Criterion of embarrassment
| ← Previous revision | Revision as of 13:32, 24 April 2026 | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Examples== |
==Examples== |
||
The [[crucifixion of Jesus]] is an example of an event that meets the criterion of embarrassment. This method of [[execution]] was considered the most shameful and degrading in the [[Roman world]], and advocates of the criterion claim this method of execution is therefore the least likely to have been invented by the followers of Jesus.Guy Davenport and Benjamin Urrutia, ''The Logia of Yeshua'', Washington, DC 1996.John P. Meier, ''A Marginal Jew'', Yale University Press, 2009N. S.Gill, [http://ancienthistory.about.com/b/a/229667.htm ''Discussion of the Historical Jesus''] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070316185139/http://ancienthistory.about.com/b/a/229667.htm |date=March 16, 2007 }}{{cite web |url=http://blue.butler.edu/~jfmcgrat/jesus/intro.htm |title=Blue Butler Education, ''Historical Study of Jesus of Nazareth - An Introduction'' |publisher=Blue.butler.edu |date=2005-03-04 |access-date=2018-04-16}} |
The [[crucifixion of Jesus]] is an example of an event that allegedly meets the criterion of embarrassment. This method of [[execution]] was considered the most shameful and degrading in the [[Roman world]], and advocates of the criterion claim this method of execution is therefore the least likely to have been invented by the followers of Jesus.Guy Davenport and Benjamin Urrutia, ''The Logia of Yeshua'', Washington, DC 1996.John P. Meier, ''A Marginal Jew'', Yale University Press, 2009N. S.Gill, [http://ancienthistory.about.com/b/a/229667.htm ''Discussion of the Historical Jesus''] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070316185139/http://ancienthistory.about.com/b/a/229667.htm |date=March 16, 2007 }}{{cite web |url=http://blue.butler.edu/~jfmcgrat/jesus/intro.htm |title=Blue Butler Education, ''Historical Study of Jesus of Nazareth - An Introduction'' |publisher=Blue.butler.edu |date=2005-03-04 |access-date=2018-04-16}} |
||
The assumption of the criterion of embarrassment is that the [[early church]] would hardly have gone out of its way to create or falsify historical material that embarrassed its author or weakened its position in arguments with opponents. Rather, embarrassing material coming from Jesus would be either suppressed or softened in later stages of the [[Gospel]] tradition. This criterion is rarely used by itself, and is typically one of a number of criteria, such as the [[criterion of dissimilarity]] and the [[criterion of multiple attestation]], along with the [[historical method]]. |
The assumption of the criterion of embarrassment is that the [[early church]] would hardly have gone out of its way to create or falsify historical material that embarrassed its author or weakened its position in arguments with opponents. Rather, embarrassing material coming from Jesus would be either suppressed or softened in later stages of the [[Gospel]] tradition. This criterion is rarely used by itself, and is typically one of a number of criteria, such as the [[criterion of dissimilarity]] and the [[criterion of multiple attestation]], along with the [[historical method]]. |
||
The [[Satanic Verses]] is also an event that meets the criterion of embarrassment. Scholars consider the event to be historical due to the thought of Muhammad praising Pagan goddesses would be embarrassing and the earliest biographies mention it.{{Citation |title=3. Why Did the Early Muslim Community Accept the Satanic Verses Incident as Truth? |date=2017-12-31 |work=Before Orthodoxy |pages=265–302 |url=https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674977372-004 |access-date=2026-04-24 |publisher=Harvard University Press}} |
|||
==Limitations== |
==Limitations== |
||
