5 ms·

I have often wondered about this; I have read in various places that scholars believe there was a historical Jesus but this always seems like a pragmatic stance

I have often wondered about this; I have read in various places that scholars believe there was a historical Jesus but this always seems like a pragmatic stance to take in societies where the vast majority of people believe that he was either a prophet or a God (which covers almost everywhere where this question would be considered worthy of any serious study). Yet there are some issues that I see: 1. "Yeshua" or "Yeshu" were relatively common Jewish names at that time (it is just "Joshuah" in Aramaic), so vague references in non-Christian writings to a "Jesus" of some kind may not refer to the same person. How many people named "Joshuah" might have led a group of disciples during a period where dozens of messianic claimants were trying to rally followers to one cause or another? 2. It is well known that the bible was subject to extensive editing prior to its official canonization, which makes it somewhat questionable as a historical document. At best we can only derive vague information about big social movements IMO -- no doubt there were Jews who taught the things attributed to Jesus, but I personally hesitate to go further and claim that the bible is an accurate account of a single person's movement. 3. The chaotic schisms in the early centuries of Christianity makes me doubt that useful historical information about the founders of the movement actually survived. The different Christian movements preserved the documents that best supported their cause. Who knows what historical information is not available today that would totally change our views on the topic.

Casseres 8y ago
> 2. It is well known that the bible was subject to extensive editing prior to its official canonization, which makes it somewhat questionable as a historical document. I've never heard this claim before. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that written copies made through the centuries were accurate copies. The only editorialization of the Bible was church councils deciding which books/letters to include in the Bible, not to edit them.
- betterunix2 8y ago
  The Gospels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis This all would have happened before the various councils decided what would be considered canonical, and the councils themselves probably had no idea that it had happened. As for the dead sea scrolls, all it shows is that the final forms of the books in the Hebrew bible and related extrabiblical works existed prior to the canonization. It is pretty clear that the Hebrew bible was edited in prior centuries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah#Authorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah#Authorship etc.

Casseres 8y ago

> 2. It is well known that the bible was subject to extensive editing prior to its official canonization, which makes it somewhat questionable as a historical document. I've never heard this claim before. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that written copies made through the centuries were accurate copies. The only editorialization of the Bible was church councils deciding which books/letters to include in the Bible, not to edit them.

betterunix2 8y ago
The Gospels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis This all would have happened before the various councils decided what would be considered canonical, and the councils themselves probably had no idea that it had happened. As for the dead sea scrolls, all it shows is that the final forms of the books in the Hebrew bible and related extrabiblical works existed prior to the canonization. It is pretty clear that the Hebrew bible was edited in prior centuries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah#Authorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah#Authorship etc.