From: rsquires@cyclops.eece.unm.edu (Roger Squires)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
Subject: The Historical Jesus VI:   Conclusion and References
Keywords: historical jesus, creation/evolution debate,
Date: 11 Apr 92 06:17:34 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

This is the sixth in a series of posts examining the historicity of
Jesus, specifically whether the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses.

Conclusion
	Well, I have demonstrated ad nauseum that the New Testament 
accounts of Jesus are at best second-hand, and that the classical,
non-Christian writings do no more than say that Christians existed,
with Jesus and Pilate mentioned casually.  Thus I have conclusively
refuted Mr. Kiledal's criticism of my original post, and reconfirmed
every assertion I made therein.  Now let us get beyond the little
debating games and ask "So what?"

	The point of my going to all of this trouble is partly for my
own education of course, but I hope that it will also serve in this
capacity for others.  Christians need to be taught that the history
behind their sacred book is complex; that the book is multi-layered,
not as simplistic, black and white, *or* authoritative as they perhaps
have been led to believe.  It may disturb them that the historical accuracy
of the accounts of Jesus is called into question, but that is the same
situation they were in with Genesis and Darwinian evolution in the 19th
century, and Christianity managed to whether the storm.  It emerged
somewhat weaker, I think, and once modern biblical research is widely
disseminated, it's claims among adherents will doubtless be weakened
somewhat more.  This is not all to the bad (it encourages toleration)
but is also unavoidable and predictable given the success of science over
the last few hundred years.

	Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright
	morning hours, ran to the market place, and cried incessantly, 
	"I seek God!  I seek God!" ...they yelled and laughed.  The madman
	jumped into their midst and pierced them with his glances.

	"Whither is God" he cried, "I shall tell you.  We have killed him -
	you and I.  All of us are his murderers.  But how have we done this?
	How were we able to drink up the sea?  Who gave us the sponge to
	wipe away the entire horizon?  What did we do when we unchained
	this earth from its sun?  Whither is it moving now?  Whither are
	we moving now?  Away from all suns?  Are we not plunging continually?
	Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions?  Is there any up or
	down left?  Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing?
	Do we not feel the breath of empty space?  Has it not become colder?
	...Do we not smell anything yet of God's decomposition?  Gods too
	decompose.  God is dead.  God remains dead.  And we have killed him.
	How shall we, the murderers of all murderers, comfort ourselves?
	What was holiest and most powerful of all that the world has
	yet owned has bled to death under our knives.  Who will wipe this
	blood off us?

	Here the madman fell silent and looked again at his listeners;
	and they too were silent and stared at him in astonishment.  At last
	he threw his lantern on the ground, and it broke and went out.
	"I come too early," he said then;..."This deed is still more distant
	from them than the most distant stars - and yet they have done it
	themselves."

	It has been related further that on that same day the madman entered
	divers churches and there sang his requiem aeternam deo.  Led out
	and called to account, he is said to have replied each time,
	"What are these churches now if they are not the tombs and
	sepulchers of God?"



[1]	A Critical Introduction to the New Testament
	Reginald H. Fuller
	BS 2330.2 F84, 1966
This one is a no-nonsense, somewhat reductionistic account.

[2]	The Formation of the New Testament
	Eduard Lohse
	BS 2330.2 L6413, 1981
I haven't studied this one as much as the others, so I have no comment.

[3]	Introduction to the New Testament, An approach to its problems
	W. Marxsen
	BS 2330.2 M313, 1968
Marxsen has a concept that he wants to get across, that of 'layers of
tradition' in the compilation of the NT, and his writing is more attractive
than the others (even in translation).  Worthwhile reading all the way through.

[4]	Understanding the New Testament, Fourth Ed.
	Howard Clark Kee
	BS 2407 K37, 1983
A popular, up to date intro, worth reading.

[5]	The New Testament as Canon:  An Introduction
	Brevard S. Childs
	BS 2330.2 C493, 1984
It is impossible to stand Childs until you understand the agenda that he
has:  He is reacting against the reductionism inherent in source/etc.
criticism, and attempting to assert his own holistic interpretation
of the NT.  So for instance, the question of redaction of a text is not
so important in itself, but rather what it shows about the community
the work was a part of and how it relates to how the community viewed the
purpose of the work in the context of their belief.  In other words, pretty
wordy and roundabout, but useful.

[6]	"Who Do Men Say That I Am?"
	Cullen Murphy
	The Atlantic Monthly, December 1986, p.37
An excellent introduction to the topic, well written, highly recommended.

References to Christians in Roman Classical Authors (Just ones I've read)
	Tactitus, Annals: XV. 43
	Suetonius, Lives: Books VI and VIII
	Plinius Secundus, Epistolae: Number 96

Roger Squires
rsquires@cyclops.eece.unm.edu