HOW MANY QUESTS HAVE THERE BEEN TO FIND THE “HISTORICAL JESUS”?

HOW MANY SEARCHES HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED

FOR THE “HISTORICAL JESUS?”

Answer: Three (3) over the past 250 years! It consumes NT scholarship even today with now a third search.

IMPORTANT: historical-critical scholars NEVER found Him in any of the searches conducted!

ALL SEARCHES FAILED? 

WHY? WHY? WHY? can’t these critical scholars find him?

ANSWER: No one could agree on whose “discovery” was correct (!) revealing its acute subjectivity.

WHY?– Baruch Spinoza had designed the “search” ideology of historical criticsm!  He did not want scholars ever to find Him!

 Indeed, in Spinoza’s historical-critical ideology, that is the POINT–deflect away from the Scriptures with a nominalist barrage of endless questions about issues behind the text so that the text (e.g. Gospels’ Jesus) never receives prominence.

 New Testament scholarship today almost unanimously identifies at least three major periods in questing for the “historical Jesus.”  Debate, however, still surrounds how many searches have been conducted or whether all searches conducted have been really one unified search operating from these common philosophical roots.  Reumann’s scheme is widely followed:

  • I.    The Old Quest (from 1778, according to Schweitzer, with its four either/or decisions: Purely historical or supernatural?  Synoptics or John?  Eschatological Jesus or not?  Mark as a whole the basis for a “life” or Chrstology as post-Easter?);
  • II. The No-Quest Period (Bultmann and the form critics: all Gospel accounts are colored by the church; or, the “no biography is possible” view);
  • III. Now, the New Quest and its fragmentation (Reumann 1974).[1]

To this prevalent scheme must be added what has now become entitled “The Third Quest” for the historical Jesus widely popularized at the end of the A.D. 20th century and into the twenty-first.

Evangelical critical scholars have now joined in!!!!

WHY? That’s what scholars do!  No British-trained evangelical scholar would dare refuse to join with the other critical scholars in this endeavor.  WHY?  because “scholars” must do what other scholars do!  Otherwise, they wouldn’t be considered scholars by scholars who control who are considered “scholars.”  No room for simpletons here!

[1] John Reumann, “Jesus and Christology,” in The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters.  Eds. Eldon J. Epp and George W. MacRae (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989). 502.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Comments are closed, but you can leave a trackback.