Program / Course 7: New Testament Theology and History / Lesson 2.3
What you will learn
- Define the main criteria historians use to judge whether a saying or deed goes back to Jesus.
- Apply each criterion to a simple example.
- Explain the main criticisms of the criteria, including the criticism of dissimilarity.
- Describe newer approaches, including plausibility and social memory.
The big idea
Because the gospels were written decades after Jesus and shaped by the church’s faith, scholars developed tests to help judge which sayings and deeds are most likely to go back to him. The best known are multiple attestation, embarrassment, dissimilarity, coherence and historical plausibility. Each test gives some help. None works as a machine that sorts truth from falsehood. Critics say that the criteria rest on shaky assumptions and often reach the results the scholar already expected. They are best used as aids to judgment.
Key terms
- Criterion of authenticity
- A rule of thumb used to judge whether a report about Jesus is likely to go back to the historical person.
- Multiple attestation
- The idea that a saying or deed reported by several independent sources is more likely to be authentic than one found in only one.
- Embarrassment
- The idea that material which would have embarrassed the early church, such as Jesus’ baptism by John, is unlikely to have been invented by it.
- Dissimilarity
- The idea that a saying is likely authentic if it differs from both contemporary Judaism and the later church. Also called discontinuity.
- Coherence
- The idea that material that fits with what is already established as authentic can be added to it.
- Plausibility
- The test of whether a report fits the historical context of Jesus’ time and also helps explain later developments.
- Social memory
- The study of how communities remember, shape and pass on the past. Some scholars apply it to the gospel traditions.
Background
When historians study a famous person, they usually have sources they can test against one another, or against documents. The gospels are different. They were written in Greek, though Jesus spoke mostly Aramaic. They arrange stories in patterns that serve a purpose, and they sometimes report the same event with differences. Historians therefore needed a method for deciding how much to trust each item.
The criteria grew out of form criticism and the New Quest. They were meant to give the discussion objective footing. Over time, scholars noticed that the criteria did not always agree, that they could be used selectively, and that some rested on unproven assumptions. Since about 2000, a number of scholars have said the whole approach should be reconsidered.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Multiple attestation
If a saying or event appears in independent sources, such as Mark, a source behind Matthew and Luke sometimes called Q, special material in Luke, and John, it is less likely to have been invented by one writer. The saying that a prophet is not without honor except in his own country appears in Mark 6:4, in John 4:44 and in a different form in Luke 4:24. Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom of God is found in many layers of the tradition.
The limits are plain. Some independent sources may depend on a common tradition that is itself not authentic. And a saying found in only one source is not therefore false. Many ancient events are known from a single witness.
Step 2: Embarrassment
Christians proclaimed Jesus as Son of God, so a report that he was baptized by John for the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4) was a problem, since it could suggest that Jesus was inferior to John. Matthew softens it (Matthew 3:14 to 15). The cry from the cross, ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’ (Mark 15:34), is also hard to explain as invention. The crucifixion itself was shameful, and Paul calls it a stumbling block (1 Corinthians 1:23).
The criterion has force when the embarrassment is real. But what embarrasses a modern reader may not have embarrassed an ancient one, and a story may have been kept for good reasons, not invented.
Step 3: Dissimilarity and its critics
The criterion of dissimilarity holds that a saying is authentic when it cannot be derived from Judaism or from the later church. It was meant to find what was unique to Jesus. But it has been criticized heavily. Jesus was a Jew, and the early church was his movement, so one would expect him to resemble both. Applied strictly, the test removes everything that makes Jesus a man of his time and gives a distorted, rootless figure.
Most scholars now use dissimilarity only in a limited way: if something differs from Judaism and the church, that is a positive argument for authenticity, but if it does not, no conclusion follows. Some call for dropping it. Jewish scholars note that the criterion was sometimes used to set Jesus against Judaism in a way that was unfair.
Step 4: Coherence, plausibility and memory
Coherence extends a core of well-supported material to other items that fit it. Another criterion looks for signs of Aramaic wording or of a Palestinian setting, such as customs and landscape. Another asks whether Jesus’ rejection and execution make sense of the story. Gerd Theissen and Dagmar Winter proposed replacing several of these by a criterion of historical plausibility: a report is plausible if it fits Jesus’ Jewish setting (contextual plausibility) and also explains the effects he had, including the divergent reactions of followers and opponents.
Other scholars, such as James Dunn, argue that the question ‘is this saying authentic?’ misleads, since the gospels preserve the impact Jesus made on his followers and the way it was remembered. They compare the process to how communities carry memory, with a stable core and flexible detail. Richard Bauckham argues that eyewitnesses stood behind the tradition. Other scholars doubt that such memory can be tested.
- Which of these criteria seems strongest to you, and which weakest?
- Why might a saying that appears in only one source still be authentic?
- What problem arises when scholars use dissimilarity to remove everything Jesus shared with other Jews?
- How can a criterion that favors the embarrassing give a skewed picture if used alone?
- What does the shift to plausibility and memory suggest about how historians think of the gospels?
- Can you think of a case from ordinary life where you judge a report by tests like these?
Examples
The baptism of Jesus
Nearly all scholars agree that Jesus was baptized by John. The reasons: the event is reported in several sources, the early church found it awkward, and it fits what is known about John’s movement. Three criteria point in the same direction.
The Lord’s Prayer
The prayer appears in Matthew and Luke in differing forms, and Paul and the Didache show it in use. It is Jewish in language and fits the proclamation of the kingdom. Scholars often judge it to reflect Jesus’ teaching, while differing on the exact wording.
A limit shown
Suppose a saying is found only in John. The multiple attestation test gives no support. But John also contains details, such as the early association of Jesus with John the Baptist’s circle, that many historians accept. The test cannot decide alone.
Different perspectives
Critical scholarship
Many critical scholars hold that the criteria, used with care, help give a probable picture, while admitting the results are probabilities and not proofs. A growing group argues that the criteria have failed and should be replaced by approaches based on memory and context.
Catholic view
Catholic teaching, set out in the Second Vatican Council’s constitution on divine revelation, Dei Verbum, holds that the church affirms the historical character of the four gospels, and also that the evangelists chose, arranged and shaped material. The Church thus accepts critical study while holding that the gospels truthfully hand on what Jesus did.
Orthodox view
Orthodox thinkers generally stress that the gospels are the church’s testimony, formed in the community of the apostles, and treat skeptical sorting of sayings with caution. Orthodox biblical scholars take part in textual and historical work while insisting that interpretation takes place within the tradition.
Protestant view
Conservative Protestants often argue that the gospels deserve trust unless disproved and criticize the criteria for placing the burden of proof on the text. Others, including liberal Protestants, use the criteria more freely. Both groups have contributed to the criticism of dissimilarity.
Why it matters
Every reader of a book about Jesus meets claims that ‘scholars agree’ this saying is authentic or that one is not. Knowing the criteria, and their weaknesses, lets a reader see how those verdicts are reached, how firm they are, and where an author’s assumptions entered.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: The criteria give objective results.
Correction: They are guides to judgment. Different scholars apply them differently and reach different conclusions, as the history of the quest shows.
Misunderstanding: If a saying fails the tests, it is proven false.
Correction: Failing a test shows only that it cannot be shown authentic by that route. Absence of proof is not proof of absence. Many true events pass none of these tests.
Misunderstanding: The criteria were invented to undermine the gospels.
Correction: They arose among scholars of many convictions, hoping to bring order into the discussion. Some believers use them to support the gospels, and some skeptics use them to challenge.
Misunderstanding: The church had no interest in preserving what Jesus really said.
Correction: The sources show a mix of preservation and adaptation. Paul distinguishes his own opinion from a command of the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:10 and 7:12), which indicates care about Jesus’ words.
Knowledge check
What is multiple attestation, and what is one limit?
It is the principle that an item found in several independent sources is more likely authentic. A limit is that independent sources may rest on a common tradition that is itself uncertain, and that a single-source item is not therefore false.
Why is Jesus’ baptism by John thought to be authentic?
It is reported in more than one source, it fits John’s movement, and it would have embarrassed the early church, which proclaimed Jesus as sinless. Matthew’s softening of the account shows the embarrassment was felt.
Why has the criterion of dissimilarity been criticized?
Because Jesus was a Jew and the church was his movement, so he would be expected to resemble both. Strict use removes what ties Jesus to Judaism and produces a distorted figure. Many scholars now use it only as a positive pointer.
What is the criterion of plausibility?
Proposed by Theissen and Winter, it asks whether a report fits the Jewish world of Jesus and also helps explain the effects he had on followers and opponents. It aims to replace a hunt for uniqueness with attention to context.
What approach do some scholars offer in place of the criteria?
Some, such as Dunn, emphasize memory: the gospels preserve the impact of Jesus as remembered in the communities, with a stable core and variable detail. They suggest studying the shape of the tradition rather than sorting sayings one by one.
Think it through
- Do you find it more trustworthy when a report is embarrassing to its writer? Why?
- How would you explain the difference between ‘not proven authentic’ and ‘proven inauthentic’ to a friend?
- What assumptions about the church might sit behind the criterion of dissimilarity?
- Does the memory approach make you more or less confident about the gospels?
Independent assignment
Testing one passage
In your own notebook, write 300 to 450 words. Choose one short gospel passage, such as the baptism of Jesus (Mark 1:9 to 11) or the saying about a prophet without honor (Mark 6:4). Apply multiple attestation, embarrassment and plausibility, noting where each helps and where it fails. Finish with one sentence stating how confident you are of the result and why. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses Read selectively on memory and testimony as an alternative to the criteria.
- N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God Read the discussion of historical method and compare it with the criteria.
- Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth Read for guidance on reading gospel sayings in context.
- Mark 1:9 The baptism of Jesus by John.
- Mark 15:34 The cry from the cross.
- 1 Corinthians 7:10 Paul distinguishes a command of the Lord from his own judgment.