Reddit reviews The Quest of the Historical Jesus

It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users.
I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click!


Here is link number 1 - Previous text "1"

Here is link number 2 - Previous text "2"

Here is link number 3 - Previous text "3"

Here is link number 4 - Previous text "4"

Here is link number 5 - Previous text "5"

Here is link number 6 - Previous text "6"



----
^Please ^PM ^/u/eganwall ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^Delete

>actually

probably*

That's the best we can do, since the evidence is suspiciously lacking and internally contradictory.

1
2
3 4
5 6

Happy Ēostre, and happy reading!

For a first step into biblical study, I'm not sure I would only read Carrier's book. As I haven't read it fully, I can't really comment on it like /u/koine_lingua.

But if you want to get a broad spectrum, you can check out:

John Meier Marginal Jew - (maybe vol. 2 or 3)

NT Wright's How God Became King

John Dominic Crossan's Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography

Marcus Borg Jesus: An uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary

Craig Blomberg Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey

You can take a stab at Albert Schweitzer's The Quest for the Historical Jesus

or Raymond E. Brown's Death of the Messiah or Birth of the Messiah if you want. I found Schweitzer's book difficult to get through. And one Easter holiday my plans were to read Death of the Messiah. After page like 17, I quit and played WoW.

That will give you a healthy dose of different perspectives - and will not only give you a survey of the scholarship but also will argue for a model, as opposed to Luke Timothy Johnson's The Real Jesus which just criticizes one aspect of HJ studies.

>The intenionally misleading term "historical Jesus" is meant to confuse who we really have evidence for. We have everyone for the person(s) Jesus is based on (whose key properties are entirely natural), but no evidence for Jesus (whose key properties are entirely supernatural).

Since you repeatedly show that you have never even bothered to so much as Google the scholarship on this issue I'm just going to give it to you.


The wikipedia page on the subject with hosts of links and quotes from historians, and textual critics:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus


Bart Ehrman Answering a question about this at talk:

https://youtu.be/43mDuIN5-ww

His book on the subject:

Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062206443/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_Hrf6CbNSB68PT

Albert Schweitzer's book on the subject:

The Quest of the Historical Jesus https://www.amazon.com/dp/0486440273/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_gtf6CbY07Q6Y0


It's also one of r/Askhistorians most frequently asked questions:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/a2z3a7/i_always_hear_people_say_we_know_for_sure_that/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/259vcd/how_much_evidence_is_there_for_a_historical_jesus/chf3t4j/?context=3

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8mm717/what_is_the_historical_jesus/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/tjeq1/from_a_historical_perspective_what_is_the_actual/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/sxsko/evidence_for_jesus/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/rubhc/so_what_do_we_actually_know_about_the_life/

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3uubcm/how_certain_are_historians_the_jesus_christ_was_a/