Morna D. Hooker, ‘On Using the Wrong Tool’, Theology 75 (1972), pp. 570–581 (580–581).

 Morna D. Hooker, ‘On Using the Wrong Tool’, Theology 75 (1972), pp. 570–581 (580–581).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 John Dominic Crossan, The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately after the Execution of Jesus (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998), pp. 143–146. Cf. John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, I, The Roots of the Problem and the Person (abrl; New York: Doubleday, 1991), pp. 167–195.

 John Dominic Crossan, The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately after the Execution of Jesus (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998), pp. 143–146. Cf. John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, I, The Roots of the Problem and the Person (abrl; New York: Doubleday, 1991), pp. 167–195.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992), pp. 427–450.

 John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992), pp. 427–450.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996), pp. 127–133.

 Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996), pp. 127–133.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 10–22.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 10–22.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, p. 165 (original emphasis removed).

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, p. 165 (original emphasis removed).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, p. 171 (original emphasis removed).

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, p. 171 (original emphasis removed).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See also Fernando Bermejo Rubio, ‘La figura histórica de Jesús y los patrones de recurrencia. Por qué los limites de los criterios de autenticidad no abocan al escepticismo’, Estudios Bíblicos 70 (2012), pp. 371–401, for an overview and evaluation of this tendency.

 See also Fernando Bermejo Rubio, ‘La figura histórica de Jesús y los patrones de recurrencia. Por qué los limites de los criterios de autenticidad no abocan al escepticismo’, Estudios Bíblicos 70 (2012), pp. 371–401, for an overview and evaluation of this tendency.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Anthony Le Donne, The Historiographical Jesus: Memory, Typology, and the Son of David (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2009); idem, Historical Jesus: What Can We Know and How Can We Know It? (Grand Rapids and Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2011); idem, ‘Memory, Commemoration and History in John 2.19–22: A Critique and Application of Social Memory’, in A. Le Donne and T. Thatcher (ed.), The Fourth Gospel in First-Century Media Culture (London and New York: T&T Clark, 2011), pp. 186–204.

 Anthony Le Donne, The Historiographical Jesus: Memory, Typology, and the Son of David (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2009); idem, Historical Jesus: What Can We Know and How Can We Know It? (Grand Rapids and Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2011); idem, ‘Memory, Commemoration and History in John 2.19–22: A Critique and Application of Social Memory’, in A. Le Donne and T. Thatcher (ed.), The Fourth Gospel in First-Century Media Culture (London and New York: T&T Clark, 2011), pp. 186–204.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Schröter, ‘The Criteria’, pp. 57–59.

 Schröter, ‘The Criteria’, pp. 57–59.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, ‘How to Marginalize’, p. 11.

 Allison, ‘How to Marginalize’, p. 11.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, ‘How to Marginalize’, p. 12; Schröter, ‘The Criteria’, p. 63.

 Allison, ‘How to Marginalize’, p. 12; Schröter, ‘The Criteria’, p. 63.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Rudolf Bultmann, Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1921); Ernst Käsemann, ‘Das Problem des historischen Jesus’, ztk 51 (1954), pp. 125–53; Norman Perrin, Rediscovering the Teaching of Jesus (London: scm, 1967); John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (4 vols.; a[y]brl; New York: Doubleday, 1991–2001; New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2009); Tom Holmén, ‘Authenticity Criteria’, in C. A. Evans (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Historical Jesus (London: Routledge, 2008), pp. 43–54.

 Rudolf Bultmann, Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1921); Ernst Käsemann, ‘Das Problem des historischen Jesus’, ztk 51 (1954), pp. 125–53; Norman Perrin, Rediscovering the Teaching of Jesus (London: scm, 1967); John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (4 vols.; a[y]brl; New York: Doubleday, 1991–2001; New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2009); Tom Holmén, ‘Authenticity Criteria’, in C. A. Evans (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Historical Jesus (London: Routledge, 2008), pp. 43–54.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, p. 164.

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, p. 164.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, pp. 164–165.

 Keith, ‘Memory and Authenticity’, pp. 164–165.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, ‘The Indebtedness’, pp. 29, 37.

 Keith, ‘The Indebtedness’, pp. 29, 37.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Byrskog, ‘Introduction’, p. 19.

 Byrskog, ‘Introduction’, p. 19.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, ‘The Indebtedness’, p. 37.

 Keith, ‘The Indebtedness’, p. 37.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Tuckett, ‘Form Criticism’, p. 37.

 Tuckett, ‘Form Criticism’, p. 37.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 David Friedrich Strauss, Das Leben Jesu, kritisch bearbeitet (2 vols.; Tübingen: Ossiander, 4th edn [reprint of 1st edn], 1840), pp. 100–105.

 David Friedrich Strauss, Das Leben Jesu, kritisch bearbeitet (2 vols.; Tübingen: Ossiander, 4th edn [reprint of 1st edn], 1840), pp. 100–105.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Strauss, Das Leben Jesu, p. 103.

 Strauss, Das Leben Jesu, p. 103.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 F. C. Burkitt, The Gospel History and Its Transmission (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1906), pp. 147–168; Heinrich Weinel, Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Die Religion Jesu und des Urchristentums (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2nd edn, 1913), p. 45.

 F. C. Burkitt, The Gospel History and Its Transmission (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1906), pp. 147–168; Heinrich Weinel, Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Die Religion Jesu und des Urchristentums (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2nd edn, 1913), p. 45.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Johannes Weiss, Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892); Schmiedel, ‘Gospels’, cols. 1872–1873. See Anthony Le Donne, ‘The Criterion of Coherence: Its Development, Inevitability, and Historiographical Limitations’, in Keith and Le Donne (ed.), Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise, pp. 95–114 (97–99).

 Johannes Weiss, Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892); Schmiedel, ‘Gospels’, cols. 1872–1873. See Anthony Le Donne, ‘The Criterion of Coherence: Its Development, Inevitability, and Historiographical Limitations’, in Keith and Le Donne (ed.), Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise, pp. 95–114 (97–99).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Keith, Jesus’ Literacy, pp. 62–63.

 Keith, Jesus’ Literacy, pp. 62–63.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 31–220.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 31–220.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 23.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 23.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, ‘How to Marginalize’, p. 26.

 Allison, ‘How to Marginalize’, p. 26.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 53–54.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 53–54.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 53–54 n. 98.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 53–54 n. 98.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Goodacre, ‘Criticizing the Criterion’, pp. 159–162.

 Goodacre, ‘Criticizing the Criterion’, pp. 159–162.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Goodacre, ‘Criticizing the Criterion’, p. 166.

 Goodacre, ‘Criticizing the Criterion’, p. 166.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, pp. 141–143.

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, pp. 141–143.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, pp. 145–146.

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, pp. 145–146.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, p. 145.

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, p. 145.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Seeley, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act’, pp. 273–282; idem, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act Revisited’, pp. 60–62.

 Seeley, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act’, pp. 273–282; idem, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act Revisited’, pp. 60–62.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Seeley, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act’, pp. 264–271; idem, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act Revisited’, pp. 59–60.

 Seeley, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act’, pp. 264–271; idem, ‘Jesus’ Temple Act Revisited’, pp. 59–60.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 237.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 237.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 237–238, 264.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 237–238, 264.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 404.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 404.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 423.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 423.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 425.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 425.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 426–427.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, pp. 426–427.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, pp. 146–147. It is Rodríguez’s logic that falters here. The idea that a tradition that suits the transmitters’ agenda must have been invented by those transmitters is unfounded, but the idea that a tradition that works against the agenda of the transmitters can hardly have been invented by them is very well founded. Moreover, Rodríguez’s assertion that ‘[e]very word from or about Jesus made sense within and served post-crucifixion theological and ideological perspectives’ (p. 147) is gratuitous. As an ironical matter of fact, such a sweeping statement could only be accepted by someone who subscribes exactly to early form criticism’s ‘presentist’ approach to memory. See further Fernando Bermejo-Rubio, ‘Changing Methods, Unpalatable Truths: Should the Criterion of Embarrassment Be Dismissed in Jesus Research?’ rej 175 (2016), forthcoming, for a more thorough critique of Rodríguez’s reasoning.

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, pp. 146–147. It is Rodríguez’s logic that falters here. The idea that a tradition that suits the transmitters’ agenda must have been invented by those transmitters is unfounded, but the idea that a tradition that works against the agenda of the transmitters can hardly have been invented by them is very well founded. Moreover, Rodríguez’s assertion that ‘[e]very word from or about Jesus made sense within and served post-crucifixion theological and ideological perspectives’ (p. 147) is gratuitous. As an ironical matter of fact, such a sweeping statement could only be accepted by someone who subscribes exactly to early form criticism’s ‘presentist’ approach to memory. See further Fernando Bermejo-Rubio, ‘Changing Methods, Unpalatable Truths: Should the Criterion of Embarrassment Be Dismissed in Jesus Research?’ rej 175 (2016), forthcoming, for a more thorough critique of Rodríguez’s reasoning.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, p. 147.

 Rodríguez, ‘The Embarrassing Truth’, p. 147.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 20 n. 85.

 Allison, Constructing Jesus, p. 20 n. 85.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 Le Donne, ‘The Criterion of Coherence’, p. 96. I find this nomenclature to be a significant improvement over against Le Donne’s previous dichotomizing of ‘memory’ and ‘invention’ (idem, The Historiographical Jesus, p. 86).

 Le Donne, ‘The Criterion of Coherence’, p. 96. I find this nomenclature to be a significant improvement over against Le Donne’s previous dichotomizing of ‘memory’ and ‘invention’ (idem, The Historiographical Jesus, p. 86).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation