Christobiography

Demonstrates the reliability of the canonical gospels by exploring the genre of ancient biography The canonical gospels are ancient biographies, narratives of Jesus’s life. The authors of these gospels were intentional in how they handled historical information and sources. Building on recent work in the study of ancient biographies, Craig Keener argues that the writers of the canonical gospels followed the literary practices of other biographers in their day. In Christobiography he explores the character of ancient biography and urges students and scholars to appreciate the gospel writers’ method and degree of accuracy in recounting the ministry of Jesus. Keener’s Christobiography has far-reaching implications for the study of the canonical gospels and historical-Jesus research. Table of Contents: Introduction Part 1. Biographies about Jesus 2. Not a Novel Proposal 3. Examples and Development of Ancient Biography 4. What Sort of Biographies Are the Gospels? 5. What Did First-Century Audiences Expect of Biographies? Part 2 Biographies and History 6. Biographies and Historical Information 7. What Historical Interests Meant in Antiquity 8. Luke-Acts as Biohistory 9. Sources Close to the Events Part 3. Testing the Range of Deviation 10. Case Studies: Biographies of Recent Characters Use Prior Information 11. Flex Room: Literary Techniques in Ancient Biographies Part 4. Two Objections to Gospels as Historical Biographies 12. What about Miracles? 13. What about John? Part 5. Memories about Jesus: Memories before Memoirs 14. Memory Studies 15. Jesus Was a Teacher 16. Oral Tradition, Oral History 17. The Implications of This Study

Given the perpetual problem of the historical Jesus, there remains an ongoing posing of the question to and a continuous seeking of the meaningfulness of Christology. From the earliest reckoning with the relationship between Jesus of Nazareth and the Christ of faith, what it means to do Christology today remains at the methodological center of the task and scope of every systematic theology. Whether giving an account of Albert Schweitzer’s bringing an end to the quest for the historical Jesus in 1906, or attending to Rudolf Bultmann’s period of no quest culminating with his demythologization project in the 1940s, how we still think of Christology as a matter of questions and concerns with meaning speaks to an unavoidable philosophizing of Christology. In this way, The Philosophy of Christology offers both a particular history of Christology in conjunction with a particular philosophy of Christology, which assesses the theological contributions by a group of Bultmannians following Bultmann in the 1950s and 1960s up to what can be reimagined by repurposing Jacques Derrida’s philosophical question into the meaning of love in 2002.

The trustworthiness of the Gospels rests not only on claims of inspiration, but also on eyewitness testimony. And our confidence in that testimony is directly related, Daniel Moore contends, to when the first Gospel was published. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Christians to consider whether an effective case can be made for asserting that the first Gospel was published within several years or perhaps a decade of the resurrection. To this end, this book offers a series of arguments demonstrating that an early publication of Matthew is reasonable, defensible, and preferable over the popular view that several decades passed before Gospels were published. These arguments include a reasonableness argument that the early church had the means, motive, and opportunity to produce a Gospel; an argument from the church fathers, which also resolves supposed conflicts; exegetical arguments from Galatians; apologetic-motivational arguments from Christian scholars over the last several centuries; arguments based on ancient perspectives on aging memory and on the obligation of orators to write, concerns which would have motivated the apostles to publish early; and an explanatory power argument. Ultimately, the author will encourage the reader to view Matthew as the Messiah’s royal chronicler.

Are the criteria of authenticity of Jesus research idiosyncratic to New Testament studies, vehicles of subjectivity, and fundamentally flawed vestiges of form criticism as some claim today? If so, why do opponents of the criteria-approach still use them? Or, are the criteria the tools of general historiography as others assert? If true, none have adequately demonstrated where and how principles such as multiple attestation, general and historical coherence, dissimilarity and embarrassment feature in general historiographic method—until now. This study analyzes the methods of general historians and Jesus researchers (who favor or oppose the criteria) and demonstrates that, regardless of sub-discipline, authenticating criteria are inherent to the practice of historiography.

For the New Testament writers, the Old Testament scriptures and the teachings of Jesus were key sources of authority and influence. When these influences are considered alongside each other, each can illuminate the other, deepening the New Testament writers' presentation of Jesus and our understanding of their interpretations. In Jesus and Scripture, Tom Parker examines the way in which Hebrews, James, and 1 and 2 Peter deal with these two different sources of authority, how they relate to each other, and what shifts have occurred historically and theologically within the writing of these texts. Treating the four epistles methodologically, Parker examines the particular ways in which each writer draws on the Hebrew scriptures. Ultimately, he argues convincingly that the nascent Jesus tradition, particularly via oral routes, influenced the way the Old Testament was processed by these various New Testament writers.

For centuries scholars have analyzed the composition of Luke-Acts presupposing that the reference to "many" accounts in Luke's Preface indicates the written texts which served as the author's primary sources of information. To justify this portrait of Luke as a text-based author, scholars have appealed to analogies with the text-based authors Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Diodorus Siculus, Plutarch, and Arrian. Luke among the Ancient Historians challenges this portrait of Luke's method through surveying the origins and development of ancient Greek historiography in chapters on Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius, Josephus, and Luke. By focusing on the values and practices of ancient historians, Peters demonstrates not only that ancient authors following the model of Thucydides regarded the testimony of eyewitnesses, as opposed to texts, as the proper sources for historians but that Luke emulated the values, practices, and craft terminology of the contemporary historiographical tradition. Taking seriously the self-presentation of Luke as a reporter of contemporary events who claims to write on the basis of "eyewitnesses from the beginning," and personal investigation, this book argues against analogies with text-based historians who wrote about non-contemporary events and instead situates Luke within a portrait of the values and practices of historians of contemporary events.

This book uses the recent findings of cognitive and clinical psychology to draw a picture of the historical Jesus. The author uses recent research on conversational memory and clinical psychology in order to shine a light on the way Jesus was. This book argues that Jesus suffered from manic-depressive illness. He identified with God. He suffered from extreme mood changes and felt great compassion towards people. All of these are mental states which may be triggered by manic depression. Manic depression is not a dementing illness. This author is not saying that Jesus suffered from a backward type of psychosis. But manic depression, when manifested in talented persons, acts as a catalyst to trigger artistic creativity. Many great artists and poets have suffered from manic depression: Byron, Schumann, Tennyson, van Gogh, Fitzgerald, and Lowell, to name a few. It is among great poets and artists such as these that the author place the historical Jesus. This book therefore argues that the writers of the Gospels, when they record Jesus as asserting his divinity, were conveying an accurate picture of him. His assertions of divinity were not fabrications of the early church.

A Catholic Quest for the Historical Christ brings together a collection of interrelated essays on the historical Jesus and primitive Christology. Sensitive to the diverse, but traditionally Protestant assumptions and perspectives of the "Quest" as well as to the widely lamented disconnect between New Testament exegesis and classical dogmatic theology, an alternative approach is proposed in these pages. Ecumenical and conciliar reference points, along with non-confessional historical methods (e.g. archeology) shape the basic project, which nevertheless assumes some distinctive and important Catholic contours. This particular synthesis injects the voice of a missing interlocutor into an established conversation that has not infrequently been both historically confused and dogmatically (and philosophically) numb. The book is divided into three sections: Historical Foundations, Theological Perspectives, and Jesus and the Scriptures. While the individual chapters represent independent probes, the cumulative argument and arc of the study drives in clear and concerted directions. After a first approach to the Gospel data, attentive at once to historiographical and historical questions, a series of interventions reorienting the present scholarly discussion are suggested. These various, foundational essays lead, finally, to a sustained mediation on the mind of Christ, considered as a unique reader of the Scriptures: a meditation having its proper reflex and reflection in the way Christians themselves, as readers of the Gospels, participate in the Lord's own encounter with the living Word.