Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus. Edited by Tom Holmen and Stanley E. Porter. (Leiden: Brill, 2011. 4 vols: I. How to Study the Historical Jesus; II. The Study ofjesus; III. 3 The Historical Jesus; IV. 4 Individual Studies. Pp. xxi, 3652. $1,329.00, cloth.) Jesus' teaching and preaching perhaps was not that clear even to his disciples, leading him to ask Who do people say that I am? There were diverse answers but the Christian tradition accepted Peter's confession, at least until Hermann Samuel Reimarus in the eighteenth century. Since then, no single voice has prevailed in academic circles. Further, academic research has neither reduced the possible answers nor limited the diversity in approaches and methodologies. Consequently, this Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus uses terms such as morass and maze to describe, quite accurately it must also be confessed, the present state of historical Jesus research. Thus in its attempt to provide academic order, this four volume work should perhaps be described as a roadmap as well as an encyclopedia, close study of which will prevent the scholar and student from straying, sinking in details or becoming lost in the footnotes all too characteristic of the myriad of diverse scholarly monographs devoted to this subject. The editors Tom Holmen (Finland) and Stanley E. Porter (Canada) admit, indeed confess, both the multiplicity of methods, diversities of approaches, and, of course, the resultant differing conclusions. These are the reasons for their massive handbook, one which strives for comprehensiveness, but without sacrificing detail or the opposing viewpoint. The results that could slow or confuse research, are instead, taken by the editors as positive signs of both the interest in the historical Jesus as well as the creativity of contemporary scholarship. Indeed this comprehensive handbook includes chapters contributed by over one hundred scholars from about twenty countries. The breadth is also evident when looking at the individual essays. The variety of notable scholars who contributed to this work is commendable: John Dominic Crossan, James D. G. Dunn, Colin Brown, Scot McKnight and Luke Timothy Johnson, to mention a selection. It is notable that two major scholars in the study of the historical Jesus are not contributors: Marcus Borg and N. T. Wright do not have contributions. There is even a chapter by the British scholar J. D. G. Dunn, Remembering Jesus: How the Quest ofjesus Lost its Way (1:183-206) that sets out his disagreements with many of the presuppositions of the modern quest for the historical Jesus. These include questioning the assumption that what defines Jesus is difference or uniqueness, stressing the importance of Jesus' mission and its oral or tradition transmission. Dunn's chapter, like all the contrihutors, is supported hy an absolute wealth of detailed footnotes. This demonstrates the editors' willingness to include as broad a range of views on the subject. The first volume, How to Study the Historical Jesus, is foundational in that it deals with the question of methodology. Not only has the study of the historical Jesus expanded dramatically since the early twentieth century, but the methods and approaches have diverged widely. Often the choice of one methodology will partly determine the results, or even obscure other results. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».