Customer Reviews

The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions

5 star:		(32)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

This book brought a lump to my throat. What rare respect. I have read many "Jesus books" and I am tired of all the biting criticism of opposing vews. Here we have a book that presents two very different views without rancor. It is so handy to have these views presented in a single volume. I am surprised and extremely pleased to see that two Christians with such different views of Jesus are good friends and respect the other's views. Borg and Wright have had many personal discussions with one another, so each is very familiar with the other's arguments. Bravo to both of them. I especially liked the following two quotations: By Wright: "And the way to solve all such questions, whether to do with Jesus or to do with the sources, is once more the scientific method of hypothesis and verification." By Borg: "My point is not to deny an afterlife. But it wasn't central to Jesus' teaching. The vision of the Christian life that flows out of taking him seriously is about a relationship with the Spirit of God that transforms our lives in the present, not about a reward that only comes later." THIS IS THE IDEAL WAY TO DEBATE SUCH ISSUES. Why can't other scholars show similar respect for opposing views?

I enjoyed the book tremendously. I am a Christian who also wants to be intellectually honest in my beliefs. To me, it was refreshing to see two devoted Christians with significantly different views of the historical Jesus engaged in respectful dialogue in which neither acuses the other of heresy.

This book presents competing views of the historical Jesus by two writers the editors label as "the leading liberal and sonservative Jesus scholars." That might be a bit overbilled, since other scholars such as Meier, Sanders and Crossan come at least as readily to mind. But Wright and Borg are excellent.

The "Liberal" and "Conservative" labels are also a bit overdone. Both scholars accept the discipline of rigorous critical scholarship and, again, both are committed Christians-- so they are not so far apart as these labels might imply. It's not as if a Fundamentalist and an Agnostic are going at each other. But these complaints are with the billing for the book and not for the book itself, which I found excellent.

Wright, the conservative, sees Jesus as a prophet inaugurating the Kingdom of God who indicated at least in a cryptic way that he was the Messiah of God. He sees the bodily ressurection and the empty tomb as historical events that are foundational for the Christian faith.

Borg, the liberal, views Jesus as a social prophet and a healer, a man who called people to a new way of seeing and a new way of living. For him, whether the tomb was empty or not is irrelevent. He believes the Messianic claims contained in the New Testament come from the early Church rather than the historical Jesus. Nevertheless, he sees Jesus as the image of the invisible God.

I recommend this book for anyone sympathetic to Christianity who is sincerely interested in the Historical Jesus debate.

Let's face it, there are loads of Jesus books out there. For one who wants to begin with taking a look at real scholarship and not metaphysical fairy tales about Jesus, it's hard to find a good place to start. Before this book was published, the best introduction was The Jesus Quest by Ben Witherington III, which looked @ the many modern scholars of Jesus scholarship. Its weakness was that it summarized views in Witherington's words which were often harshly critical because of his evangelical bias. Borg is the 'liberal' and is a powerful representative for the camp. Wright is the most exciting scholar right now who powerfully supports and challenges orthodoxy simultaneously. Wright is the superior scholar here in my opinion, but the great thing about the book is that you can decide for yourselves looking at the authors' own writings.

'The Meaning of Jesus' has seemed to take a new approach in its genre. This is most likely a result of the two mens friendship. It can be read by anyone without too much knowledge of the historical Jesus. NT Wright does use some intellectual language which might be frightening to some, but his point is not missed. Marcus Borg writes in plain old english which makes for easy reading without sacrificing to much meaningful content. This book is definitly an introduction and nothing written in it is new. It does cover many issues on several different topics. I'd reccomend this book to anyone who is casually interested in the case for the historical Jesus. I think you'll find it a very rewarding read.

This book is not geared toward those who are already familiar with the issues involved in the debate over who Jesus of Nazareth really was. Instead, it was written to introduce people to the discussion and give a general representation of the two opposing perspectives.

N.T. Wright presents the conservative view, which means that he believes the gospels give us generally reliable history, that Jesus made outrageous claims to divinity, performed miracles, rose from the dead, and is indeed divine as taught by traditional Christianity. Marcus Borg gives the liberal side. He believes the gospels contain far more myth than history, that Jesus did not claim anything out of the ordinary in regards to a unique relationship to God, and that he did not physically rise from the dead.

Neither writer is really able to give detailed arguments for their views because of the large amount of ground they attempt to cover in this book. I did like the book's format. Each section addressed a specific topic (reliability of gospels, divinity claims, etc.), with each writer devoting a chapter to the subject at hand. They then rotated which writer was first for each topic. This prevented one person from always getting the last word.

If you're already familiar with the historical Jesus debate, then I'd give it two stars (and recommend passing on this one). However, if you're new to the issue I'd say its worthy of four stars and suggest it as a good introduction to a fascinating debate.

I am not a theologian, and as such, I can't review or evaluate this book on that level. I am a Christian who was raised in the Anglican Church, and I've always been fascinated by questions of Biblical inerrancy. I approached this book as someone who clearly believes in Jesus as Son of God and Saviour, yet who is open to different ways of approaching the Bible.

Borg and Wright both make well written, clear arguments to explain their views around Christ both as a spiritual and historical figure. The authors addressed all the key questions about Jesus, and they didn't try to force the reader into accepting one point of view or the other; the book seemed to be meant to get people thinking and exploring these issues. Any book that can take such complex matters and create a book that is not dry or textbook-like should be applauded.

I thought the scholarship on both sides was sound, although both relied a bit more on their own previous works than I would have liked. A bibliography/list of works cited to go along with the notes would have been more appropriate. I thought the layout was a bit annoying - I'd have preferred a dialogue set up for each question, so that I could read the authors' differing views side by side, and it would've been easier to be clear on where they agreed and disagreed. As it was, I found myself going back and forth to see what each was saying on a particular subject.

This book may present a challenge to readers who have made up their minds about Jesus' identity either way. As someone who does have faith, I found it a good exercise to read something that asked me to set aside my beliefs, question, and be open to new possibilities/interpretations. I actually found that in some ways my faith was strengthened because Borg was able to give me a way to look at the things in the Bible I find contradictory that doesn't require me to completely abandon the Bible.

This book can be complex in parts, and it does assume a certain level of knowledge on the part of the readers' behalf. I don't know that it's a great book for a beginner. Anyone who is interested in the historical Jesus, regardless of what you believe about him, will find this book interesting, if challenging at times. I highly recommend it.

The book is presented by two acclaimed authors who both graduated from Oxford, but have differing views. Marcus Borg is a liberal in his theological thinking and N.T. Wright is rather conservative in his views. Both square off in a dual fashion to address critical issues related to the historical Jesus in eight parts.

The first section deals with how we have come to know about Jesus. Both use the New Testament, especially the Gospels, and other historical documents to come to their conclusions about who Jesus is. Interestingly enough, they both draw from the same material but come to extremely different conclusions about who Jesus was. Borg thinks of Jesus in terms of pre and post Easter. The pre-Easter Jesus as a person who was a "mystic" and the post-Easter Jesus, the Messiah, the one we talk about in Church tradition. Wright thinks of Jesus as someone who knew He was the messiah and that Jesus was the person and the divinity in one. Borg does not place a lot of historical value to the Gospels pointing out that the Gospels are embellished while Wright would say that they indicate pretty closely to what happened.

Next Wright and Borg spend time discussing what Jesus did and taught. Wright presents Jesus as a prophet who was there to usher in God's kingdom and made a call to the early Judeans to abandon their current view and join him. Wright believes that Jesus knew who He was in terms of the Messiah and that Jesus knew His role in God's plan while Borg's discusses Jesus as a Jewish mystic, healer and exorcist.

Moving on, the authors deal with the death of Jesus and what it meant. Borg presents two important issues regarding the death of Jesus. First Borg indicates that Jesus did not see himself as the way to God, or that He did not know that salvation was going to be made possible through His death and second Borg believes that Jesus died as a martyr because He stood up against the current structure of the time. Wright paints a picture where as Jesus death was planned by Jesus and He was very aware of His role in salvation. Wright points out that Jesus knew that only through great suffering could salvation be bought for all and Jesus knew this. Wright does note that while Jesus prepared His own death, he did it unwillingly. Jesus did not want to die, but He knew that it was His duty to do so for us.

Next we find something that the writers can agree on, that the resurrection of Jesus is a central key to Christianity. Both agree that without resurrection there would be no Christian movement. Both agree that something happened after the death of Jesus that caused the disciples to continue to teach of Jesus, and at this point the agreements end. Wright believes in the resurrected Christ. He believes that Jesus did rise from the dead. Borg presents a risen Jesus of almost myth, an apparition if you will. He indicates that the disciples and even other believes have had Jesus experiences that have lead to the forward movement of Christianity.

After the resurrection, we then need to address a fundamental question, which in my opinion should not even be a question. Was Jesus God? Borg indicates that Jesus did not see Himself as divine and that after Easter, Jesus becomes one with God. Wright agrees in some respect with Borg in that he does not think that Jesus thought He was God. Instead, Jesus thought He was the anointed one of God called to fulfill the God's promises to Israel.

The discussion then turns to Jesus and His birth. Wright indicates that Jesus' birth has gotten far more press than it should have. Wright believes that the focal point of Christianity is the death and resurrection. Wright does not believe that Mary's virginity is of large consequence to the person of Jesus, but he does believe that she was a virgin at the time of Jesus' birth. Borg claims that the birth is not historically factual. He points to differences in the stories as presented by Luke and Matthew as reasoning for the story to be more embellishment than truth. These two writers use this story as an example of imagery more than history.

Next is the discussion of the return of Christ. Borg believes that the end time theology has come from the church as a whole and not from Jesus. Borg also says that he does not believe that a physical Jesus will return to this Earth. Wright contends that end times discussion have come from Jewish tradition and transformed into beliefs of something that is not as impending as we sometimes believe. He believes that in the end there will come a time when heaven is shown to us and that Jesus will be a living being that we can see and touch, the dead will rise and we will all share in Jesus' new world for us.

Finally, Borg and Wright discuss the implications of their versions of Jesus and what that means for the Christian life. Wright focuses his attention on worship and missions as the centerpieces of the Christian way. Borg calls for a life for Christians that is full of God, a life where each and every moment is an experience with a God who is accessible to us all. Borg writes that he thinks Jesus is the epitome of what it is like to have a life that is full of God.

I believe that the authors have come to their beliefs based on the ways they view the sources of evidence regarding Jesus. Borg is very literal about the sources of Jesus and looks at the historical value of the written words about Jesus. He tries to eliminate any such embellishment or literary device that could have been used to mask the true evidence of the historical Jesus. Wright on the other hand, leaves open that embellishments and literary devices can have historical value and could have happened they way they were written. I believe that given these filters the authors use to aid them in their research, this is why we have two acclaimed authors who studied under the same New Testament professor at Oxford with very different thinking.

This is a good book to get you thinking about who Jesus is, but it can be difficult to read if you have not had some study in New Testament background. It is generally not a good read for the lay person.

Marcus Borg and N.T. Wright have written more than just an introduction or a summary to the Historical Jesus Debate. Although this book does summarize well the issues surrounding the increasingly controversial "Debate" between 'revisionist' historians/theologians, and more conservative believers, Borg and Wright make this book a significant contribution to the discussion.

The 'friendly' tone of the book is particularly striking and gives the reader the sense that these authors are more interested in dialogue than in debate, meaning that each is honestly interested in the contribution of the other, while coming to different conclusions. Despite this non-combative character of their discussion, Borg and Wright do not minimize the urgency and importance of these issues in the life of the church.

Wright's contributions are significantly more compelling than Borg's, while Borg makes some interesting points regarding what symbolic meanings might have been applied to the events surrounding Jesus' life. Wright, on the other hand, makes excellent arguments for the vital role of the crucifixion and resurrection to the Christian faith. He does not approach the text, as Borg does, with an anti-supernatural bias. Wright is also more interested in painting 'the big picture' of the life of Jesus, and His significance in the plan of God than he is offering token defenses of Christian dogma. Wright's eschatology is also refreshingly void of sensationalism and speculation. He is careful to let scripture tell its own story.

The final section of the book deals with "Jesus and the Christian Life", and is particularly good. Wright brings his previous arguments to conclusion by describing the broad implications of Jesus to our lives. He begins by describing "the two poles of Christian living in terms of worship and mission", and continues to elaborate on Jesus impact on our spirituality, daily living, politics, and healing.

The 8 parts of this book carry the folowing titles with a section from each author:

1. How do we know about Jesus
2. What did Jesus do and teach
3. The Death of Jesus
4. "God raised Jesus from the dead"
5. Was Jesus God?
6. The Birth of Jesus
7. "He will come again in Glory"
8. Jesus and the Christian life

I am grateful for Borg and Wright's contribution to the "Historical Jesus Debate" with this book, and I recommend it to scholars and students alike.

I'll be honest; I came to this book with my opinions firmly planted and walked away from it much the same. While N.T. Wright is the contributor that I knew I would side with more in this particular debate, I did not think that Borg would be what he is. By that I mean that he is no J.D. Crossan laying down ideas and giving me no way or reason to join him. My overall impression is that Borg stops just short of being quite a bit like Wright. Both men share a Jesus who subverts authority and liberates but Borg's is really nothing more than that. I gave this book five stars becuase it is, as other reviewers have said, a very good introduction to the debate. Futhermore, both men can write well, which is refreshing. I simply feel that Borg had the burden of proof (since I've already read some of Wirght's work) and he did not sway me. But he did inform me, which is honestly well worth the price of the book.

Years from now when people look back on the latest quest for the historical Jesus, this book will be foundational in laying forth the essence of competing views. _The Meaning of Jesus_ offers an excellent introduction to the historical Jesus debate through the eyes of two of the more important scholars in recent Jesus studyL: Marcus Borg and N.T. Wright. The book takes some of the major topics of debate head on, allowing Borg and Wright to articulate their own conflicting positions on such important questions as the resurrection of Jesus, Jesus' self-perception, Jesus' relationship with God, and the virgin birth. The conflicting essays, while brief, offer helpful glimpses into the process by which Jesus scholars reconstruct quite different pictures of the historical Jesus. The book is a must read for readers intrigued by the person of Jesus who are wanting a better handle on the recent debate.