The Historical Jesus

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30919, 27 November 1965, Page 4

The Historical Jesus

[Reviewed by G.M.] Finding The Historical Jesus. By James Peter. Collins. 212 pp. Index.

Professor James Petes’ has held several important posts as theologian, especially in Church History. This book is a deep and wide research into the facts, in so far as we have them, of the physical life of Jesus. Can it be said that Jesus is a historical person? Professor Peter insists that Jesus is more than a person who actually lived, He is an event and as such there can never be complete knowledge of Him.

The author quotes and discusses the works of many scholars on the question of the historicity of Jesus. And as the historical Jesus cannot be separated from His teaching, close attention is paid to the various assessments that scholars have made of the fundamental truths of the Christian faith. There are naturally great differences in the views held. Professor Peter examines closely the views held by two scholars whose assessments of Jesus and the Gospel have had great influence upon the Christian Church. The two scholars whose work is examined are Albert Schweitzer and Rudolph Bultmann. Schweitzer in his great book “The Quest of the Historical Jesus,” held that Jesus was a visionary, the product of apocalypticism, and proclaiming the immediate advent of the Kingdom of God. He held the expectation of a speedy end of the world. He found out that He had made a mistake in his prophecy and! considered that He Himself!

must die to save the people from the dire happenings that would precede the last days. That Schweitzer, in spite of his great learning, neglected the Resurrection of Jesus shows how restricted is his exegesis. The emphasis by Schweitzer on eschatology is a limiting factor in his assessment of Jesus. The influence of Schweitzer is widespread, the man is greater than his theology. Rudolph Bultmann holds that the Gospel is based on myth and if the mystical be eliminated the real significance of the Gospel history will be disclosed. Such a position cannot be sustained. For Bultmann there is great need for a demythologization of the New Testament. There is solid opposition to Bultmann's views. Professor Peter quotes John Macquarrie as saying regarding Bultmann's position that it is “not that every incident recorded about Jesus must be objective fact but it does argue that there must be a greater degree of continuity between the Jesus of history and the Jesus of faith than Bultmann seems willing to allow.” The uniqueness of Jesus needs no rescuing historian to emphasise His worth. The influence of Jesus upon others and the claims He made give Him a place in history and in ordinary human life today that no other can equal. The conclusion Professor Peter reaches will be acclaimed by millions of men and women that “Christianity is a historical religion. It is really through the man Jesus that God has been pleased to reveal Himself, and to know more of Jesus is to know more of Him who sent Him.”