Greg Singleton on the Hysterical Search for the Historical Jesus

WARNING: Anyone who doesn't want to endure the musings of an aging and tired historian should just delete and go on to the next message. Before we get too worked up, one way or the other, about the "Historical Jesus," let's consider the extent to which "historical" is a problematic term.

---

I have been immersed in the study of history for over three decades, and have yet to come up for air. As a result I have developed a sense of humility and skepticism in the face of evidence.

I am humble because I know how tempting it is to read preconceptions, predilections, and wishes into the evidence. I have been there, done that, and still do it when I leave humility behind. It took a long time to learn the difference between what the evidence incontrovertibly and explicitly says and what the evidence will support. One can always find the latter. The former is far more difficult to spot. A regular part of my process of writing is to subject my first draft to a rigorous cross-examination (sometimes amounting to a deconstruction of my own explanatory structure) in order to remove as many of those preconceptions, predilections and wishes as I can find. In short, I am humble because I am aware of my own ego-centric way of reading the evidence, and realize that it is not adequate. (This is an ego-centricism I share with approximately 100% of the species.)

I am skeptical because I know how one piece of evidence can raise serious questions about another piece of evidence. Given thousands of pieces of evidence, the picture usually becomes far more muddled than it initially appeared when only a handful of bits of evidence were at issue.

I began my graduate studies in Ancient History (yes, I know how that phrase could be read--be kind). I switched to Modern in large part because the difficulties inherent in the study of history generally seemed to reach exponential proportions in both the Ancient and Medieval sub-fields.

Therefore, the idea that we can actually know the "Historical Jesus" is one that strikes me as more than problematic.

I am looking at the shelves in my office right now, and, for no particular reason, my gaze has settled on the Jacksonian Era. I immediately see seven different books characterizing the period in seven remarkably different ways. I know six of the seven historians quite well, and know that they share a common store-house of archival and printed sources, and am sure that is also true of the seventh. Their interpretations are often mutually exclusive (thus not allowing us the comfortable notion that we can just blend them all and then we will have the historical "truth"), and all are equally well supported by the evidence. I know the evidence well enough to know that none of the interpretations represents what the evidence incontrovertibly and explicitly say. In fact, I suspect that the evidence is incapable of yielding anything so precise.

I can point to similar diverse interpretations of Jackson himself, with similar results.

I am now looking at the shelf containing works by scholars trying to figure out the relationship between religion and American society and culture generally. Now this is an area I know intimately. As it turns out, my own work is absolutely correct, but, alas, the evidence merely supports my interpretation. What I say is not what the evidence incontrovertibly and explicitly says. Hence you will just have to take my word that I am correct. :)

Now, concerning the "Historical Jesus," I can't generate much interest. Not nearly as much evidence about Him and His times as there is about Jackson and the Jacksonian Era. Furthermore, the nature of the evidence is somewhat more problematic than is the case with Modern sources (though there are problems a-plenty there as well). The best that we can hope for is a variety of "Historical Jesum" none of which the evidence compels us to accept, and all of which are evidentially probable.

For this aging and tired historian, the Jesus who died and rose again, the Jesus who is the Word incarnate, and the Jesus who promised eternal life will have to suffice. The evidence may or may not support this view of Jesus, but my faith does.

Pax et bonum,

Greg

---

Gregory Holmes Singleton, Ph.D. (pronounced "Fudd")
Professor and Curmudgeon of Record
Department of Temporal Process Analysis (Some call it "History")
Northeastern Illinois University Chicago 60625
G-Singleton@neiu (773)794-2805
http://gamut.neiu.edu/~ghsingle/

Lutheran Bookmarks

Site map

Text listing