0
There remains some debate as to the relationship of the historical Jesus of Nazareth to the gospels. Some alternatives that gain various levels of support are:
- The gospels are factual and reasonably accurate accounts of the life of Jesus, who was at the origin of the gospel story.
- Jesus was a wandering preacher whose life and teachings became elaborated until they bear little resemblance to the originals, but this historical Jesus was still at the origin of the gospel story.
- Christianity is really based on a spiritual Christ in heaven, who was crucified in heaven much as other Near Eastern gods were. The Epistle to the Hebrews talks of Jesus as the High Priest in heaven, but not necessarily as someone who lived on earth. There was a Jesus of Nazareth, who also attracted a following among some Jews, and the two stories eventually became conflated. The historical Jesus is only partly at the origin of the gospel story.
- There would have been a spiritual Christ in heaven, as described in Hebrews, and who was the centre of Paul's faith. The author of Mark invented the story of the historical Jesus, whether or not to keep secret just what the early Christians really believed. The authors of Matthew, Luke and John copied Mark, without realising that the story was not literally true. There is no historical Jesus.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Can you know Jesus historically?
The only information we have about the historical Jesus of Nazareth is to be found in the gospels. There is nothing in the contemporary Roman records or those of his Jewish contemporaries, such as Philo of Alexandria, that even attests that Jesus was a historical person. If you wish to know Jesus historically, you must rely on the information in the gospels alone. Yes. The Gospels are historical documents in themselves, but beyond them it is still possible. Jesus was referred to by a number of secular writers.
How do the Gospels show that the resurrection was historical?
The gospels do not show that the resurrection of Jesus was historical. In fact, the widely divergent descriptions of the appearances of the risen Jesus do more to suggest that it was not historical. At the very least, the discrepancies in the different stories show that they really knew nothing about it.
What are the five historical book in the New Testament?
The four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John with Acts can be considered historical books in the New Testament. The book of Acts is a historical account from Jesus' ascension to travels of Paul in his missionary journeys which is more chronological in its account than the gospels. The gospels include historical accounts but are not written purely as a history text.
What are the five historical books in the New Testament?
The four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John with Acts can be considered historical books in the New Testament. The book of Acts is a historical account from Jesus' ascension to travels of Paul in his missionary journeys which is more chronological in its account than the gospels. The gospels include historical accounts but are not written purely as a history text.
Who killed Jesus according to Jewish history?
----------------------- There is no historical reference, anywhere, to the death of Jesus. Jews simply accept that, in the absence of alternative explanations, Jesus probably died much as is described in the gospels.
Why do some believe the Gospels are reliable historical documents?
There is an perhaps unjustified assumption that the gospels are in fact reliable historical documents. Most people believe that they were written by eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus, or at least (for example, Luke) people who had met and learnt from eyewitnesses. However, the clear majority of modern scholars no longer support that view.Belief that the gospels are reliable historical documents must remain a matter of faith, and can not be proven.
Did Jesus bring his suffering on himself?
We know nothing historical about Jesus except what is written in the gospels, and it is not the intention of the gospels to admit any fault in Jesus. Attempting to answer the question from a wider perspective, many modern scholars believe that the gospel stories are not literally true, with some even questioning whether there really was a Jesus of Nazareth. If Jesus was, in fact, a real person but he did not really suffer in the way the gospels describe, then he also did not bring suffering on himself. If Jesus was not a real person, then of course he did not. But at this stage we do not know.
What are four true historical assertions about Jesus?
AnswerThere is so little genuine historical evidence about Jesus. It is the nature of historical inquiry that the assertions contained in the gospels can not be claimed as historically true, without independent confirming evidence, which does not exist. But the following are true historical assertions:That there were many wandering preachers in Palestine during the first century BCE and the first century CE, making it plausible that Jesus of Nazareth really did exist, as one of these wandering preachersThat many millions of Christians believe that he was the long-awaited Jewish MessiahThat a religion was founded in his nameThat several books of the genre known as 'gospels' were written about Jesus, four of those gospels being placed in the New Testament canon.
Are the Gospels in the New Testament or Old Testament?
The four Gospels (meaning "good news"), were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in the beginning of the New Testament(or the Greek Scriptures), providing an historical account of the life of Jesus.
Did Jesus ride a donkey backwards?
There is no historical account or biblical reference that suggests Jesus rode a donkey backwards. The Gospels describe Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, fulfilling a prophecy, but there is no mention of him riding the donkey backwards.
Why are there 4 Gospels but only one Jesus Christ?
The 4 Gospels were written by 4 people about one Jesus.
What is an historical background of accounting?
It's always "a" when it is before a word that does not start with a letter that is a vowel or sounds like a vowel. Therefore, the correct grammar is "a historical background." Actually, the above is...The historical background of the gospels was first century Palestine, under direct or indirect rule of the Roman Empire. The gospels tell us that Jesus was crucified during the governorship of.
