What is the difference between Christ of faith and the historical Jesus?

Answer 1

Well, there's virtually no evidence for an historical Jesus, so this question can't really be answered.

Answer 2

For one, the historical Jesus may or may not be historical. While from the number of writings about his early followers would indicate that there was someone to follow, there is no evidence of the actual man.

The Christ of faith, is largely portrayed by the gospels which were not written until over 70 years after his death and two are likely to have been copied/paraphrased from another document.

Answer 3

The historical Jesus was a young Jewish radical who got on everyone's nerves, especially the Romans. They had a nasty habit of crucifying Jews, sometimes up to a hundred in one day, and they did the same to Jesus.

He lived and died a practising Jew and if he started any 'religion' then it would be Reform Judaism. He never claimed, in reality, to 'fulfill' or 'complete' Judaism, nor that Judaic law should be set aside, nor that the covenant between the Jews and G-d was invalid.

These ideas were put forward decades after Jesus died, by people like Paul. Paul never even met Jesus.

Answer 4

The "historical Jesus" is the attempt to construct the life of Christ based on modern critical reading techniques. For example, John Dominic Crossan has suggested that walking on water cannot be real because no human has the ability to suspend their specific gravity or to make a liquid into a solid with their mind, and Jesus was fully human (according to Hebrews). So, we end up with a metaphorical resurrection, no virgin birth, miracles of healing only (and then only of psychological healing mostly), and so on. This Jesus is more human, imperfect.

Marcus Borg and others in the Jesus Seminar have argued this Jesus is no less God Incarnate, but if God really became fully human and we employ textual anaysis then we can see the realistic Jesus for the revelation of God in man, our central concern and the revelation of what a human life completely fileld with God looks like.

In response, the more reasonable conservatives like Tim Luke Johnson and NT Wright respond that this Jesus is easier to believe in, yes, but is no longer the Jesus of the Christian faith and no longer leaves anything which would compel faith in this man as special or unique.

I myself am agnostic as to the factuality of walking on water. What I care about is what truth that story tells me about Jesus, who I believe was and is the symbol for us of grace in time, the role model, God's eternal revelation in time.

Highly recommend Marcus Borg's Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time and any of NT Wright's books on Jesus to get teh opposing viewpoints expressed very reasonably. There is a book called Two View of Jesus or something like that where those two guys talk about these things quite civilly.

Answer 5

Nothing other than the fact that the Bible goes into greater details on the life of Christ. There are many historically evidences of the existence of Christ and the attitudes of his followers.

Answer 6

What historical Jesus? There is no historical record of anyone calling them self Jesus outside of the bible.

Answer 7

The historical Jesus (read: the real one) was a man who went around telling people to love each other, and got nailed to a tree for it.

The mythological Jesus that was invented years after his death was the son of God who was sent to earth to live as a man, was crucified, came back to life and ascended into heaven. They claim that if you believe in him that you are 'saved' from your sins.

No really - people actually believe this stuff!!

Answer 8

Sorry folks that disagree with this...Historically there was a Jesus that the Roman's documented as having crucified. That's not a fairytale. As far as the "Christ" of faith...NOT SON OF GOD and DIDN'T PERISH TO ABSOLVE HUMANITY OF IT'S SINS. Happy Holidays!

Answer 9

Historical would be a clear record kept by goverment or some other group in charge. Christ of faith is who we, christians, worship. One in the same, though historical is harder to see because its 2000 years old.

Answer 10

A believer would say there is no difference.

My take is that when it comes to a non-divine human who said a lot of great and wise things, I have no trouble believing Jesus existed. Why not? There have been many non-divine human beings through the ages who have said great and wise things: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Ovid, Confusious, etc.