Understanding Jesus of Nazareth: a Review of Graham Stanton’s the Gospels and Jesus

Everyone in life, has a certain image of what he or she thinks of Jesus. In the beginning of the book, Phillip Yancey, talks about, “Who Jesus Was” in part one. In part one, the reader gains a better insight into Jesus’s younger years, which is unknown to many people. In fact, the only information that people known about Jesus’ younger years are

It is possible to write on the life of Jesus from the information gathered from the bible. I will be dividing my essay into three parts. In the first part of the paper, I will talk about the nature of the gospels, John’s views vs. the Synoptic, discuss if the authors of the gospels are eyewitnesses and how they used written sources. Also I will talk about the Q source. Then I will elaborate on the topic of how Matthew and Luke were similar. Then I will continue on by discussing how the Old Testament uses Moses, Samuel and Elijah to interpret Jesus, and finally whether or not the Sermon on the Mount happened. In the second part of my paper, I will talk about Jesus’s birth and childhood, his miracles, his resurrection, and what Jesus did to cure people, spirits and how they are interpreted to the prophet, magician and the mad man compared to Saul and Elijah. The final part of the paper I will talk about what Jesus talked about as regards to the Kingdom of God vs. the Kingdom of the Romans and what he intended by speaking of the end of the world. I will also speak of the reasons behind the Romans executing him. My sources for this paper will be the New Jerusalem Bible Readers edition as my primary source and lecture notes from Professor Trumbach.

The quest for the knowledge on the historical Jesus started as a protest against the traditional dogma of Christianity, but when the neutral historians joined the movement, all they saw was Jesus without features. Even when these scholars decided that other biblical figures such as John the evangelist, John the Baptist, Paul, and others were at home in a symbolic and richly storied world. Jesus himself

The foundation of the Christian faith is cradled within truth of the virgin birth, life, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. As diverse as the world-wide Christian culture is, the truth in the birth and life of Jesus stands without border and language limitations. Just as each individual life story can be adapted to be relevant for a variety of audiences, the birth story of the Messiah was also. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke are an example of the well-rounded and diverse narration of the birth story of Jesus—Matthew’s narration spoke to the history of the Jewish people and Luke presented to the citizen of Rome.

N.T. Wright releases “How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels” with the affirmation that the church has come to emphasis almost exclusively on Jesus’ birth, death and resurrection. Although, the gospels devote the majority of their time on Jesus’ life. Jesus’s life, death, resurrection and rise did not hint the end of the old Israel story, but redirected it further to a worldwide effort of adaptation. Wright addresses several New Testament documented interpreters who present the gospels as simply “the prognosis of early Christian faith, reflecting the disputes and predicaments of the early church,” something Wright calls a “half-truth”. Wright argues that notwithstanding the gospels countless differences, none of

While the Councils of Nicea and Chalcedon allow for a more elucidated understand of Christ, the reality of other factors inhibits its full potential. There are factors that exist which produce the opposite effect. Several issues, including history, philosophy, and language, impede the attempt to better apprehend Jesus Christ. In regards to the issue with history, there is an inverse relationship between the desire for Jesus’ history with the current amount of information that humanity has recorded of him. For a religious figure who has left an immeasurable amount of influence onto mankind with his abilities, interactions with others, humility, and ultimate sacrifice, procuring more knowledge on this being would a great benefit to Christological studies. There would be no amount of books large enough to contain the knowledge of the Messiah’s actions that are not already detailed (O’Collins 2). This unquantifiable yearning for learning is unfortunately contrasted with the amount of detailed information on him currently available after nearly two millennia. There are not many details that the world knows about Jesus Christ since “he left no letters or other personal documents” (O’Collins 2). Not a lot of information is known about the Redeemer before he established his “public ministry”

Chapter four examines the methods Jesus used to teach and spread his messages about the Kingdom of God. Jesus’s primary audience was the common people of first-century Galilee, so he had to adopt creative techniques to teach uneducated people about an unknown “fantastic” topic, the Kingdom of God. His strategy was successful; amassing a great amount of followers and started the foundation of modern Christianity. The methods he utilized, includes teaching through parables, debates and including examples with miracles and enacted parables.

Two thousand years ago, the birth of Jesus, arguably the most influential man the world has ever seen, altered history forever. Christians know him as the Messiah, the son of God who came to save all of mankind, and for others, he may just be a great teacher and person of history. It is the latter that Reza Aslan attempts to shed an unbiased light on by comparing the Jesus that modern Christians believe in to the Jesus that Aslan believes would have fit into first-century Palestine: a violet revolutionary, dedicated to the eradication of the Roman government in Israel and the deposition of the rich priestly class. Aslan paints a portrayal of Jesus using knowledge of the time period, Scripture that has been taken out of context and misinterpreted, and most of all, the author’s imagination and powerful rhetoric to cover up his faulty argumentation. In his book Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, Reza Aslan recreates an interesting but purely speculative image of the historical Jesus through exploring the political and social history of first-century Palestine, the life and teachings of Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.

Some scholars argue that evidence of Jesus of Nazareth 's existence can only be found within the writings of the New Testament. They believe that the New Testament is a biased and unreliable source for the existence of Jesus. They therefore claim that Jesus did not exist. The historical existence of Jesus is necessary to demonstrate the truth of Christianity. While Christian scholars do not discount the reliability of the New Testament as a historical document, they are also able to point to other historical documents and consider non-Christian writings which support the existence of Jesus. In this paper I will argue that Jesus the Nazarene was an actual, historical person and that this can be demonstrated through extra-Biblical resources.

One of the many things that puzzle people even today; is how Jesus was portrayed and how he became a part of history throughout the centuries. Fortunately, within the book Jesus Through the Centuries, written by Jaroslav Pelikan, readers are able to get a sense of what societies viewed Jesus as and how he was/is important to many aspects of the world such as; the political, social, and cultural impact he had left. As Pelikan discusses this very topic and theme in his book, we see how there’s a connection between his audience in this book and Jesus’s are closely similar. When he got his motivation to write about Jesus through the Centuries, Jaroslav had an open audience, which was intended for anyone of all ages, races, and beliefs to read

Jesus' decision to physically cast out the moneylenders from the temple stands as one of the most interesting events of his life, because it represents what seems to be the only moment in the Gospel narratives where he becomes visibly angry to the point of physical action. While one could argue that Jesus is frequently (and justifiably) angry with the disciples from time to time, this is the only moment that Jesus' anger moves him to physical force. Although the event is recorded in all four of the Gospels, this study will focus specifically on its rendering in Matthew, because when considered in the context of Matthew's larger narrative, one can see how Jesus' decision to cleanse the temple does not represent an aberration in either his character or theological message, but rather the natural culmination of Jesus' life and works prior to that point, and demonstrates a kind of revolutionary, anti-authoritarian element of Jesus' message of salvation that is all too often overlooked by Christians and critics alike.

Johannine literature truly portrays Jesus as God, with the theme of His deity interwoven throughout numerous passages. In this respect, John’s style differs from the other four gospels, as Bickel & Jantz (1998) point out that the other three had been written prior to John’s gospel, therefore, “he wasn’t interested in just retelling the events” (p. 222). Since Jesus is the focal point of Scripture, a scholar of the New Testament with uncertainty concerning Jesus’ oneness with God will fail to perceive the crux of Christianity. Therefore, in spite of its importance, John does not focus on Jesus’ entrance into the

Luke and Acts tells the story of what Jesus did and taught during his ministry, first in his earthly life and then as the exalted Christ and Lord through his disciples. This essay will outline the various titles Luke used to portray or described Jesus in his two-volume narrative, in doing this we hope to get a better understanding and a complete picture of who Jesus was. Luke in his two volume work described Jesus in numerous ways and I am only going to be discussing four which referred to him as Christ, Lord, Prophet and Savior. The main Christological themes that appear in Luke-Acts highlighted and emphasised on the concept of the “Lord 's Christ”, meaning the coming ruler of God 's people, who will serve as their Savior and performing prophetic work [2 pg. 123-143]. Moreover, Jesus’s role was not assumed on his own initiative, but rather it was the work of God. Thus we can say that God’s work and plans were at the center of the Book of Acts and Luke’s gospel [1 pg 22].

In this article Harold Attridge examines Luke’s background, the scriptures Luke wrote, Jesus’s values, the context and purpose of Luke’s gospel and the treatment of Christians at the time of Luke’s writings. The article expresses that Luke’s Gospel was written before the destruction of Jerusalem and at a time when Christians were being persecuted for practicing their faith so consequently the purpose of his Gospel was to show an ethical example and imply that Christians could be good citizens. This source is relevant to the topic as it suggests the purpose of Luke's Gospel and the treatment of Christians before the fall of Jerusalem. A limitation of the website is that it has not been recently published, it’s publish date is April 1998 so it may not be up to date with the latest, accurate information. Nonetheless, this source is very beneficial and appropriate to the task as it provides facts and research on the chosen sacred text. This source will not be the cornerstone of my research but will add a good understanding to the purpose of the sacred text.

The word "gospel" is a translation of the Greek word "euangelion" which means "good news. The first three books in the New Testament (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) are often referred to as the Synoptic Gospels (from Greek synoptikos, "seen together") They bear greater similarity to each other than any of the other gospels in the New Testament. Along with these similarities come some differences among the gospels, suggesting that each gospel was written for a specific audience and for a specific purpose. This paper will examine the resurrection of Jesus, while identifying the significant differences between Mark, Matthew and Luke. This paper will also analyze the differences to suggest the prominent theological perspective each gospel author