GDon: I'm not a Christian, but I think that some kind of a historical Jesus is the best explanation for the earliest layer of Christian texts that we have. That Jesus isn't the Gospel Jesus. He didn't do miracles and he wasn't hugely popular with the crowds. He probably wasn't a preacher and didn't have a ministry. I think that is the picture that develops when we look at the earliest texts.
The NT texts you referenced are theologically viewpoints, opinions, not historical data. As such they serve no purpose for a historic investigation into early Christianity. If there was a historical Jesus this figure would need to be found in historical data - and we don’t have that. It’s all very well saying the gospel Jesus is not a historical figure and that that is not the same thing as saying there was no historical Jesus. OK. However, once one moves to an historical investigation there is no reason to be carrying over the name the NT writers have given to their unhistorical gospel Jesus figure. In other words; a historical investigation looks for historical figures that might have had meaning for the gospel writers - whatever the historical name they might have had. The name ‘Jesus’ after all simply relates to ideas about salvation. Hence the name ‘Jesus’ could be applied to anyone who has left a footprint on our lives, ‘saved’ us from some wrong course of action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_(na ... %20is%20my
Linguistic analysis[edit]
There have been various proposals as to the literal etymological meaning of the name Yəhôšuaʿ (Joshua, Hebrew: יְהוֹשֻׁעַ), including Yahweh/Yehowah saves, (is) salvation, (is) a saving-cry, (is) a cry-for-saving, (is) a cry-for-help, (is) my help.[4][5][6][7]
Historical figures of the past, as with historical figures in our own time, are subject to being interpretated as to their character and their actions. What any individual finds meaningful in the lives of any historical individual rests upon many things. Time and place in history being relevant to how historical individuals are judged or found to be meaningful in some way. The gospel writers would be no different to modern interpreters of history, of historical figures.
When I first began to view the gospel Jesus as a literary figure - when the incarnation, the miracles, the resurrection were found to be non-historical elements of the gospel story - I did not try and ‘save’ the gospel story by turning to non-gospel texts to support a historical Jesus. Interpretations of these non-gospel texts are just that - theological interpretations of some historical reality that some writers found to be meaningful. The issue is not their interpretations - but what were they interpretating, what historical reality was found to be relevant to their theological or philosophical musings. To find an answer one has to turn to history.
Can one find a reflection of historical man x withing the gospel story ? In other words, one works from history not the gospel writers interpretations of that history. We might disagree with the gospel writers that historical man x is of no great significance in the wider historical context. But it’s the gospel writers who make the decision of which historical figures they find to be meaningful for their salvation story.
Anyway, GDon, that’s my approach - and has been for around 40 years now. Today, I’ve come full circle - back to the beginning of my investigation but with a greater development than I would have imagined those long years ago. (yep, I’m a slow thinker….ideas need to sit a while….)
GDon: your speculation re a historical Jesus: ..’’ there was (a man ).. who was a religious leader, he had followers,……. He was considered a martyr for being killed for some infraction against the Jewish leadership and/or the Romans. ‘’ is basically a TF Lite...... without, interestingly, a mention of Pilate. Yes, Pilate is a prominent figure in the gospel story - but in history as a Roman element in the crucifixion of a historical Jesus ? When I started to look at the time frame for Pilate - and Tiberius - I didn’t find a Roman execution that could have given rise to ‘salvation’ interpretations. At that time I came to the conclusion that the crucifixion element of the gospel story was an application of the dying and rising god mythology - applied to a non-crucified historical man living under Pilate. Later I focused on Antigonus. In other words, there was no one historical man that could be identified as the historical Jesus. The gospel writers were interpretating a broad historical canvas not a narrow one.
Whatever else the gospel story is - it’s basic claim is that a Roman agent executed, crucified, hung on a stake, a king of the Jews. Yes, that wording can be interpreted as sarcastic, irony, mockery. But without those words the crucifixion of a nobody would be of no consequence to anybody. The crucified figure needs relevance for the gospel writers - that a crucified man was humble - many people are. Humility does not identify the man on the cross.
I’ll copy an old chart of mine - you’ve probably seen it before. I did link to it once on Richard’s Carrier’s old blog. His response was along the lines of this is how things should be done – i.e. list history alongside gospel stories. History, as far as can be established, is one thing - what Josephus says is something else. Consequently, what Josephus says about the historical figures in this chart is not without question. We have the coins that these figures existed - the Josephan stories about these figures need to be examined. The way forward is through Josephus - not via NT non-gospel theological or philosophical musings.
==========
A bit late to the party - had a fall while on holiday and arm has been confined to a sling making typing a pain….dislocated collar bone…)
=======================================================
Historical artefacts, such as coins, are testimony to the fact that certain individuals were historical figures. That is the bare bones of historical evidence. However, history requires a story; a narrative, to joins up the facts and present a meaningful picture. The picture could be cloudy and unclear or it could be a reasonable explanation of what happened. In the chart that follows, Josephus is the primary source for building that historical narrative. Did Josephus himself, writing after the events, have accurate material to work with? Or is Josephus creating his own narrative - and without a secondary source there is no way to be sure. All one can do is work with his material and question his story when it presents problems.
| HISTORY and Coins |
Philo (died about 50 c.e.) Flaccus |
JOSEPHUS: War (about 75 c.e.)Antiquities:(about 94 c.e.) |
The composite gospel Jesus figure based upon the historical figures of the last King and High Priest of the Jews, Antigonus; Philip the Tetrarch and Agrippa I. |
| King Antigonus Mattathias II High Priest of the Jews: 4 b.c.e. – 37 b.c.e. Hasmonean Bilingual Coins, Hebrew and Greek. |
|
Antigonus enters Jerusalem: Antigonus himself also bit off Hyrcanus's ears with his own teeth, as he fell down upon his knees to him, that so he might never be able upon any mutation of affairs to take the high priesthood again, for the high priests that officiated were to be complete, and without blemish. War: Book 1.ch.13 (40 b.c.)........................Antony came in, and told them that it was for their advantage in the Parthian war that Herod should be king; so they all gave their votes for it. War: Book 1.ch.14 (40 b.c.) |
John 18.10; Mark 14.47; Matthew 26.51; Luke 22.50. John and Luke specifying right ear, Mark and Matthew have 'ear'. gJohn stating that Peter cut off the ear of the High Priest's servant. |
|
|
Now as winter was going off, Herod marched to Jerusalem, and brought his army to the wall of it; this was the third year since he had been made king at Rome; War: Book 1. ch.17 (37 b.c.).. Herod on his own account, in order to take the government from Antigonus, who was declared an enemy at Rome, and that he might himself be king, according to the decree of the Senate. Antiquities Book 14 ch.16. |
gJohn indicates a three year ministry for JC. |
| Cassius Dio: Antigonus. These people Antony entrusted to one Herod to govern, and Antigonus he bound to a cross and flogged,—treatment accorded to no other king by the Romans,—and subsequently slew him. Roman History, Book xlix, c.22. |
|
Then it was that Antigonus, without any regard to his former or to his present fortune, came down from the citadel, and fell at Sosius's feet, who without pitying him at all, upon the change of his condition, laughed at him beyond measure, and called him Antigona. Yet did he not treat him like a woman, or let him go free, but put him into bonds, and kept him in custody.... Sosius ......went away from Jerusalem, leading Antigonus away in bonds to Antony; then did the axe bring him to his end..War: Book 1.ch.18. ..Antigonus, without regard to either his past or present circumstances, came down from the citadel, and fell down at the feet of Sosius, who took no pity of him, in the change of his fortune, but insulted him beyond measure, and called him Antigone [i.e. a woman, and not a man;] yet did he not treat him as if he were a woman, by letting him go at liberty, but put him into bonds, and kept him in close custody....... |
The soldiers mock Jesus: Mark 15.16-20; Matthew 27:27-31.Jesus flogged: John 19:1; Mark 15:15; Matthew 27:26. JC crucified. Trilingual sign over cross: Aramaic, Latin and Greek. gJohn 19.19-21. JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Other variations: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS; THE KING OF THE JEWS; THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. |
|
|
...and then but Herod was afraid lest Antigonus should be kept in prison [only] by Antony, and that when he was carried to Rome by him, he might get his cause to be heard by the senate, and might demonstrate, as he was himself of the royal blood, and Herod but a private man, that therefore it belonged to his sons however to have the kingdom, on account of the family they were of, in case he had himself offended the Romans by what he had done. Out of Herod's fear of this it was that he, by giving Antony a great deal of money, endeavoured to persuade him to have Antigonus slain. Antiquities: Book 14 ch.16. (Slavonic Josephus has the teachers of the Law giving the money to Pilate...) |
Judas betrays JC for 30 pieces of silver. Matthew 27.3. |
|
|
Now when Antony had received Antigonus as his captive, he determined to keep him against his triumph; but when he heard that the nation grew seditious, and that, out of their hatred to Herod, they continued to bear good-will to Antigonus, he resolved to behead him at Antioch, for otherwise the Jews could no way be brought to be quiet. (37 b.c.) Antiquities: Book 15 ch.1. |
Acts: 11:16.The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. |
| Philip the Tetrarch: Herodian Coins. 4 b.c.e. – 34 c.e. |
|
When Philip also had built Paneas, a city at the fountains of Jordan, he named it Caesarea. He also advanced the village Bethsaida, situate at the lake of Gennesareth, unto the dignity of a city, both by the number of inhabitants it contained, and its other grandeur, and called it by the name of Julias, Antiquities: Book 18 ch.2. |
John 1:43-45. Philip, Andrew and Peter come from Bethsaida. Around the villages of Caesarea Phillipi JC asked the disciples who do people say he is. Peter says: "You are the Messiah". Mark 8:27-30; Matthew 16: 13-16. |
|
|
(about 34 c.e.) About this time it was that Philip, Herod's brother, departed this life, in the twentieth year of the reign of Tiberius, after he had been tetrarch of Trachonitis and Gaulanitis, and of the nation of the Bataneans also, thirty seven years. He had showed himself a person of moderation and quietness in the conduct of his life and government; he constantly lived in that country which was subject to him; he used to make his progress with a few chosen friends; his tribunal also, on which he sat in judgment, followed him in his progress; and when any one met him who wanted his assistance, he made no delay, but had his tribunal set down immediately, wheresoever he happened to be, and sat down upon it, and heard his complaint: he there ordered the guilty that were convicted to be punished, and absolved those that had been accused unjustly. He died at Julias; and when he was carried to that monument which he had already erected for himself beforehand, he was buried with great pomp.His principality Tiberius took, (for he left no sons behind him,) and added it to the province of Syria, but gave order that the tributes which arose from it should be collected, and laid up in his tetrachy. Antiquities: Book 18 ch.4. |
disciples/apostles: John 6:70; Mark 3:14; Matthew 10:2; Luke 6:13. A rich man from Arimathea, Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. Matthew 27:57-59. Mark 15:43. Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus’ body. JC crucified during rule of Pilate - which ends in 36 c.e. |
| Agrippa I. (d.44 c.e.) Herodian Coins. |
The mocking of Carabbas:... a diadem, and clothed the rest of his body with a common door mat instead of a cloak and instead of a sceptre they put in his hand a small stick ..., he had received all the insignia of royal authority, and had been dressed and adorned like a king, ....Then from the multitude of those who were standing around there arose a wonderful shout of men calling out Maris; and this is the name by which it is said that they call the kings among the Syrians;..when Flaccus heard, or rather when he saw this, he would have done right if he had apprehended the maniac and put him in prison, that he might not give to those who reviled him any opportunity or excuse for insulting their superiors, and if he had chastised those who dressed him up for having dared both openly and disgustedly, both with words and actions, to insult a king. |
|
The soldiers mock Jesus: Mark 15.16-20; Matthew 27:27-31. ..... The soldiers led Jesus away into the palace (that is, the Praetorium) and called together the whole company of soldiers. They put a purple robe on him, then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on him. And they began to call out to him, “Hail, king of the Jews!” Again and again they struck him on the head with a staff and spit on him. Falling on their knees, they paid homage to him. And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him out to crucify him............Pilate released Barabbas. |
While the chart has set down the historical backdrop in which to view the gospel JC figure, the chart is not the whole JC story. That story goes on to include OT midrash and mythological elements. However, without the historical backdrop, the gospel JC story would have had no legs upon which to run; no legs to allow it to be viewed as a plausible historical account. Crucified itinerate carpenters might well present historical possibilities and assumptions. However, belief in historical possibilities is something down the line, not something immediate. The immediate reality does not allow for possibilities - it allows only for what reality is. And that is historical reality not assumptions or possibilities.
The gospel JC story is not history; it is a mythologizing of history; an interpretation of history; salvation history. History viewed through a Jewish philosophical and a prophetic lens.
Basically, the gospel Jesus story is a historical/political allegory - based primarily upon the historical figures of Jewish history named in the above chart.
Paul, whoever he was, emphasized the Jerusalem above, the spiritual Jerusalem, the theological/philosophical Jerusalem. However, ideas don't exist in a vacuum. Our reality is not all in the mind. We also live in a physical reality. Hence the need, for the gospel writers, to provide a physical, a historical foundation for their new spiritual vision. Ideas, to have relevance to our physical reality need to have some connection to the reality. Our minds might provide insight and inspiration but it's feet on the ground that enables us to walk the talk....History, in other words, matters ......it mattered for the gospel writers just as it matters for us today.
I've tried to stick to the earliest texts as much as possible, and from them I think I've built a consistent picture, though admittedly one built off minimal data points. One can draw anything from a small number of dots.
