Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition, The

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Sep 2008 by Ingolfsland, Dennis

The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition. By Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007, 479 pp., $24.99 paper.

The Jesus Legend is a thorough refutation of the increasingly popular idea that the Jesus of the Gospels is a myth or legend. Eddy and Boyd deal with all the variations of this thesis. For example, some, like Bruno Bauer or G. A. Wells, believe that the Jesus of the Gospels is virtually, if not entirely, fictional. Others, like Rudolf Bultmann and Burton Mack, believe that a person named Jesus existed, but we know almost nothing about him. Still others, like Robert Funk and J. D. Crossan, argue that while we do know something about Jesus, what we know of him is significantly different than the image(s) presented in the NT.

In part 1 the authors deal with naturalism, the historical-critical method, and the influence of Hellenism on Judaism. Eddy and Boyd offer convincing critiques of western "ethnocentric" scholars, who approach historical studies with an unshakable presupposition of naturalism. They discuss what they believe are anachronistic approaches to textual and oral traditions, critiquing radical literary critics like Derrida and Foucault. The authors also convincingly point out the errors involved in the supposed parallels between Jesus and ancient hero legends or between Jesus and ancient dying and rising savior gods.

Eddy and Boyd propose their own "open historical-critical method," which includes five facets: (1) that evidence must be drawn from a global pool of human experiences; (2) that assumptions must be held tentatively, with presuppositions being fair game for criticism; (3) that the burden of proof lies with any scholar making a claim about history; (4) that historical-critical work becomes "messier" since it calls for the dethronement of the Western naturalist worldview; and (5) that their method has limitations.

The authors argue that a "truly critical historical method" must also be critical of naturalistic presuppositions about miracles, which to a large extent are the basis for the legendary Jesus thesis. They insist, however, that this does not mean an uncritical acceptance of miracles. All things being equal, natural explanations must be preferred over supernatural ones.

Part 2 addresses the issue of the relative silence about the historical Jesus on the part of ancient historians and Paul. Jesus theorists affirming a legendary position argue that, if Jesus really existed, Paul and various pagan writers would have mentioned Jesus' works and teachings. Eddy and Boyd argue that Paul was not nearly as silent about the historical Jesus as these theorists seem to think. Using evidence from Paul's letters, they convincingly demonstrate that Paul considered Jesus to be a real person who lived in the recent past.

Part 3 discusses the transmission of oral tradition between the time of Jesus and the writing of the Gospels. Since Jesus theorists affirming a legendary position base many of their arguments on the form-critical theories of Rudolf Bultmann and his followers, Eddy and Boyd devote a significant amount of space critiquing those theories.

For example, the authors argue that most folklore experts have now abandoned, as factually in error, the form-critical assumptions that folk traditions were transmitted in short isolated units by communities rather than individuals. In addition, contrary to the form-critical assumption that the earliest Christians had little interest in passing on biographical information about Jesus, the authors demonstrate that the NT writers actually placed a significant emphasis on the importance of teaching and bearing witness.

Part 4 discusses the genre of the Synoptic Gospels and their use as historical sources for Jesus. In the final analysis, the authors agree with J. D. Crossan that, while the Gospels do not entirely fit the genre of history, they contain history, and, while they do not entirely fit the genre of biography, they contain biography. In some senses they appear to be sui generis. What they really are is good news. Against those who would argue that ancient biographers and historians are biased and often unreliable, Eddy and Boyd counter by demonstrating that ancient historians actually often exhibited a good degree of skepticism.

Eddy and Boyd also critique the misuse of redaction criticism, which has often increased skepticism toward the Gospels. Over against the supposed creativity proposed by the redaction critics, Eddy and Boyd apply to the Gospels six broad questions historians ask of ancient documents in order to assess their historical reliability. The authors provide evidence to show that the Gospels meet each of the six conditions, thus demonstrating that we do indeed have reason to believe that the Gospels are historically reliable.

While The Jesus Legend is an outstanding book, the authors raise some issues that could have been addressed a bit more clearly. First, Eddy and Boyd point out that some scholars are beginning to place such emphasis on the significance of oral cultures and multiple oral performances that they are now questioning whether it makes sense to talk about "original autographs" at all. When evangelicals, however, speak of inerrancy, they typically talk about inerrancy in "the original autographs." It would have been helpful to know how this emphasis on oral cultures and oral performances in the Gospels affects the authors' thinking on inerrancy.