Customer Reviews

The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The author is Canon Theologian of Westminster Abbey, and this book represents a distillation of ideas he presents at length in lengthy scholarly publications, which engage in "mainstream" historical debate about Jesus and first-century Christianity. Wright debates, however, without setting aside personal commitment to and belief in the essential truth and genuine historicity (of Jesus's resurrection, for example) which the New Testament books and letters claim. This does not mean that he feels bound to toe any particular line defined as orthodox. "I am someone who believes that being a Christian necessarily entails doing business with history and that history done for all it's worth will challenge spurious versions of Christianity, including many that think of themselves as orthodox, while sustaining and regenerating a deep and true orthodoxy, surprising and challenging though this will always remain." (p 16) I would have to let theolgians offer opinions on the orthodoxy of Wright's arguments; but these arguments are in any case stimulating and bring fresh air to scriptural study and devotional contemplation. There are three areas where Wright challenges what he feels are common misunderstandings about Jesus. First, he argues that "Jesus remained utterly anchored in first-century Judaism" (p 73), and that everything he said and did was a "unique challenge to his contemporaries" and was "related uniquely and specifically to that situation" [i.e. in the first century] (p 174). Wright feels that this approach closes off the possibility of Deism, or of seeing Jesus merely as one of several `great men' of a certain type in human history, a type of deeply wise, gentle moral philosopher preaching timeless aphorisms. By setting studying Jesus in his historical context alone, and shutting off (at least for the moment) the universality of his words and deeds, we come to a better understanding of their profound radicality and significance. Jesus was casting himself as the culminating nexus of everything that Jewish history and prophecy had been pointing to. Wright shows how this approach helps us to understand better why the first Christians (who were Jews) became utterly convinced that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, whose message had to be taken to the Gentiles. Wright cautions that his approach does not mean that Jesus loses his relevance for today - "this fear is groundless". "The key I propose for translating Jesus' unique message to the Israel of his day into our message to our contemporaries is to grasp the parallel, which is woven deeply into both Testaments, between the human call to bear God's image and Israel's call to be the light of the world. ... Jesus came as the true Israel, the true Jew, the true human." (p 184) The author also challenges what he considers a creeping Docetism into our modern understanding of who Jesus was, and of how he understood his vocation and what he believed himself to be. Wright's arguments in this book, although shortened from his methodical treatment in other books, are still to complex - challenging - to outline in a review. He urges Christians to "forget the `titles' of Jesus, at least for a moment; forget the attempts of some well-meaning Christians to make Jesus of Nazareth conscious of being the second person of the Trinity" (p 122-123), as these approaches can reduce Jesus to almost a ghostly, supernatural presence, when in fact he was a breathing, sleeping, walking man who suffered and died. Third: in the final two chapters of the book Wright explains why he feels that postmodern philosophy has discredited modern philosophy (modern = 18th, 19th, early 20th centuries), with its claim that science can uncover objective truth, and why we should not fear this. Rather, he considers that Christianity can fluorish as well or better in the postmodern intellectual world, and mixes the argument with personal, devotional reflections on what it means to be a follower of Jesus today. I recommend the book espcially to anyone who wants to read an intellectually rigorous challenge to the conclusions of those historians who wish, however tactfully, to debunk Christianity.

"Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation" (2 Corinthians 5:18 ) Jesus Christ came to reconcile us with the Father. Through his wounds we are healed.

In "The Challenge of Jesus," N.T. Wright does a good job of helping us to try and look at Jesus with our blinders off. Rejecting the thesis of Wrede, and following in the footsteps of Schweitzer, Wright believes that we can learn a good deal about the actual, "Historical" Jesus (my, how that phrase has been abused in the last half-century) through doing the work of history.

I praise Wright for attempting this grand task. "The Challenge of Jesus" is a shorter distillation of Wright's larger ongoing work which at the time of my writing consists of two published volumes (The New Testament and the People of God; Jesus and the Victory of God) with the series length now projected at six volumes total. This volume is no doubt aimed at a broader audience than Wright's more scholarly work.

Wright attempts to look at Jesus without the lens of a controlling theology. I like this a lot. We should always read the Bible for what it actually says, remembering the context in which they were written, and then build our theology from that foundation. Too often, we make up a theology and then try and fit its square peg into the round hole that the Word of God confronts us with...there is a word for this kind of thing: idolatry.

Wright manages to do a fairly good job of interacting with the Bible and history. He does disappoint me on his views of Jesus knowing whether he is God or not...he gives a waffling answer with unsatisfactory support.

Wright's Jesus comes out looking a lot like the Jesus of orthodoxy in the things that he did: proclaiming the Kingdom, Dying a sacrificial, atoning, and reconciling death, making clear claims to divinity (in spite of Wright's own weird view on the matter,) and being Bodily Resurrected on a Sunday morning...the startling part of the book is the perspective...Wright solidly locates Jesus and his message within the milieu of second temple Judaism...the results give a whole new spin on the Message of Jesus. For me, this book has strengthened my walk with the Savior.

In spite of its flaws, I'm giving this one five stars...it is incredibly thought-provoking. I recommend this book most highly.

This is an excellent book if you want a quick overview of Wright's thought, yet you are not ready to purchase and read the books in his Christian Origins series. For most Christians, the ideas expressed in this book will be unsettling.

The goal of the book is to view Jesus (and the Gospels) from a first century Jewish perspective, not from a 16th century Reformation or 21st century Christian perspective. Wright attempts to peel away the theological and historical layers that have accumulated around the actual, historical figure of Jesus.

The sections in the book are: (1) Wright's methodology used, (2) a 1st century view/understanding of the Kingdom of God, the Parables, the crucifixion, and the resurrection, and (3) how should a 20th/21st century Christian live now they have a historically more accurate view of Jesus.

Though no biblical scholar, I have a background in theology, biblical studies, and history. I found Wright's methodology correct and refreshing. In my Interpreting the Bible class, we were pounded with the dictum that (1) we must first understand what the author of a book in the Bible thought they were saying, (2) what the intended hearers/readers thought was said, and (3) once 1 and 2 were completed accurately we should move to what does the biblical passage mean to us in the 21st century. This is exactly what this book does for the Gospel portrayal of Christ.

Wright focuses on what a 1st century Palestinian Jew living in Galilee would think if they did and said what Jesus said and did. He also looks into what a 1st century Palestinian Jew living in Galilee would think when they heard and saw what Jesus said and did.

Wright makes a good (though not obvious) point that what we Christians hear and think when reading/studying the Gospels is based on a long trail of historical interpretation of the Gospels. The Reformers interpreted the Gospels from a 15th century perspective and had very little evidence to understand the 1st century perspective. A pastor/preacher/priest giving a sermon today sees the Gospels from a historical perspective that has been changed by 20 centuries.

Based on this, how can Wright know the real Jesus? Wright and other scholars have the good fortune of living in a time when 1st century documents have come to light. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library are two examples. Both of these were discovered after 1940. Wright (and other scholars like Geza Vermes) are using these new discoveries to get a more historically accurate view of Jesus and the times he lived in.

If you are an evangelical or have an interest in Jesus, read this book! It will be unsettling and disturbing as (like me) you may find many of your cherished, long held views of Jesus undermined and dismissed. Wright is not out to destroy Jesus or the Christian religion. Wright is not out to make a name for himself by putting forth crazy theories. He is very conservative in his thinking. I think his goal is to try to discover the true meaning of Jesus and the gospels. I don't agree with everything in the book, but I agreed with much of it.

This is the rare book that makes you think. It does not contain the same re-hashed arguments and evidences. Also, the last two chapters examine what it means to live the Christian life today. Unlike most academics, Wright does not give generalities but goes into specifics where he can. This was great! I am always annoyed when I read a self-help or Christian living book and all they give are basic generalities that everyone knows. Wright does not do this, he lets the rubber hit the road and gives you much to think about on living the Christian life in the 21st century.

PREMISE: We have at least two camps (actually more) of persons who study the life of Jesus. There are those who search for the historical Jesus. This camp is too often made up of historians who come at the issue with a bias against traditional Christianity that was born of the enlightenment. Hence, they discount stories of the miraculous because they don't believe in miracles. A second camp is made up of conservative Christian scholars who approach the life of Jesus from a theological bias, born of centuries of Christian tradition. They do believe in miracles, because they have faith. Surprise! Both camps find the Jesus they set out to look for. N.T. Wright is aware of both camps, but writes somewhere outside of either. He approaches Scripture and the life of Jesus through the eyes of Second Temple Period Jewish Politics. His version of the historical Jesus is VERY political. He puts forth a rational case for his thesis, then examines the impact this new vision of Jesus should have on the church in this postmodern world.

AM I CONVINCED? I'm not sure I would say he convinced me, intrigued would be a better word. His case is too unusual to accept at first reading, but he certainly offers the reader a lot to think about, and delivers his message well. I will keep my eyes open a little wider for future discussions of this nature.

RECOMMENDATION: If you like to be challenged, you might like this book. If you are too accepting, you might be tempted to accept his well written premise too easily. If you tend to be a "Defender of the Faith" you might find this book threatening.

N. T. Wright is undoubtedly one of the most important scholars in the field of New Testament Studies today. This book is a shorter, more accessible book of the ideas and research that he fully presents in "Jesus and the Victory of God." Wright's great achievement, in my opinion, is that he takes up the critical questions concerning the historical Jesus (posed by radical skeptics like John Dominic Crossan)...yet he proposes an answer that is at once intellectually credible and yet more faithful to the witness of the Gospels and the testimony of the Christian church. It would be an overstatement to call him a traditional conservative scholar, for he does not shy away from the issues posed by Biblical critics. Yet it is evident that his scholarly endeavor is motivated by a deep, abiding faith that Jesus of Nazareth is the unique revelation of the God of Abraham. This book will offer any serious layperson an enjoyable and challenging read.

Why all this fuss about the quest for the historical Jesus? Don't we have the historical Jesus presented to us in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Why do we need to take a fresh look at Jesus when we (speaking of Christian evangelicals) know who he is already? Ah, but is the Jesus we think we know the real Jesus that walked this earth nearly 2000 years ago? N.T. Wright brings new perspectives in this discussion about Jesus, while remaining thoroughly biblical in this approach. Indeed, he is more rigorously biblical than most, as he recognizes the ministry and message of Jesus as being specific to the first-century Jew. What did the words "Messiah", "Son of Man", "Son of God" and "Kingdom of God" mean to the Jews of that era? What was the central theme of Jesus' ministry? How did he use not only words but symbolic actions to get his message across? What does it mean to say that Jesus is God? Given the specificity of his message, what does that mean for the church and the world today? Wright addresses all these questions and, whether you agree with all he says or not, it makes for provocative reading. As both a scholar and a churchman, Wright makes cutting-edge biblical scholarship understandable and relevant to the average churchgoer, and that is worthy of commendation.

THE AUTHOR

N.T. Wright has proven to be one of the leading New Testament scholars in Christendom and has provided a countless amount of fresh insight into the message of scripture. Clearly, his intellectual prowess has not gone unrecognized. He recently accepted the position as Anglican Bishop of Durham and was previously Canon Theologian of Westminster Abbey and Dean of Litchfield Cathedral. He also taught New Testament studies for twenty years at Cambridge, McGill and Oxford Universities. His magnum opus (to date) includes two volumes of an anticipated six-volume series labeled "Christian Origins and the Question of God". The two published volumes, entitled The New Testament and the People of God and Jesus and the Victory of God, are some of the most substantial works in the "Third Quest" of the historical Jesus.

That is only half of his story, though. His scholastic credentials are quite impressive, but academia is not an end-all for Wright. The community of faith meets historiography halfway-one is not mutually exclusive from the other. In fact, Wright would argue (and does so in The Challenge of Jesus) that the study of history is a necessary part of Christian discipleship. Perhaps it is best to let Wright explain his own experience:

"When I was at seminary in my early twenties, having graduated, I remember talking to one of my advisors about my desire to do both pastoral work and scholarship and the advisor saying very firmly `Well, you're going to have to choose which you want.' And I thought then, and think now, thirty-five years later, that he was wrong, that I have been right to combine the two."

It is out of this framework that Wright presents The Challenge of Jesus.

THE SUMMARY

The full title, The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is, begs the question: What is this work of "rediscovering" Jesus? Has he been lost? These questions are not lost on the reader, though, as Wright addresses them without delay. In opening, Wright acquaints his reader with the focus of his work. His purpose, as he states in the opening remarks, involves three facets. First, Wright intends to preserve "historical integrity in talking about Jesus" (p. 10). Secondly, Wright directs his attention to "the Christian discipleship that professes to follow the true Jesus" (p. 11). Finally, Wright asserts that it simply will not do for Christians to practice their faith in private and neglect the "commission to be for the world what he [Jesus] was for the Israel of his day" (p. 11). Thus, his third objective involves equipping believers with a mighty vision that has the power and authority to change the world.

With these objectives in mind, Wright divides his book into two sections. Within the first six chapters, Wright constructs a Jesus free from the distortions of Reformation and Enlightenment theology. In short, he outlines a historical Jesus-Jesus as he appeared in first-century Palestine. After Wright has unveiled his rendering of Jesus, he uses the final two chapters to connect with the postmodern world in which readers find themselves. He directs Christians to take their understanding of the historical Jesus and and grow in faith.

As demanding as pure historical work can be, Wright maintains that in studying the life of Jesus, this type of tedious research simply cannot be sidestepped in favor of another methodology. In the first section, therefore, Wright performs the necessary work of uncovering the facts that characterized first-century Palestine. The focus of the book is not ancient history, so Wright avoids writing a textbook on the antiquities. He does, however, read his interpretation of the life and mission of Jesus while preserving a first-century Jewish perspective.

There are six subsections devoted to unearthing the historical Jesus, each having its own chapter. The first chapter sets the tone for the remainder of the book and is vital to understanding the work as a whole. In it, Wright exposes the blunders of studying Jesus out of his historical context, namely through Enlightenment or Reformation lenses. After establishing his methodology for studying Jesus, Wright deals with issues and questions that surround Jesus' ministry. He then offers his opinion on how first-century Jews and Gentiles would have understood Jesus' message. Wright focuses on the following issues: Jesus' proclamation concerning the Kingdom of God, the challenge Jesus presented in relation to Jewish symbols, the realization of the Jewish sacrificial system in Jesus' crucifixion, Jesus' deity, and the Resurrection. It is within these middle chapters that Wright adds details to aid the reader in understanding the first-century perception of Jesus. For instance, the reader is encouraged to view Jesus' mission as extensively political (albeit eschatological) in nature. Also, he draws the parallel of Jesus' redeeming action to that of Jewish history, particularly the events of the Exile and Restoration. This view, Wright explains, is most certainly how a first-century Jew would have understood Jesus' vocation. These, among others, are Wright's attempts to bring the reader as near to first-century Palestine as pen-and-ink can draw.

This particular work of Wright's is not stuck in the first century, though, and the author has had his eyes fixed on the contemporary situation throughout the book. It is within the final two chapters that Wright takes the historical Jesus and applies his message to a postmodern world. The significance of the book, therefore, culminates within the last section as Wright presents his challenge: present-day Christians should be to their world what Israel was to the Old Testament World and what Jesus was to Israel. In short, Christians should be "the Light of the World"-a title that negates fear of the postmodernist movement.

THE CRITIQUE

N.T. Wright demonstrates his brilliant writing skills in The Challenge of Jesus. However, the ultimate test of a work lies not in the hands of an author's scholarship, but with its intended audience. Literature can be eloquently written, historically accurate, and logically sound, but if it falls short of its objectives, has anything really been accomplished? In the preface, Wright defines three specific purposes for writing this book (see section "The Author"). These, therefore, should be used as the benchmark in evaluating this book.

His first aim involves maintaining historical accuracy concerning the study of Jesus, and this goal has, for the most part, been met. Wright makes use of recent discoveries (such as the Dead Sea Scrolls) to support his arguments, and when confronted with the evidence he presents, it is difficult for one to deny his stance. That is not to say that he overlooks other scholarly opinions, though. Perhaps one of the strongest parts of his work is Wright's willingness to confront tough issues head-on. In fact, he acknowledges that the questions raised by other scholars in this field (Schweitzer, Reimarus, and Crossan, among many others) are even necessary and denies, therefore, the inflexible dogmatism that characterizes many Christians (p. 20)! Wright's evenhanded position on most issues found in the book lends the reader to believing that he is getting an unbiased opinion toward an authentic historical description. How rare! His efforts intended to cut through Reformation and Enlightenment theology do not go unnoticed and, at least for this reviewer, are much appreciated.

Nevertheless, the historical work Wright performed is not foolproof and can be improved upon. One section Wright needs to reconsider is the chapter entitled "Jesus and God". He seems a bit too presumptuous in assuming that he is able to understand Jesus' psychological state. Claims like, "I do not believe Jesus `knew he was God' in the same sense that one knows one is hungry or thirsty, tall or short," (p. 121) are shaky at best and should have been avoided. Wright should have treated this subject a bit more delicately and not been so hasty in his assertions.

In addition, there is an unnecessary amount of information concerning the effect of the Enlightenment on Christianity. Without question, Enlightenment theology distorted the Christian faith. However, for a book that is limited in focus, Wright would have done better to bypass how the Enlightenment misinterpreted faith and reason, only acknowledging that it did. Because tracing why postmodern Christians think as they do is not one of his goals, time would have been better spent elsewhere. Also, without denying Wright's scholarship, is he in a place to speculate on the Enlightenment's mammoth effects? In fact, Wright actually admits that he is no "eighteenth-century specialist" and that his premise derives from "what little (he knows) of the last five hundred years" (p. 18-19). Perhaps he should let that issue be handled by someone who could treat it more carefully. All this is not to say that Wright did poorly on his overall historical analysis, though. In reality, there are few better.

The tedious task of dealing with historical data in The Challenge of Jesus could have easily been made stale and unproductive. However, Wright managed to compile the names, people, places, and dates into a kaleidoscope of vibrant color and relate them to a modern world-far from an easy task. His second ambition, therefore, of encouraging Christian discipleship rooted in Jesus himself is accomplished. Do not fail to notice the ground-breaking effect of what Wright has done. For many Christians, their long-espoused perceptions of an unexciting, unchallenging Jesus have been shattered and replaced with the "sharp and craggy message" (p. 17) that Jesus left behind . This newly-found perception of (and relationship with) Jesus opens up a much richer and more profound world for discipleship and prayer. For Wright, this revelation is personal. He acknowledges that when he says the Christian creeds he means them sincerely, but that after twenty years of historical study he intends "something much deeper, much more challenging" than he did when he first began (p. 17-18). Wright's personal testimony reflects the crux of his second intention-that his brothers and sisters in Christ would share in his experience of intimacy with God through discipleship based on historical study. Because Wright recounts his own experience, his second objective is made more believable.

Wright's departing desire is not confined to a study room, however. It involves equipping Christians with the power of God's gospel to revolutionize the world. Wright's final goal for writing is, indeed, his strongest. Refusing to let readers remain dormant in an ever-shifting culture, Wright encourages his readers to apply their knowledge of discipleship to radically affect their lives, as well as the world around them. The final section is a motivating, uplifting, and refreshing perspective on how to employ one's discipleship training.

Wright was thorough in his treatment of this subject and would be hard-pressed to fit more applicable, practical information into two chapters. As the author of one critique suggested, Wright lets the "rubber hit the road" by avoiding the same, boring generalities one usually finds in a "self-help" book .

Additionally, his comparison of Psalms 42 and 43, the two men on the road to Emmaus, and the present condition of living in a postmodern world was no less than masterful. It certainly brought to light God's dealings throughout history while challenging Christians to live under God's power-the same power that raised Christ from the dead. Finally, this section reaffirms what Wright has been saying all along: before interpreting what Jesus means for the present condition, he must be clearly set in a first-century Jewish perspective.

In conclusion, it is necessary to see not just how, but why Wright continues on his search for the historical Jesus. In the first chapter, entitled "The Challenge of Studying Jesus", Wright lays out exactly why he feels compelled to participate in the Third Quest. He testifies that humans are made to be a praise of God's glory (p. 16). That statement alone speaks volumes on behalf of N.T. Wright. His quest is not one of personal gain, nor is he seeking to be decorated with an elaborate array of awards. He has chosen to demolish the dividing wall that separates scholarship and faith as he testifies that when "Christianity is truest to itself...it denies precisely this dichotomy," (p. 16). The Challenge of Jesus presents its readers with a unique, yet rewarding responsibility: devote oneself to accurate historical study of scripture, and use that knowledge to transform the world as a praise of God's glory.

N.T. Wright is the Anglican Bishop of Durham (England) and also a leading scriptural scholar. (By the way, for some reason he doesn't use his full name when writing and publishing - the N.T. stands for Nicholas Thomas.) I've been wanting to read a sample of his work, and "The Challenge of Jesus" was a good choice. It is an abbreviated version, with some new material on the resurrection, of his book "Jesus and the Victory of God." And that book is the second of a projected six volume series! So this book is not really designed for other scholars, but for serious amateurs!

In the preface, Wright outlines the three goals of the book: (1) maintain historical integrity, (2)examine how Christian discipleship flows from following Jesus, and (3) how we are to be for the contemporary world, what Jesus was to Israel?

There are eight chapters, with the first six taken up with Who was Jesus? (Of course this is the question, isn't it? How many books have been written addressing that question?) He looks at the historical Jesus as he would have appeared to a first century Palestinian Jew. Some of Wright's commentary looks at Jesus' understanding of his Messiahship (P. 89), Jesus Messiahship and his followers understanding of divinity (P. 110), Jesus as the new Exodus (P. 115).

In Wright's view, Jesus self-understanding and the understanding of his followers (post resurrection)is that Jesus replaces the Jewish concept of incarnation - the physical Temple and the Torah - with Jesus as the living word of God.

Chapter six is entitled "The Challenge of Easter" and here Wright defends the resurrection as an historical event - something in history, not "outside" of history, or "transcending" history, or just a psychological resurrection in the minds of Jesus' followers. Wright doesn't have much time for trendy groups like "The Jesus Seminar" who come up with brilliant insights like Jesus' body was probably eaten by wild dogs (That's former Catholic priest John Dominic Crossan's theory).

The last two chapters address the practical difficulties of trying to be a disciple in the post-modern world, where scepticism reigns supreme. He offers a wonderful interpretation of the Lucan story of the disciples on their way to Emmaus. For Wright, Jesus stands as Lord; not Marx, Freud or Nietzsche.

So this is a very good book; not a great book, but solid scholarship and thoughtful reflections on Christian discipleship in today's world.

For me, the best short, thorough study of modern scriptural views about Jesus is the late Fr. Raymond Brown's "An Introduction to New Testament Christology". Brown was a great scholar and he pours his years of study into 210 pages of solid analysis and thinking. If you are interested in this kind of academic study - designed for serious, thinking amateurs, without "The Jesus Seminar" baloney - read Brown as well as Wright.

Wright's book will challenge all you have thought about Jesus, whether you are an evangelical or a diehard liberal. He is, in my opinion, wrongly thought of as "conservative" in his assessment of the historical Jesus. Be prepared to have your ideas about the resurrection, about Jesus's divinity, and about the apocalyptic passages in the gospels turned upside down.

By doggedly placing Jesus within first-century Judaism, Wright makes us grasp how little we know about that time. While he offers a spirited reinterpretation of the resurrection, along the lines argued for by the Pharisees of the time, the total effect (at least for me) is further to undermine the belief in bodily revival and life after death still so prized by many Christians. I am not quite sure that Jesus' own resurrection is essential to Wright's thesis, although he strongly affirms that it is. Clearly, Wright does believe that the resurrection, where this means the restoration of Israel and the re-embodiment of the dead and the living, is still central to any conception of Christianity.

At the end of the book you are left with a very human Jesus who likely never thought of himself as God, at least not as we use that term. He likely thought of himself as Yahweh's representative acting in Israel, as the herald of the end of Israel's exile, and as the human embodiment of the Temple, or the place where God dwells. If Wright is right, this changes everything. I have read everything that Crossan has written; this book shook me up far more.

N.T. Wright was a name that was unfamiliar to me as recently as a few years ago, but I have increasingly heard references to him lately, especially since I started seminary last year. He is obviously a very well-respected and popular author. I've read several of his articles in the last year, and I have greatly appreciated what he had to say. With that context, I had great expectations for "The Challenge of Jesus," the first of his books that I have actually read. Those expectations were met in large part, with a few caveats.

The strength of the book is Wright's ability to challenge some preconceived notions of evangelical orthodoxy without being condescending or smug. He is a well-regarded academic who writes for a popular audience, and he manages to wrestle with complex intellectual questions without distancing himself from the reader.

The most challenging point that I read in this book was his suggestion that Jesus did not necessarily know the entirety of his divine nature while he lived on earth as a first-century Jew. Orthodox Christian theology seems to articulate that Jesus was completely aware of his fully-man, fully-God nature, but Wright claims otherwise. Though I did not find his argument for this point to be entirely convincing, it's certainly a question worth further consideration.

Most compellingly, Wright argues that the vigorous historical pursuit of the life and mission of Jesus of Nazareth is essential for the church and for individual Christians to formulate a robust understanding of who He was and is. For any Christians who think that historical research about Jesus is irrelevant, this book eliminates that all-too-common notion.

My biggest complaint about the book relates to its origin. Apparently, Wright gave a series of lectures, which were then reformatted and polished into this book form. The process can obviously work, as C.S. Lewis demonstrated with "Mere Christianity." But the problem is that Wright makes comment after comment about the reality that he does not have time or space to address a particular point. That approach has one effect on the listener during verbal communication, who invariably does not want to sit and listen to a speaker talk for hours and hours. But for a reader who has committed to read a book of this import, it was frustrating to continually get the sense that this work was vastly incomplete. Of course, it is essential for any scholar who is writing to a popular audience to omit tremendous volumes of background information, which would otherwise be overwhelming. But that does not mean that the author needs to reiterate that the really important stuff has actually been extracted from the text for space constraints.

Ultimately, I thought that this book was very good, if not outstanding. I found Wright's style to be sufficiently engaging that I hope to read more of his work. And I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to wrestle with the questions about the historical reality of Jesus of Nazareth.