Current Trends In Third-Quest Research -- By: Benjamin I. Simpson

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 171:682 (Apr 2014)
Article: Current Trends In Third-Quest Research
Author: Benjamin I. Simpson


Current Trends In Third-Quest Research

Benjamin I. Simpson

Benjamin I. Simpson is Assistant Professor of New Testament Studies and Assistant Dean, Dallas Theological Seminary, Houston Extension.

Wright’s declaration of a Third Quest for the historical Jesus spawned a number of works placing Jesus within His Jewish context. Wright defined this movement as one of serious historians with “no unified background or programme” who believe “that it is possible to know quite a lot about Jesus of Nazareth and that it is worth while to do so.”1 Elsewhere he defined the Third Quest as carefully considering Jesus’ Jewish context and His aims and constructing a picture of Jesus that coheres with His death.2 The loosely defined historiography of the Third Quest has had a positive effect in historical Jesus studies in that historians with diverse backgrounds have carried on the conversation, setting aside theological questions to write history.3 It has also, however, created room for diverse historical methods and conclusions. A comparison of Third-Quest historians at different stages of the phase will show how the method has evolved; yet certain

elements have remained the same. The first part of this article will survey historical Jesus research. The second part will compare the work of J. P. Meier and James D. G. Dunn. This will situate the Third Quest within historical Jesus research and show how the movement has shifted.

Survey Of Historical Jesus Research

Most Jesus scholars highlight four phases of Jesus research: (1) the “First Quest” or the “Old Quest,” (2) the “No Quest,” (3) the “New Quest” or the “Second Quest,” and (4) the “Third Quest.”4 Surveyors note that the First Quest (1778-1906) began with Hermann Reimarus5 and ended with Albert Schweitzer.6 Reimarus approached the Gospels with rationalism. He argued that Jesus’ message made sense in light of the Jewish context, apart from early Christian dogma. According to Reimarus, Jesus died as a political revolutionary and the disciples invented the resurrection as a cover-up. After Reimarus, antidogmatic, rationalistic portraits of Jesus typified most life-of-Jesus research during this phase. In 1906, Schweitzer criticized these portraits by arguing that a rationalistic Jesus who communicated in modern terms ...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()