelism. The Righteousness of God in the Pauline Corpus Dr. Wood examines the crucial role that righteousness plays in understanding Paul's perspectives on justification, propitiation, expiation, and covenant. The Structure of the Apocalypse Dr. Wood provides an in-depth analysis of the structure (or structures) behind the Book o
Read more

Tillich, part 2: What does it mean to say "God is Being Itself?"

By -
 In this essay, which is a chapter from the new book I'm now working on, I'm moving toward defining what I think Tillich means exactly by being itself. It's a long journey but an important one. What does Tillich actually mean by “being itself?” Does he mean the same things as other theologians who use the phrase? It’s a mysterious sounding phrase and Tillich never actually comes out and says what he means by it. As I will show there is a reason for this, and I will show what I think that reason in is. In the mean time the task of this chapter is to deduce exactly what Tillich actually means by this phrase. There are three basic possibilities: Three alternatives as to meaning (1) The basic fact that things exist is all that the concept of “God” amounts to. (2) There is a special quality to being, an impersonal aspect” ground of being” or “being itself” and that quality constitutes ‘the divine.’ This possibility excludes God as “king of the universe.” (3) God is b
Read more

A Botched Abortion Shows the Lies of Pro-Choice Proponents

By -
One of the classes I teach at the university is a course on Ethics, and I am using a book by Ralph Dolgoff, Donna Harrington and Frank M. Lowenberg entitled " Ethical Decisions for Social Work Practice " as the text. Overall, I think that it is a good Ethics textbook largely because it provides a balanced viewpoint on the need for values in social work. For example, the book makes the argument (without committing to it) that those engaged in social work cannot avoid making value judgments in ethical decisions because trying to do what is right necessarily involves making an value choice. Also, I book notes that some (including me) think it is ethically wrong for a social worker to cover-up her own values when counseling another person because it creates a false (and ultimately unproductive) relationship with the person being counseled. Still, one of the exemplars in the book gave me pause – not because I thought it raised a deep ethical quandary, but because I wondered how
Read more

The Folded Napkin Legend

By J. P Holding -
I wrote about t his "urban legend" a few years ago, but it's typical of the silly urban legends we hear about now and then, such as the idea that the head of Proctor and Gamble went on Oprah to pledge his allegiance to Satanism. Christians are no less gullible for this sort of nonsense than anyone else, and frankly, some seem more gullible to believe anything that they consider "edifying". It's no wonder we're mesmerized by self-comfort tunes like "I Can Only Imagine" that contain about as much useful theology as a thimble. ** The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes. The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded, and was placed at the head of that stony coffin.... In order to understand the significance of the folded napkin, you have to understand a little bit about Hebrew tradition of that day. The fol
Read more

Exodus 22:18 - Are Followers of God to Kill Witches?

By -
Image
A few days ago I stumbled upon an article published on a website named Haaretz which appears to be a news site for Israeli news. The article entitled " Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live: A Murderous Translation ," discussed the correct understanding of Exodus 22:18. According to the Haaretz article (authored by Elizabeth Sloane), the word "witch" may have been an erroneous translation. And, to read into Ms. Sloane's argument just a bit, the erroneous translation contributed to the deaths of many innocent witches. Specifically, she notes: This quote, found in the King James Version of the Bible, has been widely held responsible for the witch burnings that plagued Europe, and later America, in the Early Modern Period (1450 C.E. – 1750 C.E.). But the murderous practice may have all been the result of a Biblical mistranslation. Now, as I am not an expert on ancient Hebrew, I need to approach translation issues such as this by accessing sources readily
Read more

A Non-Biblical Historian Accepts the Key "Minimum Facts" Supporting Jesus' Resurrection

By -
In their book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus , Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona argue for the historical reality of Jesus' bodily resurrection using the "minimum facts" approach. Rather than get bogged down in inerrancy and other debates, they focus on the key facts demonstrating Jesus' resurrection. For them, the key facts are: *Jesus' death by crucifixion. *Disciples' Beliefs that Jesus Appeared. *Conversion of Paul. *Conversion of James. *Empty Tomb. William L. Craig, another significant apologist for the historical bodily resurrection of Jesus likewise focuses, in his accessible The Son Rises , on the empty tomb and Jesus' resurrection appearance. Craig gives special emphasis to Jesus' honorable burial by Joseph of Arimathea and Jesus' appearances to James and Paul and their subsequent commitment to the Christian cause. Craig, Licona, and Habermas argue that these basic facts are generally supported by most of the relevant sc
Read more