Criterion of contextual credibility

Last updated

The criterion of contextual credibility, [1] also variously called the criterion of Semitisms and Palestinian background [2] or the criterion of Semitic language phenomena and Palestinian environment, [3] is a tool used by Biblical scholars to help determine whether certain actions or sayings by Jesus in the New Testament are from the Historical Jesus. Simply put, if a tradition about Jesus does not fit the linguistic, cultural, historical and social environment of Jewish Aramaic-speaking 1st-century Palestine, it is probably not authentic. The linguistic and the environmental criteria are treated separately by some scholars, but taken together by others. [4]

Contents

The criterion emerged as separate but interrelated criteria: the 'criterion of Semitic language phenomena' (first introduced in 1925 by C. F. Burney), [5] [6] followed by and linked to the 'criterion of Palestinian environment' by scholars such as Joachim Jeremias (1947), [7] in the period between the so-called 'first' and 'second' quest for the historical Jesus (1906–1953). [5]

Description

Several preliminary discussions and inquiries into whether and how the Greek phrases in the New Testament must be translatable back to Aramaic and make sense in that language in order to allow for the possibility that Jesus had really said them, go back to the 17th century, and some early attempts to do so were thoroughly assessed and dismissed by Albert Schweitzer in The Quest of the Historical Jesus (1906). [8] [6] However, according to Stanley E. Porter, it was C. F. Burney (1925) who reignited the scholarly debate by formulating the 'criterion of Semitic language phenomena', soon joined by Jeremias who added the environmental features of Palestine, and then others. [5] [6]

Jeremias's 'criterion of traces of Aramaic' evaluates a biblical saying based on the presence of possibly Aramaic vocabulary or grammar, while the similar criterion of the Palestinian environment considers a saying authentic if it fits in the Palestinian setting of Jesus' time. [9] [10] The linguistic criterion observes that the New Testament was written in Koine Greek but contains a high number of words and phrases called Semitisms: a combination of poetic or vernacular koine Greek with Hebrew and Aramaic influences. [11] [12] A Semitism is the linguistic usage, in the Greek in a non-Greek fashion, of an expression or construction typical of Hebrew or Aramaic. In other words, a Semitism is Greek in Hebrew or Aramaic style. [13] [14] The environmental criterion observes features mentioned in the sources that point to origin of the tradition in Palestine. [7] However, when combinations of certain linguistic, geographical or historical elements in a tradition produce anachronisms, anatopisms or other impossibilities, the tradition defies contextual credibility. [15] : 23:38 

John P. Meier (1991) defined a 'criterion of traces of Aramaic' and a 'criterion of Palestinian environment', noting they are closely connected. [16] Bart D. Ehrman (1999) combined them into the 'criterion of contextual credibility'. [17] [2] [18] This "asserts that traditions are more likely to be reliable if they conform well to what is known of the historical and social situation of the time", namely 1st-century Palestine. [2] [18] Arthur J. Bellinzoni (2016) distinguished a 'criterion of Semitism or Aramaism' for all linguistic issues, and a 'criterion of contextual credibility' for 'the historical, political, social, and religious contexts' of Jesus as "a Galilean Jew (...) in Roman Palestine for a brief period around 30", with which documents must be consistent. [19]

Examples of its use

Nicodemus (left) talking to Jesus. Painting (1899) by Henry Ossawa Tanner Henry Ossawa Tanner - Jesus and nicodemus.jpg
Nicodemus (left) talking to Jesus. Painting (1899) by Henry Ossawa Tanner

Matthew begins with a Hebrew gematria (a method of interpreting Hebrew by computing the numerical value of words). In Matthew 1:1, Jesus is designated "the son of David, the son of Abraham". The numerical value of David's name in Hebrew is 14 (דוד = 4 + 6 + 4), so this genealogy has 14 generations from Abraham to David, 14 from David to the Babylonian exile, and 14 from the exile to the Christ (Matthew 1:17). [20] Such linguistic peculiarities tie New Testament texts to Aramaic-speaking Jews (with knowledge of the Hebrew Bible, or Septuagint translations) in 1st-century Palestine. [21]

Ehrman (1999) cited the conversation between Nicodemus and Jesus in chapter 3 of the Gospel of John: their confusion is based on the multiple meanings of the Greek word ανωθεν/anothen ('again' and 'from above'), but in 1st-century Palestine, they would have spoken Aramaic, which has no word with the same double meaning; therefore, the conversation could not have taken place as narrated. [22] [15] : 26:10  Another example given is saying 37 of the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, which says: "When you undress without being ashamed, and you take your clothes and put them under your feet as little children and tramp on them, then you shall see the Son of the Living one, and you shall not fear." This saying fits the (Egyptian) 2nd-century context, when a Gnostic myth, which could make sense of the saying, was influential, but it does not fit the early 1st-century Palestinian context of Jesus. [1] [15] : 25:08  Likewise, the Gospel of Peter claims that Jesus was crucified by Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea), rather than Pontius Pilate (Roman governor of Judea), which contradicts what is known about how the Romans governed their provinces and thus fails the criterion of contextual credibility, [15] : 25:39  aside from also failing the criteria of independent attestation (because all other early sources hold Pilate responsible) and dissimilarity (because it serves the author's demonstrable anti-Jewish bias). [23]

Bellinzoni (2016) argued that the words "take up their cross" in Mark 8:34 failed the criterion of dissimilarity and may thus represent an interpolation (perhaps inserted into the tradition before the author of the Gospel of Mark wrote it down), but that, when these words are removed, the rest of the verse ("If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves ... and follow me") 'meets the criterion of Aramaism or Semitism and the criterion of contextual credibility, meaning that Jesus could definitely have spoken these words to his followers in Aramaic.' [19] : 186 

Limitations

Meier (1991) warned that the linguistic and the environmental criteria are best applied in the negative sense, as the linguistic, social, and cultural environment of Palestine did not suddenly change after the death of Jesus and so traditions that were invented in Palestine during the first few decades after Jesus's death may misleadingly appear contextually authentic. [16] Ehrman (1999) agreed: "Unlike the other two criteria [of independent attestation and dissimilarity], this one serves a strictly negative function (...) to argue against a tradition, on the grounds that it does not conform to what we know about the historical and social context of Jesus' life." [22] [15] : 28:56 

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gospel</span> Books on the life and teachings of Jesus

Gospel originally meant the Christian message, but in the 2nd century it came to be used also for the books in which the message was reported. In this sense a gospel can be defined as a loose-knit, episodic narrative of the words and deeds of Jesus, culminating in his trial and death and concluding with various reports of his post-resurrection appearances.

The New Testament (NT) is the second division of the Christian biblical canon. It discusses the teachings and person of Jesus, as well as events relating to first-century Christianity. The New Testament's background, the first division of the Christian Bible, is called the Old Testament, which is based primarily upon the Hebrew Bible; together they are regarded as Sacred Scripture by Christians.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gospel of Thomas</span> Extra-canonical sayings gospel

The Gospel of Thomas is an extra-canonical sayings gospel. It was discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945 among a group of books known as the Nag Hammadi library. Scholars speculate the works were buried in response to a letter from Bishop Athanasius declaring a strict canon of Christian scripture. Scholars have proposed dates of composition as early as 60 AD and late as 250 AD, with most placing it during the second century. Many scholars have seen it as evidence of the existence of a "Q source" that might have been similar in its form as a collection of sayings of Jesus, without any accounts of his deeds or his life and death, referred to as a sayings gospel, though most conclude that Thomas depends on or harmonizes the Synoptics.

The historicity of Jesus is the question of whether Jesus historically existed. The question of historicity was generally settled in scholarship in the early 20th century. Today scholars agree that a Jewish man named Jesus of Nazareth did exist in the Herodian Kingdom of Judea and the subsequent Herodian tetrarchy in the 1st century AD, upon whose life and teachings Christianity was later constructed, but a distinction is made by scholars between 'the Jesus of history' and 'the Christ of faith'.

The term "historical Jesus" refers to the life and teachings of Jesus as interpreted through critical historical methods, in contrast to what are traditionally religious interpretations. It also considers the historical and cultural contexts in which Jesus lived. Virtually all scholars of antiquity accept that Jesus was a historical figure, and the idea that Jesus was a mythical figure has been consistently rejected by the scholarly consensus as a fringe theory. Scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, with only two events being supported by nearly universal scholarly consensus: Jesus was baptized and Jesus was crucified.

George Mamishisho Lamsa was an Assyrian author. He was born in Mar Bishu in what is now the extreme east of Turkey. A native Aramaic speaker, he translated the Aramaic Peshitta Old and New Testaments into English. He popularized the claim of the Assyrian Church of the East that the New Testament was written in Aramaic and then translated into Greek, contrary to academic consensus.

There exists a consensus among scholars that Jesus of Nazareth spoke the Aramaic language. Aramaic was the common language of Roman Judaea, and was thus also spoken by Jesus' disciples. The villages of Nazareth and Capernaum in Galilee, where he spent most of his time, were populated by Aramaic-speaking communities. Jesus probably spoke the Galilean dialect, distinguishable from that which was spoken in Roman-era Jerusalem. Based on the symbolic renaming or nicknaming of some of his apostles, it is also likely that Jesus or at least one of his apostles knew enough Koine Greek to converse with non-Judaeans. It is reasonable to assume that Jesus was well versed in Hebrew for religious purposes, as it is the liturgical language of Judaism.

The quest for the historical Jesus consists of academic efforts to determine what words and actions, if any, may be attributed to Jesus, and to use the findings to provide portraits of the historical Jesus. Conventionally, since the 18th century three scholarly quests for the historical Jesus are distinguished, each with distinct characteristics and based on different research criteria, which were often developed during each specific phase. These quests are distinguished from earlier approaches because they rely on the historical method to study biblical narratives. While textual analysis of biblical sources had taken place for centuries, these quests introduced new methods and specific techniques to establish the historical validity of their conclusions.

The Gospel of the Nazarenes is the traditional but hypothetical name given by some scholars to distinguish some of the references to, or citations of, non-canonical Jewish-Christian Gospels extant in patristic writings from other citations believed to derive from different Gospels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criterion of embarrassment</span> Critical criterion

The criterion of embarrassment is a type of biblical historical analysis in which a historical account is deemed likely to be true if the author would have no reason to invent a historical account which might embarrass them. Certain Biblical scholars have used this as a metric for assessing whether the New Testament's accounts of Jesus' actions and words are historically probable.

Yahshua is a proposed transliteration of יהושוע‎, the original Hebrew name of Jesus. The pronunciation Yahshua is philologically impossible in the original Hebrew and has support neither in archeological findings, such as the Dead Sea scrolls or inscriptions, nor in rabbinical texts as a form of Joshua. Scholarship generally considers the original form of Jesus to be Yeshua, a Hebrew Bible form of Joshua.

John Paul Meier was an American biblical scholar and Roman Catholic priest. He was author of the series A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, six other books, and more than 70 articles for peer-reviewed or solicited journals or books.

The criterion of multiple attestation, also called the criterion of independent attestation or the cross-section method, is a tool used by Biblical scholars to help determine whether certain actions or sayings by Jesus in the New Testament are from the Historical Jesus. Simply put, the more independent witnesses that report an event or saying, the better. This criterion was first developed by F. C. Burkitt in 1906, at the end of the first quest for the historical Jesus.

The criterion of dissimilarity is used in Biblical criticism to determine if a statement attributed to Jesus may be authentic. The criterion states that if a saying attributed to Jesus is different from both the Jewish traditions of his time and the early Church that followed him, it is likely to come from the historical Jesus.

The Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research is a consortium of Jewish and Christian scholars that study the Synoptic Gospels in light of the historic, linguistic and cultural milieu of Jesus. The beginnings of the collegial relationships that formed the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research can be traced back to David Flusser and Robert L. Lindsey in the 1960s.

The historical reliability of the Gospels is evaluated by experts who have not reached complete consensus. While all four canonical gospels contain some sayings and events that may meet at least one of the five criteria for historical reliability used in biblical studies, the assessment and evaluation of these elements is a matter of ongoing debate.

Philip Maurice Casey was a British scholar of New Testament and early Christianity. He was an emeritus professor at the University of Nottingham, having served there as Professor of New Testament Languages and Literature at the Department of Theology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">L source</span> Inferred oral tradition behind Lukes gospel

In textual criticism of the New Testament, the L source is a hypothetical oral or textual tradition which the author of Luke–Acts may have used when composing the Gospel of Luke.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hebrew Gospel hypothesis</span> Group of theories relating to early Christian history

The Hebrew Gospel hypothesis is that a lost gospel, written in Hebrew or Aramaic, predated the four canonical gospels. In the 18th and early 19th century several scholars suggested that a Hebrew proto-gospel was the main source or one of several sources for the canonical gospels. This theorizing would later give birth to the two source-hypothesis that views Q as a proto-gospel but believes this proto-gospel to have been written in Koine Greek. After the wide-spread scholarly acceptance of the two-source hypothesis scholarly interest in the Hebrew gospel hypothesis dwindled. Modern variants of the Hebrew gospel hypothesis survive, but have not found favor with scholars as a whole.

The New Testament was written in a form of Koine Greek, which was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean from the conquests of Alexander the Great until the evolution of Byzantine Greek.

References

  1. 1 2 Ehrman 1999, pp. 94–95.
  2. 1 2 3 DeMoss, Matthew S. (2010). Pocket Dictionary for the Study of New Testament Greek. InterVarsity Press. p. 39. ISBN   9780830867110 . Retrieved 11 January 2022.
  3. ↑ Porter 2004, p. 82.
  4. ↑ Porter 2004, p. 90.
  5. 1 2 3 Porter 2004, p. 102.
  6. 1 2 3 Stanley E. Porter, Reading the Gospels Today (2004), p. 50.
  7. 1 2 Porter 2004, p. 89.
  8. ↑ Porter 2004, p. 90–91.
  9. ↑ Who Is Jesus? by Thomas P. Rausch (Jul 1, 2003) ISBN   0814650783 pages 35-40
  10. ↑ Meier, John P. (2005). "Criteria: How do we decide what comes from Jesus?". In Dunn, James D. G.; McKnight, Scot (eds.). The Historical Jesus in Recent Research. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. pp. 136–139. ISBN   1575061007 . Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  11. ↑ Koester 1995, p. 112.
  12. ↑ Shepherd 2018, pp. 52–68.
  13. ↑ Shepherd 2018, p. 53.
  14. ↑ Koester 1995, pp. 111–114.
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 Bart D. Ehrman (2000). "10: More Historical Criteria". Historical Jesus. The Great Courses. Retrieved 12 January 2022.
  16. 1 2 Meier 1991, pp. 174–175, 317.
  17. ↑ Ehrman 1999, p. 94.
  18. 1 2 Ingolfsland, Dennis (April 2001). "An Evaluation of Bart Ehrman's "Historical Jesus"". Bibliotheca Sacra . Dallas Theological Seminary: 181–197. Retrieved 11 January 2022.
  19. 1 2 Bellinzoni, Arthur J. (2016). The New Testament: An Introduction to Biblical Scholarship. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers. pp. 184–185. ISBN   9781498235129 . Retrieved 12 January 2022.
  20. ↑ Shepherd 2018, p. 54.
  21. ↑ Shepherd 2018, p. 52–53.
  22. 1 2 Ehrman 1999, p. 95.
  23. ↑ Ehrman 1999, p. 89.

Literature

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.