Abstract
This article enters into the debate over the place of memory studies in Jesus research by examining the question of whether or not Jesus anticipated his demise, analyzing the method and arguments of Dale Allison’s, Constructing Jesus (2010) as a test case. It responds to criticisms of Allison’s work, demonstrating that his approach relies on more than a mere appeal to the general trustworthiness of early memories about Jesus. Although critical of the standard ‘criteria of authenticity,’ Allison makes his case for the eschatological character of Jesus’ perspective by highlighting other indicators of historical plausibility. In sum, this paper demonstrates that memory research has much to offer Jesus studies, though its application must be carefully supplemented with other considerations.