Talk:Historical reliability of the Gospels/Episode based

=Episode based analysis=

Birth
Jesus was probably born in the last years before Herod's reign ended in 4 BC, in the Galilean village of Nazareth. Geza Vermes views the different and contradictory accounts of Jesus' birth given in the Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of Matthew as "pious fictions". E. P. Sanders describes them as "the clearest cases of invention in the Gospels". Raymond Brown notes that "it is unlikely that either account is completely historical", and suggests that the account in Matthew is based on an earlier narrative patterned on traditions about the birth of Moses. While the infancy narratives are considered problematic by critical scholars, particularly because they are laced with theology and are indebted to precursor texts, it has been suggested that they do contain some historical information about Jesus, such as when he was born and the names of his parents.

This first Herod, an Idumaean whom the Roman Senate elected King of the Jews over Idumea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria and neighboring lands, ruled from 37 to 4 BC. Upon Herod's death, the Romans divided up his kingdom between his sons, and Herod Antipas ruled Galilee but not Judea (which became part of Iudaea province after Herod Archelaus was deposed in 6 CE), while Jesus was still a boy.

Family background and childhood
Jesus' father might have been named Yosef, a common name at the time. Jesus' reputed descent from King David would be consistent with an attempt by the authors of Matthew and Luke to show his identity as the Messiah and King of the Jews.

Jesus' mother was named Mary (Hebrew: Maryām), a common name at the time. Beyond the accounts in the Gospels and a few other early Christian sources, there is no independent or verifiable information about any aspect of Mary's life.

Jesus had "brothers and sisters", as reported in Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55-56. However, whether the verse literally meant brother or another close family member is still debated to this day. Prior to the 4th century, the standard theory was that they were Jesus’ "brothers" who were sons of Joseph though not of Mary. According to this view, Joseph was a widower at the time he married Mary. He had children from his first marriage (who would be older than Jesus, explaining their attitude toward him). This is mentioned in a number of early Christian writings. One work, known as the Proto-evangelium of James (A.D. 125) records that Joseph was selected from a group of widowers to serve as the husband/protector of Mary, who was a virgin consecrated to God. When he was chosen, Joseph objected: "I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl." Today, the most commonly accepted view among Catholics is that they were Jesus’ cousins. According to Robert Funk of the Jesus Seminar, the Catholic doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity has long obscured the recognition that Jesus had siblings. After Jesus' death, James, "the Lord's brother", was the head of the congregation in Jerusalem and Jesus' relatives seem to have held positions of authority in the surrounding area. His brother Simon or Simeon, seems to have led the community after James's death, seeking refuge in Pella during the Jewish Revolt. After Simon's death, another brother Judah led the early Nazarene movement, and thereafter till the Bar Kochba revolt, the descendants of Judah seem to have been the bishops of Jerusalem, down to the time of Judas Kyriakos.

Ministry
The synoptic Gospels agree that Jesus grew up in Nazareth, went to the River Jordan to meet and be baptised by the prophet John (Yohannan) the Baptist, and shortly thereafter began healing and preaching to villagers and fishermen around Luke's "Sea of Galilee" (which is actually a freshwater lake). Although there were many Phoenician, Hellenistic, and Roman cities nearby (such as Gesara and Gadara; Sidon and Tyre; Sepphoris and Tiberias), the Gentile mission was, at most, peripheral to Jesus' ministry.

In recent years many different portraits have been presented of the Historical Jesus.


 * 1) There is Jesus the political revolutionary in the work of S.G.F. Brandon
 * 2) There is Jesus the magician by Morton Smith
 * 3) There is Jesus the Galilean charismatic by Geza Vermez
 * 4) There is Jesus the Galilean Rabbi by Bruce Chilton
 * 5) There is Jesus the Hillelite proto Pharisee or Essene by Harvey Falk
 * 6) There is Jesus the eschatological prophet by E.P. Sanders

These views often say more about the writer than about the Historical Jesus. Nevertheless it is clear that Jesus is thinking of Israel, so he doesn't have to plan out any structures. He may have done one seemingly structural thing by calling the twelve apostles, which was a symbolic body. Jesus chose the 12 to "sit on the 12 thrones to judge the tribes of Israel," a symbolic role as the judges of the house of Israel. The center of his work was Capernaum, a small town (about 500 by 350 meters, with a population of 1,500-2,000) where, according to the Gospels, he appeared at the town's synagogue (a non-sacred meeting house where Jews would often gather on the Sabbath to study the Torah), and performed a public reading of scripture, but was met with rejection.

Jesus gathered a following and achieved a measure of fame around Galilee. Then for Passover, he and his followers traveled to the Davidic capital of the United Monarchy, the city of Jerusalem. However, Jesus left no instructions about founding a church.

Historians do not know how long Jesus preached. The synoptic Gospels suggest a period of up to one year. The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers, Jesus' ministry is traditionally said to have been three years long. In the view of Paul N. Anderson, John's presentation is more plausible historically than that of the Synoptics.

Jesus and John the Baptist
Jesus began preaching, teaching, and healing after he was baptized by John the Baptist, an apocalyptic ascetic preacher who called on Jews to repent.

Jesus was apparently a follower of John, a populist and activist prophet who looked forward to divine deliverance of the Jewish homeland from the Romans. John was a major religious figure, whose movement was probably larger than Jesus' own. Herod Antipas had John executed. In a saying thought to have been originally recorded in Q, the historical Jesus defended John shortly after John's death.

John's followers formed a movement that continued after his death alongside Jesus' own following. John's followers apparently believed that John might have risen from the dead, an expectation that may have influenced the expectations of Jesus' followers after his own execution. Some of Jesus' followers were former followers of John the Baptist. Fasting and baptism, elements of John's preaching, may have entered early Christian practice as John's followers joined the movement.

John Dominic Crossan portrays Jesus as rejecting John's apocalyptic eschatology in favor of a sapiential eschatology, in which cultural transformation results from humans' own actions, rather than from God's intervention.

Historians consider Jesus' baptism by John to be historical, an event that early Christians would not have included in their Gospels in the absence of a "firm report". Like Jesus, John and his execution are mentioned by Josephus.

John the Baptist's prominence in both the Gospels and Josephus suggests that he may have been more popular than Jesus in his lifetime; also, Jesus' mission does not begin until after his baptism by John. Fredriksen suggests that it was only after Jesus' death that Jesus emerged as more influential than John. Accordingly, the Gospels project Jesus' posthumous importance back to his lifetime. One way Fredriksen believes this was accomplished was by minimizing John's importance by having John resist baptizing Jesus, by referring to the baptism in passing , or by asserting Jesus's superiority.

Scholars posit that Jesus may have been a direct follower in John the Baptist's movement. John Dominic Crossan suggests that John the Baptist may have been killed for political reasons, not necessarily the personal grudge given in Mark's gospel. Going into the desert and baptising in the Jordan suggests that John and his followers were purifying themselves for what they believed was God's imminent deliverance. This was reminiscent of such a crossing of the Jordan after the Exodus (see Book of Joshua), leading into the promised land of their deliverance from oppression. Jesus' teachings would later diverge from John's apocalyptic vision (though it depends which scholarly view is adopted; according to Ehrman and Sanders, the apocalyptic vision was the core of Jesus' teaching) which warned of "the wrath to come," as "the axe is laid to the root of the trees" and those who do not bear "good fruit" are "cut down and thrown into the fire." (Luke 3:7-9)

Works and miracles


The gospels narrate various miracles that Jesus performed in the course of his ministry. These mostly consist of miraculous healing, exorcisms and dominion over other things in nature besides people.

As Albert Schweitzer showed in his Quest of the Historical Jesus, in the early 19th century, debate about the "Historical Jesus" centered on the credibility of the miracle reports. Early 19th century scholars offered three types of explanation for these miracle stories: they were regarded as supernatural events, or were "rationalized" (e.g., by Paulus), or were regarded as mythical (e.g., by Strauss).

Scholars in both Christian and secular traditions continue to debate how the reports of Jesus' miracles should be construed. The Christian Gospels states that Jesus has God's authoritarian power over nature, life and death, but naturalistic historians, following Strauss, generally choose either to see these stories as legend or allegory, or, for some of the miracles they follow the rationalizing method.

Jesus as divine
Some scholars interpret Jesus as a charismatic preacher who taught the principles of salvation, everlasting life, and the Kingdom of God. E.P. Sanders sees him as accepting a divine role as God's viceroy in the coming kingdom. It has been argued, by Christian believers, that Jesus' use of three important terms: Messiah, Son of God, and Son of Man, reveals his understanding of his divine role. Jürgen Becker sees Jesus taking his authority directly from God, in contrast to the prophets who revealed the future or will of God. M. de Jonge argues that Jesus saw himself as God's final envoy.

Burton Mack on the other hand supports the hypothesis of the Messianic secret first proposed by William Wrede. This hypothesis holds that Jesus' instruction to his disciples not to reveal his identity as the Messiah was a later invention by the early Church to deal with the embarrassing fact that early traditions did not show Jesus as claiming to be the Messiah.

Messiah
In the Hebrew Bible, three classes of people are identified as "anointed," that is, "Messiahs": prophets, priests, and kings. In Jesus' time, the term Messiah was used in different ways, and no one can be sure how Jesus would even have meant it if he had accepted the term. Though Messianic expectations in general centered on the King Messiah, the Essenes expected both a kingly and a priestly figure in their eschatology. The Jews of Jesus' time waited expectantly for a divine redeemer who would restore Israel, which suffered under Roman rule. John the Baptist was apparently waiting for one greater than himself, an apocalyptic figure. Christian scripture and faith acclaim Jesus as this "Messiah" ("anointed one," "Christ").

Son of God
Paul describes God as declaring Jesus to be the Son of God by raising him from the dead, and Sanders argues Mark portrays God as adopting Jesus as his son at his baptism, although many others do not accept this interpretation of Mark. Sanders argues that for Jesus to be hailed as the Son of God does not mean that he is literally God's offspring. Rather, it indicates a very high designation, one who stands in a special relation to God.

In the synoptic Gospels, the being of Jesus as "Son of God" corresponds exactly to the typical Hasidean from Galilee, a "pious" holy man that by God's intervention performs miracles and exorcisms.

Son of Man
The most literal translation here is "Son of Humanity", or "human being". Jesus uses "Son of Man" to mean sometimes "I" or a mortal in general, sometimes a divine figure destined to suffer, and sometimes a heavenly figure of judgment soon to arrive. Jesus' usage of son of man in the first way is historical but without divine claim. The Son of Man as one destined to suffer seems to be, according to some, a Christian invention that does not go back to Jesus, and it is not clear whether Jesus meant himself when he spoke of the divine judge. These three uses do not appear together, such as the Son of Man who suffers and returns. Others maintain that Jesus' use of this phrase illustrates Jesus' self-understanding as the divine representative of God. This phrase is used in the Bible in the book of Daniel, where the writer claims a sight of revelation when the 'son of man' will return to earth to judge the people according to their acts and is a representative of divine authority and power. Therefore, the pharisees and religious teachers despised Jesus for using the term of such prophetic and divine importance. The Bible does not mention anyone other than Jesus as using the term to refer to himself.(((Yes it does, Ezekiel... and more...)))

Laconic sage
The sage of the ancient Near East was a self-effacing man of few words who did not provoke encounters. A holy man offers cures and exorcisms only when petitioned, and even then may be reluctant. Jesus seems to have displayed a similar style.

The Gospels present Jesus engaging in frequent "question and answer" religious debates with Pharisees and Sadducees. The Jesus Seminar believes the debates about scripture and doctrine are rabbinic in style and not characteristic of Jesus. They believe these "conflict stories" represent the conflicts between the early Christian community and those around them: the Pharisees, Sadducees, etc. The group believes these sometimes include genuine sayings or concepts but are largely the product of the early Christian community.

Other depictions
The title Logos, identifying Jesus as the divine word, first appears in the Gospel of John, written c. 90-100.

It is claimed by some that the earliest Christians did not call Jesus "God", although this is at odds with a plain reading of passages such as, "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" (NIV 1984), and Apostolic Christology in general. Some New Testament scholars argue that Jesus did not make any explicit claims to be God., whilst others point out that Jesus' claims to deity in the synoptic gospels are indirect. See also Divinity of Jesus and Nontrinitarianism.

Pinchas Lapide sees Jesus as a rabbi in the Hasid tradition of Hillel the Elder, Yochanan ben Zakai and Hanina Ben Dosa.

The gospels and Christian tradition depict Jesus as being executed at the insistence of Jewish leaders, who considered his claims to divinity to be blasphemous, see also Responsibility for the death of Jesus. Historically, Jesus seems instead to have been executed as a potential source of unrest.

Parables and paradoxes
Jesus taught in parables and aphorisms. A parable is a figurative image with a single message (sometimes mistaken for an analogy, in which each element has a metaphoric meaning). An aphorism is a short, memorable turn of phrase. In Jesus' case, aphorisms often involve some paradox or reversal. Authentic parables probably include the Good Samaritan and the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. Authentic aphorisms include "turn the other cheek", "go the second mile", and "love your enemies".

Crossan writes that Jesus' parables worked on multiple levels at the same time, provoking discussions with his peasant audience.

Jesus' parables and aphorisms circulated orally among his followers for years before they were written down and later incorporated into the Gospels. They represent the earliest Christian traditions about Jesus.

Eschatology
Jesus preached mainly about the Kingdom of God. Scholars are divided over whether he was referring to an imminent apocalyptic event or the transformation of everyday life.

Some critical Biblical scholars, going as far back as Albert Schweitzer, hold that Jesus believed that the end of history was coming within his own lifetime or within the lifetime of his contemporaries.

The evidence for this thesis comes from several verses, including the following:
 * In Jesus says that the Son of Man will come "in the glory of the Father with the holy angels" during "this adulterous generation." Indeed, he says, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."
 * In, Jesus urges constant, unremitting preparedness on the part of his followers in light of the imminence of the end of history and the final intervention of God. "But stay awake at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are going to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man."
 * In Jesus describes what will happen when the end comes, saying that "the sun will grow dark and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and ... they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds with great power and glory." He gives a deadline for this event: "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."
 * The Apostle Paul also seems to have shared this expectation. Toward the end of 1 Corinthians 7, he counsels Christians to avoid getting married if they can since the end of history was imminent. Speaking to the unmarried, he writes, "I think that, in view of the impending crisis, it is well for you to remain as you are." "I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short ... For the present form of this world is passing away." (1 Corinthians 7:26, 29, 31) In, Paul also seems to believe that he will live to witness the return of Jesus. ("For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.")

According to Geza Vermes, Jesus' announcement of the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God "was patently not fulfilled" and "created a serious embarrassment for the primitive church". According to E.P. Sanders, these eschatological sayings of Jesus are "passages that many Christian scholars would like to see vanish" as "the events they predict did not come to pass, which means that Jesus was wrong."

Many scholars argue that since the Bible does not account for the destruction of Jerusalem, which would have been a critical and overwhelming event in Israelite and Christian history, that this event may have instead been the 'end of history' the church was looking for but did not recognize. This would be contrary to verses which state that all nations would know what was happening, and who was responsible for it. Yet a writer such as the Apostle John, responsible for Revelation, and who survived the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, would likely have documented the attack. Being that he did not, some presume he concluded that Jesus' words were thus fulfilled. The subsequent councils and churches which grew from this era then would have taken this outlook of 'end of world' and extended it for their own followers to look forward to.

Robert W. Funk and colleagues, on the other hand, wrote that beginning in the 1970s, some scholars have come to reject the view of Jesus as eschatological, pointing out that he rejected the asceticism of John the Baptist and his eschatological message. In this view, the Kingdom of God is not a future state, but rather a contemporary, mysterious presence. John Dominic Crossan describes Jesus' eschatology as based on establishing a new, holy way of life rather than on God's redeeming intervention in history.

Evidence for the Kingdom of God as already present derives from these verses.
 * In Luke 17:20-21, Jesus says that one will not be able to observe God's Kingdom arriving, and that it "is right there in your presence."
 * In Thomas 113, Jesus says that God's Kingdom "is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it."
 * In Luke 11:20, Jesus says that if he drives out demons by God's finger then "for you" the Kingdom of God has arrived.
 * Furthermore, the major parables of Jesus do not reflect an apocalyptic view of history.

The Jesus Seminar concludes that apocalyptic statements attributed to Jesus could have originated from early Christians, as apocalyptic ideas were common, but the statements about God's Kingdom being mysteriously present cut against the common view and could have originated only with Jesus himself.

Jesus' repeated declarations that the kingdom of God was at hand echoed popular apocalyptic views. According to Geza Vermes and others, the use of the terms "messiah" and "son of God" by Jesus' followers indicate that they believed he would assume the monarchy upon the restoration of the kingdom (see Names and titles of Jesus).

Asceticism
The fellows of the Jesus Seminar mostly held that Jesus was not an ascetic, and that he probably drank wine and did not fast, other than as all observant Jews did. He did, however, promote a simple life and the renunciation of wealth.

Jesus said that some made themselves "eunuchs" for the Kingdom of Heaven. This aphorism might have been meant to establish solidarity with eunuchs, who were considered "incomplete" in Jewish society. Alternatively, he may have been promoting celibacy.

A majority of the Fellows of the Jesus Seminar regard it probable that Jesus was not celibate but instead had a special relationship with Mary Magdalene. However, Ehrman notes the conjectural nature of the claims that Jesus and Mary were married, as "not a single one of our ancient sources indicates that Jesus was married, let alone married to Mary Magdalene."

John the Baptist was an ascetic and perhaps a Nazirite, who promoted celibacy like the Essenes. Ascetic elements, such as fasting, appeared in Early Christianity and are mentioned by Matthew during Jesus' discourse on ostentation.

Table fellowship
Open table fellowship with outsiders was central to Jesus' ministry. His practice of eating with the lowly people whom he healed defied the expectations of traditional Jewish society. He presumably taught at the meal, as would be expected in a symposium. His conduct caused enough of a scandal that he was accused of being a glutton and a drunk.

John Dominic Crossan identifies this table practice as part of Jesus' radical egalitarian program. The importance of table fellowship is seen in the prevalence of meal scenes in early Christian art and in the Eucharist, the Christian ritual of bread and wine.

Disciples
Some scholars believe Jesus recruited twelve Galilean peasants as his inner circle, including several fishermen. The fishermen in question and the tax collector Matthew would have business dealings requiring some knowledge of Greek. The father of two of the fishermen is represented as having the means to hire labourers for his fishing business, and tax collectors were seen as exploiters. One interpretation is that the twelve were expected to rule the twelve tribes of Israel in the Kingdom of God.

The Jesus Seminar on the other hand believes that the number 'twelve' in connection with an inner circle of disciples is a fiction.

The disciples of Jesus play a large role in the search for the historical Jesus. However, the four Gospels use different words to apply to Jesus' followers. The Greek word "ochloi" refers to the crowds who gathered around Jesus as he preached. The word "mathetes" refers to the followers who stuck around for more teaching. The word "apostolos" refers to the twelve disciples, or apostles, whom Jesus chose specifically to be his close followers. With these three categories of followers, Meier uses a model of concentric circles around Jesus in order to create a distinction among those who were closer to Jesus than others.

Ochloi

The outer most circle surrounding Jesus are known as Ochloi, or "the crowds." This outer circle of Jesus' followers would have been the largest and least stable of the groups following Jesus. The criterion of multiple attestation of Mark, John, Q, Matthew, and Luke, supports the historicity of Jesus attracting large crowds. This argument is bolstered by the fact that Jesus was crucified outside Jerusalem by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate, most probably on the charge of claiming to be "King of the Jews." How a Jewish preacher, teacher, and healer from Galilee would end up executed by Romans in Jerusalem could only be plausible if he did in fact attract large, enthusiastic crowds. We can see in the Gospels that Jesus' ability to attract large crowds through preaching and healing seemed to have lasted until his final days in Jerusalem. Meier notes that the success of his ministry probably led to his arrest and execution by the nervous authorities. Although the crowds were enthusiastic at times, the enthusiasm rarely translated in deep, enduring commitment from members of the crowds. Critical remarks by the evangelists, the unrepentant cities of Galilee (Matthew 11:20-24), and the relative failure of Jesus' followers to win over the majority of Palestinian Jews to "Christianity" is all evidence that most people in the crowds never crossed over from being just curious or sympathetic audiences to deeply committed disciples or supporters. Although, we will see as we move to the inner circles surrounding Jesus that some of his closest disciples came from the crowds that surrounded Jesus.

Mathetes

The second ring around Jesus consists of Mathetes, or "disciples." Meier simply uses the term "disciples". These are the people who stayed for Jesus' teaching. As Meier puts it, "Jesus' disciples are marked by obedience to his peremptory call, denial of self, and exposure to hostility and danger." However, since the members of this group were not individually called by Jesus to be his disciples like the Twelve were, Meier therefore refers to the followers and crowds as "pseudo-disciples." In other words, these groups simply were physical followers of Jesus but not necessarily committed followers who were with him all the time. In many cases, the term "disciples" is used to encompass both the "sympathetic audiences" and the Twelve. It is important that a distinction is made between the crowds and the disciples. On the other hand, some passages suggest that the Gospels use the terms "disciples" and "the Twelve" interchangeably. Jesus' ministry was primarily focused on his twelve disciples and not on the crowds and followers. It was the Twelve whom Jesus spent most of his time with and directed most of his teachings towards, as indicated by the accounts in the four Gospels.

Apostolos

Commonly referred to as "the Twelve" in both John and Mark, this group would have been the one group that was fairly fixed because of the set number of members. What set this group of followers apart from the other two groups was that they were a set group of committed disciples who had been individually called by Jesus. Although the Twelve appeared to be a set group, there is confusion about the actual names of all of the Twelve. For example, names like Nathanael and Judas son of James are not in the lists described in the Gospels. Out of "the Twelve" there seems to be an even closer group of "Four", or circle, that includes Simon Peter, James (son of Zebedee), John (brother of James), and Andrew (Simon Peter's brother). However, because the Gospels might mention these men more than the other apostles, does not necessarily mean that the other apostles were not just as close to Jesus. The Twelve holds the most significant standing among all of the groups following Jesus, as each member was individually called to follow him.

Women Disciples

Jesus controversially accepted women and sinners (those who violated purity laws) among his followers. Even though women were never directly called "disciples", certain passages in the Gospels seem to indicate that women followers of Jesus were equivalent to the disciples. It was possible for members of the "ochloi" to cross over into the "mathetes" category. However, Meier argues that some people from the "mathetes" category actually crossed into the "apostolos" category, namely Mary Magdalene. The narration of Jesus' death and the events that accompany it mention the presence of women. Meier states that the pivotal role of the women at the cross is revealed in the subsequent narrative, where at least some of the women, notably Mary Magdalene, witnessed both the burial of Jesus (Mark 15:47) and discovered the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-8). Luke also mentions that as Jesus and the Twelve were travelling from city to city preaching the "good news", they were accompanied by women, who provided for them out of their own means. We can conclude that women did follow Jesus a considerable length of time during his Galilean ministry and his last journey to Jerusalem. Such a devoted, long-term following could not occur without the initiative or active acceptance of the women who followed him. However, most scholars would argue that it is unreasonable to say that Mary Magdalene's seemingly close relationship with Jesus suggests that she was a disciple of Jesus or one of the Twelve. In name, the women are not historically considered "disciples" of Jesus, but the fact that he allowed them to follow and serve him proves that they were to some extent treated as disciples.

Missionaries
The Gospels recount Jesus commissioning disciples to spread the word, sometimes during his life (e.g., Mark 6:7-12) and sometimes during a resurrection appearance (e.g., Matthew 28:18-20). These accounts reflect early Christian practice and may reflect Jesus' original instructions, though some scholars contend that historical Jesus issued no such missionary commission.

According to John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar, Jesus sent his disciples out to heal and to proclaim the Kingdom of God. They were to eat with those they healed rather than with higher status people who might well be honored to host a healer, and Jesus directed them to eat whatever was offered them. This implicit challenge to the social hierarchy was part of Jesus' program of radical egalitarianism. These themes of healing and eating are common in early Christian art.

Jesus' instructions to the missionaries appear in the synoptic Gospels (, and ), as the so-called Great Commission.

Travel to Jerusalem


Jesus and his followers left Galilee and traveled to Jerusalem in Judea. They may have traveled through Samaria as reported in John, or around the border of Samaria as reported in Luke, as was common practice for Jews avoiding hostile Samaritans. Jerusalem was packed with Jews who had come for Passover, perhaps comprising 300,000 to 400,000 pilgrims.

Jesus might have entered Jerusalem on a donkey as a symbolic act, possibly to contrast with the triumphant entry that a Roman conqueror would make, or to enact a prophecy in Zechariah. Christian scripture makes the reference to Zechariah explicit, perhaps because the scene was invented as scribes looked to scripture to help them flesh out the details of the gospel narratives.

Temple disturbance
Jesus taught in Jerusalem, and he caused a disturbance at the temple. This act seems to have been symbolic, related to Jesus' prediction that the Temple would be destroyed when the apocalypse came. Since Jesus was not arrested immediately, Bart Ehrman suggests that the event was not dramatic, but that it drew the authorities' attention to Jesus. The authorities arrested him later, Ehrman suggests, once they'd seen that he was popular with the people and that he was stirring up apocalyptic fervor in the restive Passover crowds.

Betrayal
Jesus' betrayal by Judas Iscariot, one of his own disciples, is attested in early documents, but it does not appear in the Epistles of Paul, nor in the Q Gospel. In the gospel of Mark, Judas appears only in chapter 14, in connection with the betrayal of Jesus. By the criterion of embarrassment, it would be unlikely that early Christians would fabricate such a story and as such is assumed to be historically accurate. It's not clear what information the traitor would have provided that the authorities would need. Bart Ehrman holds that Judas revealed that Jesus was secretly teaching the disciples that he would be the king of the coming kingdom. Theologian Aaron Saari, however, contends in his work The Many Deaths of Judas Iscariot that Judas Iscariot was the literary invention of the Markan community. John Shelby Spong thinks that early Christians compiled the Judas story from three Old Testament Jewish betrayal stories. Tassos Kioulachoglou points to the multiple references to the number of twelve apostles after Christ's death, suggesting that Judas was still included in that number, in contradiction of the story of him committing suicide before Jesus' crucifixion.

Trial and execution


Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Iudaea province (26 AD to 36 AD). Scholars suggest that Pilate executed Jesus as a public nuisance, perhaps with the cooperation of the Jewish authorities. E. P. Sanders argued that the cleansing of the Temple was an act that seriously offended his Jewish audience and eventually led to his death,  while Bart D. Ehrman argued that Jesus' actions would have been considered treasonous and thus a capital offense by the Romans. The claim that the Sadducee high-priestly leaders and their associates handed Jesus over to the Romans is strongly attested.

The Jesus Seminar argued that Christian scribes seem to have drawn on scripture in order to flesh out the passion narrative, such as inventing Jesus' trial. Since none of Jesus' followers witnessed the trial, there is no way to know historically what took place. Scholars are split on the historicity of the underlying events.

John Dominic Crossan points to the use of the word "kingdom" in his central teachings of the "Kingdom of God," which alone would have brought Jesus to the attention of Roman authority. Rome dealt with Jesus as it commonly did with essentially non-violent dissension: the killing of its leader. It was usually violent uprisings such as those during the Roman-Jewish Wars that warranted the slaughter of leader and followers. As the balance shifted in the early Church from the Jewish community to Gentile converts, it may have sought to distance itself from rebellious Jews (those who rose up against the Roman occupation). There was also a schism developing within the Jewish community as these believers in Jesus were pushed out of the synagogues after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, see Council of Jamnia. The divergent accounts of Jewish involvement in the trial of Jesus suggest some of the unfavorable sentiments between such Jews that resulted. See also List of events in early Christianity.

Aside from the fact that the Gospels provide different accounts of the Jewish role in Jesus's death (for example, Mark and Matthew report two separate trials, Luke one, and John none), Fredriksen and Catchpole argue that many elements of the gospel accounts could not have happened: according to Jewish law, the court could not meet at night; it could not meet on a major holiday; Jesus's statements to the Sanhedrin or the High Priest (e.g., that he was the messiah) did not constitute blasphemy; the charges that the Gospels purport the Jews to have made against Jesus were not capital crimes against Jewish law; even if Jesus had been accused and found guilty of a capital offense by the Sanhedrin, the punishment would have been death by stoning (the fates of Saint Stephen and James the Just for example) and not crucifixion. Furthermore, talk of a restoration of the Jewish monarchy was seditious under Roman occupation. Further, Jesus would have entered Jerusalem at an especially risky time, during Passover, when popular emotions were running high. Although most Jews did not have the means to travel to Jerusalem for every holiday, virtually all tried to comply with these laws as best they could. And during these festivals, such as the Passover, the population of Jerusalem would swell, and outbreaks of violence were common. Scholars suggest that the High Priest feared that Jesus' talk of an imminent restoration of an independent Jewish state might spark a riot. Maintaining the peace was one of the primary jobs of the Roman-appointed High Priest, who was personally responsible to them for any major outbreak. Scholars therefore argue that he would have arrested Jesus for promoting sedition and rebellion, and turned him over to the Romans for punishment.

Burial and empty tomb
Scholars are split on whether Jesus was buried. Craig A. Evans contends that, "the literary, historical and archaeological evidence points in one direction: that the body of Jesus was placed in a tomb, according to Jewish custom." John Dominic Crossan, based on his unique position that the Gospel of Peter contains the oldest primary source about Jesus, argued that the burial accounts become progressively extravagant and thus found it historically unlikely that an enemy would release a corpse, contending that Jesus' followers did not have the means to know what happened to Jesus' body. Crossan's position on the Gospel of Peter has not found scholarly support, from Meyer's description of it as "eccentric and implausible", to Koester's critique of it as "seriously flawed". Other scholars write that at least one member of the Sanhedrin obtained the body of Jesus from Pilate and arranged for a dishonorable burial. In particular, Byron R. McCane writes that a new tomb as described in the gospel "would be the only culturally acceptable alternative to a criminal's burial place, for it would be the only other way to preserve the boundry [sic] of shame that separated Jesus from his people".

Bart Ehrman points out that historians try to determine which events most probably occurred. Even if Jesus' followers did find his tomb empty, any improbable explanation for its being empty is historically superior to the explanation that Jesus rose from the dead, which would be a virtual impossibility. Some scholars think that the story of the empty tomb is a late development and that Mark's account of the women telling no one explains why the story had not been widely or previously known. However, Michael Grant wrote: "[I]f we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply to any other ancient literary sources, then the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty". Still, scholars Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz conclude that "the empty tomb can only be illuminated by the Easter faith (which is based on appearances); the Easter faith cannot be illuminated by the empty tomb."

Disciples abandon Jesus
When Jesus was arrested, the disciples fled (Mark 14:50, Matthew 26:56) and did not witness his crucifixion, with the exception of the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 19:26-27). Some scholars say that the cowardly and disoriented behavior of most of the disciples suggests that Jesus had not foretold his own death and resurrection, as the gospels say he did. The gospels disagree on whether the disciples fled to Galilee (Matthew) or stayed in Jerusalem (Luke). In the opinion of E. P. Sanders, they fled to Galilee and later returned to Jerusalem.

Resurrection appearances


Many philosophers of history and biblical scholars think that supernatural events cannot be reconstructed using empirical methods, and so the resurrection of Jesus qualifies as a point of Christian dogma unamenable to the historical method. But some prominent figures disagree with them and try to determine what is the best hypothesis according to the data available. The point of view that the accounts reflect historical visions by the followers of Jesus is known as the vision hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis assumes that the resurrection appearances are legendary.

Paul recorded his vision in an epistle and lists other reported appearances. He does not describe any of the appearances, and he makes no distinction between his and the others. Acts reports that Paul's vision did not involve seeing Jesus in the flesh. The oldest extant versions of the Gospel of Mark report Jesus' empty tomb, but Matthew, Luke, and John all include significant resurrection appearances. In general, the appearance stories from the last three gospels do not match each other.

The inconsistent resurrection stories probably arose from competition over who was first among the witnesses rather than from deliberate fraud. The Jesus Seminar favors the vision hypothesis, that the appearance stories are based on visionary experiences of Peter, Paul, and Mary.