There is one thing those proposing eyewitness to a Pilate Jesus crucifixion are forgetting – people living around 30/33 c.e. would not have a memory blank slate. i.e. they would remember earlier than 30/33 c.e. historical/political events. Thus, an assumed eyewitness to a Jesus crucified by Pilate would also be in procession of an earlier memory about Rome executing a King of the Jews. (Antigonus in 37 b.c.e.) How would such an assumed eyewitness, to the gospel event of 30/33 c.e., incorporate and thus manage these two memories without some distortion taking place in their retelling – and the further and yet further retelling until, as Bart writes, some 50 to 60 years later Matthew writes his gospel….One may as well argue that the gospel Pilate crucifixion of Jesus in 30/33 c.e. is actually a literary remembrance of the 70 year earlier Roman execution of the last King and High Priest of the Jews in 37 b.c.e.
One cannot build a plausible gospel theory regarding memory without taking into account the historical, political or cultural memories of those living in 30/33 c.e. The historical context in which the gospel story is set is a context with it’s own panorama of remembrances. Whatever memory of the years 30/33 c.e. those living at that time would have – these memories cannot be isolated from the wider historical, political or cultural memories associated with that time frame.
Bart’s new book not withstanding, memory could well be the Achilles Heel of the Jesus historicist theory.
I am interested in the pre-ministry life of Jesus. Unfortunately, except for the myths, I am unaware of any empirical sources for credible information about him or his family. I also have not found more specific information about his brother, James, who led the movement in Jerusalem. Was he a disciple before the death of Jesus? Was he in fact one of the twelve apostles? Was he married? How did he become so prominent after the crucifixion, even though he was given no such role in the gospels.
It is frustrating that information is so limited, preventing investigation of such hypotheses as “Jesus was a widower who lost his wife to childbirth or illness, creating a spiritual crisis that led him to John’s movement.” How can this be tested without sources? And yet, it is so very tantalizing!
Collective Memory Distortion and the
Quest for the Historical Jesus
- Zeba Crook
** you do not have permission to see this link **
”It is this last point that is key: we cannot take at face value the confidence people have in the accuracy or historicity of their own memories.
In fact, there is according to some studies an inverse relationship between
confidence in accuracy and actual accuracy.84 So, memory theory does not,
pace Dunn, Bauckham, Le Donne and McIver, give us cause for optimism
concerning the historicity of the Gospels. On the contrary, memory theory
ought to leave us feeling deeply troubled about what we can actually know
about the past. Alain Gowling writes that ‘it is this capacity of texts to create or establish memory—if you prefer, to fictionalize—that renders them somewhat problematic as sources of historical information’.85 Collective memory theory might enrich our understanding of how Gospel materials
were transmitted, and how they may have taken shape, both in the period
of oral transmission and in the period of literary redaction, but, properly
understood, it does not provide shelter in the reliability wars.
————————————-
So – memory theory ”…does not provide shelter in the reliability wars.”
What does that say about Jesus Before the Gospels? Can’t find him I’m afraid…
lwwdsw said
I am interested in the pre-ministry life of Jesus. Unfortunately, except for the myths, I am unaware of any empirical sources for credible information about him or his family. I also have not found more specific information about his brother, James, who led the movement in Jerusalem. Was he a disciple before the death of Jesus? Was he in fact one of the twelve apostles? Was he married? How did he become so prominent after the crucifixion, even though he was given no such role in the gospels.It is frustrating that information is so limited, preventing investigation of such hypotheses as “Jesus was a widower who lost his wife to childbirth or illness, creating a spiritual crisis that led him to John’s movement.” How can this be tested without sources? And yet, it is so very tantalizing!
empirical sources?
You might want to familiarize yourself with the critical method. The Historical-Critical Method: A Guide for the Perplexed By David R Law. Pretty sure you can get it on Amazon for around $20
RE: James, Roughly speaking James is believed to have been a convert post resurrection. In Matthew he is described as someone who thinks Jesus is crazy. According to Gary Habermas, James had a sighting. It is generally conceded that James had an experience convincing him, his brother was ressurected leading him to convert.
spiker said
lwwdsw said
I am interested in the pre-ministry life of Jesus. Unfortunately, except for the myths, I am unaware of any empirical sources for credible information about him or his family. I also have not found more specific information about his brother, James, who led the movement in Jerusalem. Was he a disciple before the death of Jesus? Was he in fact one of the twelve apostles? Was he married? How did he become so prominent after the crucifixion, even though he was given no such role in the gospels.It is frustrating that information is so limited, preventing investigation of such hypotheses as “Jesus was a widower who lost his wife to childbirth or illness, creating a spiritual crisis that led him to John’s movement.” How can this be tested without sources? And yet, it is so very tantalizing!
empirical sources?
You might want to familiarize yourself with the critical method. The Historical-Critical Method: A Guide for the Perplexed By David R Law. Pretty sure you can get it on Amazon for around $20
RE: James, Roughly speaking James is believed to have been a convert post resurrection. In Matthew he is described as someone who thinks Jesus is crazy. According to Gary Habermas, James had a sighting. It is generally conceded that James had an experience convincing him, his brother was ressurected leading him to convert.
Fascinating. He appears to gain a leadership position afterwards right? Him alongside Peter. Wonder how that went.
If only we had more understanding of that 20 year gap.
spiker said
Alongside, Peter? Considering that they probably either knew each other or at least of each other, it’s not surprising at all that a close relative acquired a position of leadership in a very new movement? What 20 year gap?
It is kinda surprising if he was a new convert to the movement.
20 year gap, I’m referring to the period after Jesus but before Pauls first letters. We know little of this era. We can infer Peter and James led the movement but we don’t really know that much of what was happening there. There are no known texts from that era so we are in the dark.
MMahmud said
It is kinda surprising if he was a new convert to the movement.
Yes, MMahmud I addressed that point in my first response. It wasn’t like I didn’t realize James was a NEW convert ( Is there any such thing as an old convert?). However, as I pointed out the movement, itself was also NEW. James wasn’t just some guy who converted.This is a brother of the central figure joining the movement at a time when they are trying to convince others that Jesus was the suffering Messiah. What better witness to have than the man’s brother who can tell ppl he once thought his brother was crazy, but then saw him risen from the dead? Further if they were brothers, they may have shared some leadership traits.
The implication from your remarks is that you think there would have been some sort of power struggle, but I fail to see why that would necessarily be so. Paul mentions him alongside Peter in Galatians 1:19. My suspicion is that Peter would have been deferential towards his masters brother. Further, if the Bible is at all accurate, Peter seems to have been a bit of a coward.
It’s one thing to be skeptical, another to characterize things in a way that makes them sound unlikely.
Re: the 20 year gap. Yea, but you can understand how talking about that in the context of James leadership would give the impression you meant James came along 20 years later.
spiker said
MMahmud said
It is kinda surprising if he was a new convert to the movement.Yes, MMahmud I addressed that point in my first response. It wasn’t like I didn’t realize James was a NEW convert ( Is there any such thing as an old convert?). However, as I pointed out the movement, itself was also NEW. James wasn’t just some guy who converted.This is a brother of the central figure joining the movement at a time when they are trying to convince others that Jesus was the suffering Messiah. What better witness to have than the man’s brother who can tell ppl he once thought his brother was crazy, but then saw him risen from the dead? Further if they were brothers, they may have shared some leadership traits.
The implication from your remarks is that you think there would have been some sort of power struggle, but I fail to see why that would necessarily be so. Paul mentions him alongside Peter in Galatians 1:19. My suspicion is that Peter would have been deferential towards his masters brother. Further, if the Bible is at all accurate, Peter seems to have been a bit of a coward.
It’s one thing to be skeptical, another to characterize things in a way that makes them sound unlikely.
Re: the 20 year gap. Yea, but you can understand how talking about that in the context of James leadership would give the impression you meant James came along 20 years later.
Good points, especially with the Peter being deferential by nature.
I definitely didn’t think there was some power struggle though. We’d probably know about something like that if it were the case.
Re: the 20 year gap. Yea, but you can understand how talking about that in the context of James leadership would give the impression you meant James came along 20 years later.
Yup, my bad. What I meant was, we don’t seem to know much about Peter and James and the core of the movement in those formative years.
A clarification is in order I think. It’s not a question of being a convert, new or old. The early disciples considered themselves to be perfectly pious Jews. In following Jesus they weren’t converting to anything.
James seems to have had a reputation for great piety. I doubt that began only after the death of Jesus. What might have begun after the death of Jesus was the acceptance that Jesus had been privileged by God. It’s useful to remember that the negative views of Jesus’ family came only much much later in the literary record. Paul obviously chafes but he is forced to defer to the “pillars” of the early Jesus community. Paul defends his own ministry but he never really questions James’ authority.
Good point about Peter deferring to James.
Stephen said
A clarification is in order I think. It’s not a question of being a convert, new or old. The early disciples considered themselves to be perfectly pious Jews. In following Jesus they weren’t converting to anything.
Sure, but-if we take the biblical account seriously- James is characterized as someone who thought Jesus was crazy or at any rate
was not a follower. In this context he was a convert (after reportedly after seeing the risen Jesus)to what Geza Vermes characterized as a renewal movement.
James seems to have had a reputation for great piety. I doubt that began only after the death of Jesus. What might have begun after the death of Jesus was the acceptance that Jesus had been privileged by God. It’s useful to remember that the negative views of Jesus’ family came only much much later in the literary record. Paul obviously chafes but he is forced to defer to the “pillars” of the early Jesus community. Paul defends his own ministry but he never really questions James’ authority.
Good point about Peter deferring to James.
Yea, that’s entirely plausible.
Tim Widowfield, at Vridar org, is reviewing ‘Jesus Before the Gospels’. Presently has three blog posts online – more to come….
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
————-
New blog post by Tim Widowfield.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)