Editing Jesus Seminar (section)

== Search for the "Historical Jesus" ==

The Seminar's reconstruction of the [[historical Jesus]] portrayed him as an [[itinerant minister|itinerant]] [[Cynicism (philosophy)#Cynicism and Christianity|Hellenistic Jewish sage]] and [[faith healing|faith-healer]] who preached a [[Good news (Christianity)|gospel]] of liberation from [[injustice]] in startling [[parable]]s and [[aphorism]]s.<ref name="Words"/><ref name="Acts"/><ref name="Gospel"/> An [[iconoclast]], Jesus broke with established Jewish theological dogmas and social conventions both in his teachings and in his behavior, often by turning common-sense ideas upside down, confounding the expectations of his audience: he preached of "Heaven's imperial rule" (traditionally translated as "[[Kingdom of God]]") as being already present but unseen; he depicted God as a [[Divine love|loving]] [[God the Father|father]]; he fraternized with outsiders and criticized insiders.<ref name="Words"/><ref name="Acts"/><ref name="Gospel"/> According to the Seminar, Jesus was a mortal man born of two human parents, who did not perform nature miracles nor die as a substitute for sinners nor rise bodily from the dead.<ref name="Words"/><ref name="Acts"/><ref name="Gospel"/> Sightings of a risen Jesus represented the [[vision hypothesis|visionary experiences]] of some of his disciples rather than physical encounters.<ref name="Words"/><ref name="Acts"/><ref name="Gospel"/> While these claims, not accepted by conservative Christian laity, have been repeatedly made in various forms since the 18th century,<ref>Ehrman, B, (Feb 2, 2010), "Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)"</ref> the Jesus Seminar addressed them in a unique manner with its consensual research methodology.

The Seminar treated the [[canonical gospels]] as historical sources that represent Jesus' actual words and deeds as well as elaborations of the [[Early Christianity|early Christian]] community and of the [[Four Evangelists|gospel authors]]. The Fellows placed the [[Scientific burden of evidence|burden of proof]] on those who advocate any passage's historicity. Unconcerned with [[biblical canon|canonical]] boundaries, they asserted that the [[Gospel of Thomas]] may have more authentic material than the [[Gospel of John]].<ref name="NWT">[[N.T. Wright]], [Five Gospels but no Gospel] {{Cite web |url= http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Five_Gospels.pdf |title= Archived copy |access-date= 2006-08-02 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20041222151203/http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Five_Gospels.pdf |archive-date= 2004-12-22 }}, 1999, p.5 [[PDF]]</ref>

The Seminar held a number of premises or [[#"Seven pillars of scholarly wisdom"|"scholarly wisdom"]] about Jesus when critically approaching the gospels. Members acted on the premise that Jesus did not hold an [[apocalypticism|apocalyptic]] worldview, an opinion that is controversial in mainstream [[Historicity of Jesus#Overview of scholarly studies of Jesus|scholarly studies of Jesus]]{{Broken anchor|date=2024-11-09|bot=User:Cewbot/log/20201008/configuration|target_link=Historicity of Jesus#Overview of scholarly studies of Jesus|reason= The anchor (Overview of scholarly studies of Jesus) [[Special:Diff/504176918|has been deleted]].}}.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/jesus/epsanders.html | title= E.P. Sanders: Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet}}</ref>{{qn|date=May 2016}} The Fellows argued that the authentic words of Jesus, rather than revealing an apocalyptic [[eschatology]] which instructs his [[disciple (Christianity)|disciples]] to prepare for the end of the world,  indicate that he preached a [[sapiential eschatology]], which encourages all of God's children to [[tikkun olam|repair the world]].<ref name="Crossan 1998">{{cite book | author = Crossan, John Dominic | author-link = John Dominic Crossan | title = The Essential Jesus: Original Sayings and Earliest Images, p. 8 | publisher = Book Sales | year = 1998 | isbn = 0-7858-0901-5 | url = https://archive.org/details/essentialjesusor00cros }}</ref><ref>[[Paula Fredriksen|Fredriksen, Paula]]. [http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/fredricksen_JesustoChrist.shtml Excerpt from "From Jesus to Christ"]. In particular, note the second footnote for a brief overview of scholars supporting an apocalyptic view, including [[Bart D. Ehrman]] and [[John P. Meier]].</ref>

The methods and conclusions of the Jesus Seminar have come under harsh criticism from numerous{{quantify|date=August 2021}} biblical scholars, historians and clergy for a variety of reasons. Such critics assert, for example, that the Fellows of the Seminar were not all trained scholars, that their voting technique did not allow for nuance, that they were preoccupied with the [[Q source]] and with the Gospel of Thomas but omitted material in other sources such as the [[Gospel of the Hebrews]], and that they relied excessively on the [[criterion of embarrassment]].<ref name="NWT"/><ref>Catherine M. Murphy, ''The Historical Jesus For Dummies'', For Dummies Pub., 2007. p. 60 – "The Jesus Seminar has come under a lot of fire from other scholars and clergy for a variety of reasons{{nbsp}}[...] The Jesus Seminar has generated a lot of debate because it finds little historical evidence for certain Christian beliefs, such as the virgin birth, the divinity of Jesus, and the resurrection.".
</ref><ref>Bruce Chilton & Craig A. Evans, ''Authenticating the activities of Jesus'', Volume 2, BRILL, 1999. pp 83–99,110–120.
</ref><ref>Robert Joseph Miller, ''The Jesus seminar and its critics'', Polebridge Press, 1999. pp 65–79
</ref>