![]() : 208–233 Theissen says "there is broad scholarly consensus that we can best find access to the historical Jesus through the Synoptic tradition." Bart D. : 344–351 The presence of details of Jesus' life in Paul, and the differences between letters and Gospels, are sufficient for most scholars to dismiss mythicist claims concerning Paul. Historical scholars see differences between the content of the Jewish Messianic prophecies and the life of Jesus, undermining views Jesus was invented as a Jewish Midrash or Peshar. Mentions of Jesus in extra-biblical texts do exist and are supported as genuine by the majority of historians. Sanders and Gerd Theissen have traced elements of Christianity to diversity in first-century Judaism and discarded nineteenth-century views that Jesus was based on previous pagan deities. Since the 1970s, various scholars such as Joachim Jeremias, E. P. Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical textual criticism are applied to the New Testament, "we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned." There is no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus. ![]() Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |