The quest for the historical Jesus has gone on for about three centuries. The big question is, is the quest for the historical Jesus for Christians? And is it worthwhile? Jesus is depicted as a social revolutionary opposed to the powers that be, be those powers the priestly hierarchy in the Jerusalem temple or the larger patron-client network in the Roman Empire.
An egalitarian feminist, Jesus sought to subvert the hierarchical structures of his day by welcoming one and all to table fellowship and by practicing magic as an alternative to the temple cult. “Jesus is seen to be calling his audience to open their eyes to the ever-present kingdom of God available to all in their human experience” (Wright, 1992).
Both the Cynic and the Gnostic coloration of its portrait of Jesus are questionable on the grounds of dating of sources and historical context, and the wholesale elimination of future eschatology from Jesus’ message flies in the face of its widespread attestation in many different gospel sources and literary forms.
Before the nineteenth century, when Christians sought to understand Jesus and the ancient world depicted in the gospels, they adhered to naturalistic literalism. Naturalistic literalism is the practice of reading the Scriptures and accepting the events that are described therein as the literal truth. No one had ever given much thought to reading the New Testament (NT) any other way. Things have changed dramatically since then. Today, the only Christians that still hold to a natural-literal reading of the NT are Fundamentalists who believe it to be plenary, which is to say that God inspires every word. However, even a quick glance at the NT reveals inconsistencies.
Some Catholic critics have adopted a new version of the once-scandalously skeptical position the quest for the historical Jesus is both historically....
