A: The process for studying the historical Jesus is called "quest" because Albert Schweitzer called it that in 1906, and it became common thereafter. If Schweitzer had called his book "search for Jesus" that may have become the topic name. But the whole field now calls it "quest", in the same way that New York is called New York. The fact that scholars widely use the terms "second quest" and "third quest" is an indication that the term has been totally attached to the topic now, and is hence used per WP:Commonname.
Q 2
How is this article different from Historical Jesus?
A: This article discusses the "processes and the techniques" used by academics. The Historical Jesus article discusses the end product of those efforts. This is in the same sense that automobile manufacturing is the process by which automobile is produced as an end product. Another analogy for this article being about the "academic process" and the Historical Jesus article being about the "material/end product" is this:
The article Coffeemaker discusses a "device and a process" for making coffee.
The article on Coffee discusses material involved in and produced by the process.
Of course, the Coffee and Coffeemaker pages refer to each other, but they are separate concepts and separate articles. So this article (which is about the process) and the Historical Jesus article (which is about the material/product) refer to each other, but are distinct concepts and articles.
Q 3
How does this article fit in the overall scheme of the articles on Jesus?
This article is about "techniques and processes" for gaining an understanding of Jesus. The article Historicity of Jesus on the other hand does not address these issues, but only focuses on the very basic issue of the "existence of Jesus" - in effect only addressing the question: "Did Jesus walk the streets of Jerusalem?". The Historical Jesus article discusses the various aspects of what can be understood about the activities of Jesus as he walked the streets or preached, e.g. "Was Jesus seen as a social reformer by the people of his time?" These are hence three different aspects and topics with three separate articles. For a further overview of the related articles, please see Jesus and history which lists more items.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bahá'í Faith, a coordinated attempt to increase the quality and quantity of information about the Baháʼí Faith on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.Bahá'í FaithWikipedia:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithTemplate:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithBahá'í Faith
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
Bernier, Jonathan (2016), The Quest for the Historical Jesus after the Demise of Authenticity: Toward a Critical Realist Philosophy of History in Jesus Studies, Bloomsbury Publishing
Yup, "postmodern" has come to mean "there are no facts" or "we may spin history the way we want". And for some fundamentalist Christians, the historical Jesus is bogus scholarship. Fundamentalist Christians are not by default opposed to postmodernism, some found in it a way to do away with science. Tgeorgescu (talk) 08:56, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This construction implies that Houston was the author, when he has been established as the translator. I am guessing that "(who stated in a confession that he was the author)" or ("claimed authorship in a confession") would better reflect the facts. Since I don't know the facts, I am referring this question to someone here who might know them. Thank you. Michael (talk) 14:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hardyplants: Of course, Jewish and Christian authors did write about Jesus in the 1st century. That's how we have much of the New Testament and apocryphal books about Jesus. Ehrman meant that no 1st century AD Greek or Roman author wrote about Jesus, with the exception of Jews and Christians. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It never appears to have been formally adopted, it was boldly added to the article and I reverted that bold addition. Do you disagree with my interpretation of history? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No you can't that isn't how WP:CONSENSUS works... There is no formal adoption other than an actual active consensus... And remember, for there to be an FAQ there actually have to be frequently asked questions... It isn't an answer to hypothetical questions, thats why this is so weird. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 05:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Q2 and Q3 also don't appear to be true anymore... And Q1 is very strongly and personally worded, its formatted as a personal opinion not a community answer. None of it seems to reflect community consensus or to be frankly all that helpful. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How are Q2 and Q3 not correct anymore? I don't perceive Q1 as "very strongly and personally worded"; it just explains why the term "quest" is being used. Again, nobody objected in 12 years, so that's a kind of consensus. Regarding "not helpfull," that's relevant; why do you think it's not helpfull? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!04:12, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its an implicit consensus which ends the moment its challenged... And 12 years is worth the same as 12 minutes. I don't think it actually solves any problems. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 05:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody seems to care about it either except as a blunt instrument, it took a decade for an obvious error to be corrected[1]... One so obvious it makes you wonder whether anyone actually read the whole thing up until then. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point; frankly, I never read it myself either. Hmmm.... So, obviously, this may be an arguument against it. But then, again, it doesn't hurt either to have some explanation, does it? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!04:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So generally the way it works is that you make a FAQ after you have frequently asked questions... Unless I'm missing something nobody has ever asked "Why is the term "quest" used here?" Horse Eye's Back (talk) 05:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
