What do you think?
Rate this book
The Historical Jesus: An Essential Guide
Recent years have seen an explosion of talk about the historical Jesus from scholarly settings as well as media outlets (including sensational TV documentaries and national magazines). How is the student of the Bible to assess these various claims about Jesus? And what difference does knowledge of his time and place make for Christian faith, theological thinking, and historical research? James Charlesworth presents the solid results of modern study into the life and times of Jesus, especially regarding the role of the Essenes, the significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the nature of messianic expectation, and much more. No one today is better equipped than James Charlesworth to lead students through the thickets of controversy that surround much of contemporary historical Jesus research.
This Abingdon Essential Guide will fulfill the need for a brief, substantive, yet highly accessible introduction to this core area of New Testament studies. Drawing on the best in current scholarship, written with the need of students foremost in mind, addressed to learners in a number of contexts, this Essential Guide will be the first choice of those who wish to acquaint themselves or their students with the broad scope of issues, perspectives, and subject matters relating to modern quests for the historical Jesus. It will also be a preferred text for those who need or want to refresh their knowledge regarding the context within which Jesus lived in preparation for leading church discussion groups in studies of the Gospels.
This Abingdon Essential Guide will fulfill the need for a brief, substantive, yet highly accessible introduction to this core area of New Testament studies. Drawing on the best in current scholarship, written with the need of students foremost in mind, addressed to learners in a number of contexts, this Essential Guide will be the first choice of those who wish to acquaint themselves or their students with the broad scope of issues, perspectives, and subject matters relating to modern quests for the historical Jesus. It will also be a preferred text for those who need or want to refresh their knowledge regarding the context within which Jesus lived in preparation for leading church discussion groups in studies of the Gospels.
131 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
13 people are currently reading
58 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
![Profile Image for [Name Redacted].](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gr-assets.com%2Fimages%2FS%2Fcompressed.photo.goodreads.com%2Fusers%2F1347082397i%2F287915._UY200_CR0%2C0%2C200%2C200_.jpg&w=128&q=75)
November 4, 2011
I want to approve of this book far more than I actually do. I enjoy it, I'm planning to assign it for a class, I think it's an excellent introduction to the "Quest" for the so-called "historical Jesus". However there's a not-inconsiderable thread of religiosity which seems to run throuhgout the book, and my academic training has prejudiced me against anything even slightly confessional (which, as i have noted elsewhere, is hilarious given how essentially confessional the vast majority of the more atheistic and agnostic scholarship on religion actually is). I'm a huge fan of Charlesworth's work on pseudepigraphal texts and the Hebrew Bible, and I LOVE this text's indictments of both modern scholarship and old-time theology, but... Well, let's focus on the aspects which aren't subject to my inability to read objectively due to my modern scholarly biases.
He capably and admirably disarms many of the more sensationalistic theories about Jesus and early Christianity, demonstrating that, compared to the four canonical Gospels, these theories are actually far more fantastic (cf. also Freud's "Moses & Monotheism"). He points out that claims that Jesus was an Egyptian-trained sorcerer, a Cynic sage, a Buddhist philosopher, a Gnostic teacher, etc. ignore the profoundly Jewish nature of everything anyone contemporaneous to Jesus ever records him as having taught.
He notes that, while Jesus being married would make perfect sense given his religious and historical context, there is no historical evidence that he was. He also points out that the only "evidence" of any sort of romantic relationship is a fragmentary portion of the apocryphal Gospel of Philip involving Mary Magdalene which was a creation of an extremely localized Gnostic community in Egypt written at least a century (most scholars estimate 2 centuries) after the "canonical" Gospels are estimated to have been written. Scholars often cite a lack of evidence for a traditional interpretation as a justification for discarding that interpretation; yet they also IGNORE absence of evidence when it might undermine their own theories and interpretations. I applaud his honesty.
He also notes the deplorable absence of archaeology in modern Jesus research, owing largely to the majority of scholars involved in the research being text-based and having no training IN archaeology; this results in scholars either ignoring valuable evidence or buying into half-baked theories grounded in their own misreading of the archaeological evidence. The same can be said about their lack of knowledge regarding the Hebrew Bible and pseudepigrapha Good stuff!
He capably and admirably disarms many of the more sensationalistic theories about Jesus and early Christianity, demonstrating that, compared to the four canonical Gospels, these theories are actually far more fantastic (cf. also Freud's "Moses & Monotheism"). He points out that claims that Jesus was an Egyptian-trained sorcerer, a Cynic sage, a Buddhist philosopher, a Gnostic teacher, etc. ignore the profoundly Jewish nature of everything anyone contemporaneous to Jesus ever records him as having taught.
He notes that, while Jesus being married would make perfect sense given his religious and historical context, there is no historical evidence that he was. He also points out that the only "evidence" of any sort of romantic relationship is a fragmentary portion of the apocryphal Gospel of Philip involving Mary Magdalene which was a creation of an extremely localized Gnostic community in Egypt written at least a century (most scholars estimate 2 centuries) after the "canonical" Gospels are estimated to have been written. Scholars often cite a lack of evidence for a traditional interpretation as a justification for discarding that interpretation; yet they also IGNORE absence of evidence when it might undermine their own theories and interpretations. I applaud his honesty.
He also notes the deplorable absence of archaeology in modern Jesus research, owing largely to the majority of scholars involved in the research being text-based and having no training IN archaeology; this results in scholars either ignoring valuable evidence or buying into half-baked theories grounded in their own misreading of the archaeological evidence. The same can be said about their lack of knowledge regarding the Hebrew Bible and pseudepigrapha Good stuff!
December 3, 2017
Excellent. As was said in an earlier review: "I LOVE this text's indictments of both modern scholarship and old-time theology".
May 23, 2015
Charlesworth, a significant contributor to research on the historical Jesus over the last few decades, has written a reliable, readable introduction to the topic.
Pros:
Representative - Charlesworth's goal is to introduce readers to the scholarly consensus in the field. He gives both a lucid history of the field and a survey of its current (as of 2008) topography. I did not detect significant bias. Charlesworth relates contradictory opinions while marking his preferences.
Methodologically focused - How Jesus Research scholars come to their conclusions is its own chapter, but methodological consciousness pervades the entire work. Thus, the book makes an intellectual appeal to readers rather than just forcing conclusions upon them.
Readable - Charlesworth has done a fantastic job reducing jargon and explaining difficult concepts. He also organized the book in a question-answer format, which feels much less clinical than most academic books.
Cons:
Terrible printing - Abingdon Press really screwed up. The pages are stuffed with text; small margins and insufficient line spacing. It's hideous. Worse, in one key section, all italicization was removed, though Charlesworth had specifically added the italicization in order to show presumed additions to the text. As it stands, the section is incomprehensible. Shame on you, Abingdon.
Tangents - Occasionally Charlesworth wanders off track to discuss how Christians ought to respond to Jesus Research. That's really not his job, and it's not how the book advertised itself. It excludes non-Christian readers.
Organization - Overall it's pretty good, but the questions and answers don't always line up too sensibly with the chapters, and some questions seem to get disproportionate attention. A few sections also drift toward lists of data.
Conclusion: I recommend this book for a solid, quick read. It will likely lead the reader to more substantive, focused studies of interest.
Pros:
Representative - Charlesworth's goal is to introduce readers to the scholarly consensus in the field. He gives both a lucid history of the field and a survey of its current (as of 2008) topography. I did not detect significant bias. Charlesworth relates contradictory opinions while marking his preferences.
Methodologically focused - How Jesus Research scholars come to their conclusions is its own chapter, but methodological consciousness pervades the entire work. Thus, the book makes an intellectual appeal to readers rather than just forcing conclusions upon them.
Readable - Charlesworth has done a fantastic job reducing jargon and explaining difficult concepts. He also organized the book in a question-answer format, which feels much less clinical than most academic books.
Cons:
Terrible printing - Abingdon Press really screwed up. The pages are stuffed with text; small margins and insufficient line spacing. It's hideous. Worse, in one key section, all italicization was removed, though Charlesworth had specifically added the italicization in order to show presumed additions to the text. As it stands, the section is incomprehensible. Shame on you, Abingdon.
Tangents - Occasionally Charlesworth wanders off track to discuss how Christians ought to respond to Jesus Research. That's really not his job, and it's not how the book advertised itself. It excludes non-Christian readers.
Organization - Overall it's pretty good, but the questions and answers don't always line up too sensibly with the chapters, and some questions seem to get disproportionate attention. A few sections also drift toward lists of data.
Conclusion: I recommend this book for a solid, quick read. It will likely lead the reader to more substantive, focused studies of interest.
January 26, 2009
Good overview of "Jesus Research" from a trusted source. I like Charlesworth because he's willing to say we can know quite a lot about Jesus. He stands up for trying to understand who he was historically. The Jesus he comes up with is affirming to my faith. Provisional from a historical point of view - but an amazing historical figure.
This particular book is short (131 pp) and fairly didactic in form, adopting a question-and-answer format as a structure for the book. It avoids footnotes and uses instead a series of abbreviations for major works. I've read enough New-Testament scholarship to start to map out the terrain of thinkers, so this freer style was fine for me.
The physical packaging of the book was not great. Very thin margins like those cheap Dover books. That left wide margins, which are harder for me to read.
I like Charlesworth because:
- He gives good attention to the reasoning from sources - not just summarizing the consensus opinion (as Marcus Borg tends to do).
- He takes The Gospels seriously as historial record
- He places Jesus firmly within a Jewish context - Jesus was a devout Jew, not the first Christian
- He is open to all the scholarship bearing on Church origins, including various forms of text analysis and criticism, archeology, anthropology, sociology etc.
- He's got a good heart!
This particular book is short (131 pp) and fairly didactic in form, adopting a question-and-answer format as a structure for the book. It avoids footnotes and uses instead a series of abbreviations for major works. I've read enough New-Testament scholarship to start to map out the terrain of thinkers, so this freer style was fine for me.
The physical packaging of the book was not great. Very thin margins like those cheap Dover books. That left wide margins, which are harder for me to read.
I like Charlesworth because:
- He gives good attention to the reasoning from sources - not just summarizing the consensus opinion (as Marcus Borg tends to do).
- He takes The Gospels seriously as historial record
- He places Jesus firmly within a Jewish context - Jesus was a devout Jew, not the first Christian
- He is open to all the scholarship bearing on Church origins, including various forms of text analysis and criticism, archeology, anthropology, sociology etc.
- He's got a good heart!
January 3, 2017
A very interesting overview of the 'historical Jesus' studies. I think the author takes a very balanced approach and admits several times that what an individual believes about Jesus divinity and mission could not be proven through the study of history. These things require faith. There is simply not enough historical data to reconstruct Jesus' life through the documents, even if the documents (including the New Testament) had not been edited in certain areas or written centuries after Jesus' life. However, it is very interesting to read about sources outside the New Testament that attest to Jesus' existence, miracles, teachings, etc. One specific point I found interesting is that most scholars agree that Jesus was likely not born in Bethlehem, since the Book of Mormon has received some criticism for indicating the 'land of Jerusalem'.
If you are interested in the topic, I think this book is a good choice.
If you are interested in the topic, I think this book is a good choice.
August 19, 2014
Good summary of the idea of the historical Jesus, and how it can inform our image of Jesus. I still think it's an fool's errand for academics since there just isn't enough data. The confidence intervals for any biblical scholarship position are incredibly large, as there are so many different possibilities for why something was written the way it was. Because biblical scholars deal with weak data, and everybody wants to able to stake some firm position, they tend to be more sure than is objectively warranted given the quality of the data. There's my soap box, but overall the book did succeed in informing my perspective on Jesus' background. Also, as a Book of Mormon believer it was interesting to see that most scholars don't think that Jesus was actually born in Bethlehem.
March 26, 2013
Short and easy to read book that presents the various views of the historical Jesus, what's pertinent or less pertinent in them, what are the different methodologies used, how this or that idea was reached, etc.
The author remains objective and presents all the views in the same manner. It's the historian writing, not the believer, and that's appreciable.
A very good starting place for anyone interested in the subject, this "Essential Guide" really deserves its title.
The author remains objective and presents all the views in the same manner. It's the historian writing, not the believer, and that's appreciable.
A very good starting place for anyone interested in the subject, this "Essential Guide" really deserves its title.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews