HistoricalReconstruction of Jesus Christ of Nazareth
Indeed,historical reconstruction of Jesus Christ of Nazareth amount tolittle more than the writing of the historian`s own values andaspirations. Jesus Christ is considered as the pillar and core ofChristian theology hence, his existence and eventual death plays akey role in the lives of all Christians. There are vast facts thatcontradict his existence as well as the details of his sermons andteachings. Many historians argue that methodology applied in thestudy of the history of Jesus is of lower quality as compared to thestudy of other areas in comparable areas (Levine Allison, &Crossan 87). There is a high likelihood that evidence about historyof Jesus Christ of Nazareth raises much controversy since allavailable evidence is in literary form, lack of direct eye-witnessaccounts of Jesus, and the fact that Jesus did not write anythingabout himself. Despite this, the available sources cannot be rendereduseless in any case, it creates a platform for unearthing historicaldata.
Quitea good number of non-Christian sources show that Roman historians andClassical Greek played a key role in ignoring Jesus and argued thathe was not worthy of their consideration. They considered him as atrouble maker. Christian sources are considered to give a deeperinsight on the history of Jesus Christ as compared to non-Christiansource. Gospels texts are more insightful than non-canonical one. Oneof the most Christian sources available includes the Letters of St.Paul. These letters have a high tendency of portraying Jesus as apre-existent mythical being hence, they are considered lesssignificant than the gospels despite their advanced age (Levine et al156). In addition, these letters tend to focus more on Jesus Christinstead of Jesus of Nazareth. As a result, these letters offer littledirect information about the historical Jesus. Non-canonical texts,which are fond in the New Testament, include the gospel of Peter andgospel of Thomas they have fragmented, romantic, and fanciful natureand they are newer than the gospel texts. Consequently, they offerinsightful and deeper information about the historical Jesus.
Accordingto Levine et al (267), the New Testament gospels constitute theprimary sources of historical Jesus. In fact, the gospels offer themost information about Jesus of Nazareth to historians. This isbecause unlike the non-Christian sources gospels text chiefly focuson Jesus. However, gospel texts are not historical biographiesdespite their presentation, in a biographical form, of the life ofJesus. The way gospel texts were created offer reliable informationabout Jesus to scholars, even though they are far from perfect.
Mostsynoptic gospels, like Mark and Luke, provide information on thebasis of the knowledge that most historians have on Jesus ofNazareth. However, information in Mark is considered more reliablesince there is evidence of theological tampering with informationcontained in either Luke or Mathew gospel. There is no theologicalattachment or meaning on the death and suffering of Jesus in Mark(Levine et al 345). The imperfection even in the best sources is aclear indication or rather restriction on the extent to which anindividual can really get information about the historical Jesus.
Undeniably,it is possible to understand certain thing, which can still be knownusing meagre sources, about the historical Jesus. Most historiansmake use of traditional materials to study the history of Jesus ofNazareth nevertheless this does not solve the problem of controversythat concerns this history. Therefore, it is quite hard to reallyunderstand or grasp enough information about the historical Jesus.
Levine,Amy-Jill, Allison, Dale, & Crossan, John. TheHistorical Jesus in Context.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009. Print.