ARTICLE GUIDE
At a Glance
Engaging Paul Barnett and G. R. Elton, this essay examines historical method, early Pauline evidence, and inference to the best explanation as controls on reconstructions of Jesus and the origins of apostolic faith.
How should historians test competing explanations of Jesus and Christian origins?
This guide introduces the argument developed in the complete article and identifies its principal lines of investigation.
Key Claims
- Historical explanation must account for particular events, individual agency, and causal change.
- Early incidental evidence in Paul provides an important check on later reconstructions.
- Social models require textual controls and care with evidence from later rabbinic sources.
- The study connects historical inquiry with the promise-plan without treating theological coherence as a substitute for evidence.
Primary Textual Anchors
- 1 Corinthians 15:3–8
- Galatians 1:18–19
- Romans 1:3–4
- Genesis 12:1–3
Scripture Connections
1 Corinthians 15:3–8; Galatians 1:18–19; Romans 1:3–4; Genesis 12:1–3
Selected Scholarship
- Barnett, P. W. (1997). Jesus and the logic of history.
- McCullagh, C. B. (1984). Justifying historical descriptions.
- Wright, N. T. (2003). The resurrection of the Son of God.
- Kaiser, W. C., Jr. (2008). The promise-plan of God.
Related Guides
- The Historical Bedrock of the Crucifixion
- The Shroud of Turin, Empirical Artifacts, and the Resurrection of Jesus: A Historiographical, Medical, and Biblical-Theological Investigation
Continue on Substack
Read the complete article on Substack, with Watch and Listen resources where available.
Leave a Reply