Who Was Jesus? [Paperback]

Wright (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: March 9, 1993

Did the historical person Jesus really regard himself as the Son of God? What did Jesus actually stand for? And what are we to make of the early Christian conviction that, following his execution by the Romans, Jesus physically rose from the dead? N. T. Wright's Who Was Jesus? considers these and many other questions thrown up by the latest wave of controversial books about Jesus, including * Barbara Thiering's Jesus the Man: A New Interpretation from the Dead Sea Scrolls, * A. N. Wilson's Jesus, * John Shelby Spong's Born of a Woman, and * John Dominic Crossan's The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant. Each of these books portrays a different Jesus, and each portrait is markedly different from the traditional, orthodox Christian view of Jesus. While Wright agrees with these "Jesus" authors that the real, historical Jesus has many surprises in store for institutional Christianity, he also argues that they "fail to reach anything like the right answer" as to who Jesus was. Who Was Jesus? examines the recent Jesus publications in the context of the many modern Jesus books, dominated by Albert Schweitzer's masterful portrait, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (1906). As Wright shows, the modern "quest" displays many variations on the same themes, so that the latest portraits of Jesus are not nearly as novel as they are made out to be. Wright also outlines the arguments made specifically by Thiering, Wilson, and Spong, and he presents solid reasons for discounting their arguments. Written from the standpoint of professional biblical scholarship yet assuming no prior knowledge of the subject, Wright's Who Was Jesus? shows convincingly that much can be gained from a rigorous historical assessment of what the Gospels say about Jesus. This is a book to engage skeptic and believer alike.

Product Details

• Paperback: 117 pages
• Publisher: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (March 9, 1993)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0802806945
• ISBN-13: 978-0802806949
• Product Dimensions: 8.5 x 5.4 x 0.3 inches
• Shipping Weight: 4.8 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (14 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #673,418 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

N.T. Wright is Bishop of Durham and was formerly Canon Theologian of Westminster Abbey and dean of Lichfield Cathedral. He taught New Testament studies for twenty years at Cambridge, McGill and Oxford Universities. Wright's full-scale works The New Testament and the People of God, Jesus and the Victory of God, and The Resurrection of the Son of God are part of a projected six-volume series entitled Christian Origins and the Question of God. Among his many other published works are The Original Jesus, What Saint Paul Really Said and The Climax of the Covenant. He is also coauthor with Marcus Borg of The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions and the volume on Colossians and Philemon in The Tyndale New Testament Commentary series.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

38 of 41 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A damning critique of some media darlings, April 30, 2000

By 

Wayne Symes (Doha, Qatar) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Who Was Jesus? (Paperback)

At the beginning of the 1990's a media bandwagon around `new' outlooks on the life of Jesus was in full swing. In particular the works of Bishop John Spong (USA), A.N Wilson (UK) and Barbara Thiering (Australia) were given popular acclaim. Wright (a well credentialled New Testament scholar) takes each of these `writers' and shows how flawed their accounts are. He is strong, concise and rightly critical of poor scholarship. While the times that occasioned the book may have passed, the issues remain and Wright's discussion of what we can say about Jesus is very helpful.

26 of 29 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Lemonaide from lemons., February 22, 2004

By 

David Marshall (Seattle area) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Who Was Jesus? (Paperback)

At first glance, this seems a rather odd book. What is a first-class historian like N. T. Wright doing, refuting the likes of Spong and Thiering? Does one need a bulldozer to squash ants? (Wilson, I personally find more intelligent, and thus perhaps rising to the dignity of being run over.) Yet Wright gives their arguments a fair hearing, then a fair and gentle hanging.

But there seems to be method to Wright's mildness. As an alternative to the fumbling and bumbling of his protagonists, he offers a simple and readable description of who he has found the historical Jesus to be. Their errors prove a useful foil for explaining the methods and conclusions of legitimate New Testament scholarship. Wright's critiques of those with whom he disagrees are always a delight -- he shows a sincere appreciation for what is worthwhile, then refutes errors with wit and the gentle precision that comes of great intellectual power matched to thorough knowledge of the subject.

The subject here is Jesus, a fox in pursuit of whom academic hounds have banged their heads on many trees. Wright rightly follows him to the cross. "The Christian doctrine is all about a different kind of God -- a God who was so different to normal expectations that he could, completely appropriately, become human . . . To say that Jesus is in some sense God is of course to make a startling statement about Jesus. It is also to make a stupendous claim about God."

I think Wright over-emphasizes the genius of Biblical scholarship. He tends to give the impression that nobody knew anything worth knowing about Jesus, until the question was brought to the attention of modern academics. Having read many "Jesus Seminar" books, I think credentialed scholars like Crossan, Borg, Mack, and Pagels, are often as foolish as Wilson -- and less truly knowledgeable about the historical Jesus than the average Pentacostal grandmother.

Wright also knocks C. S. Lewis for his "odd" criticism of the "quest for Jesus" as "the work of the devil," in the Screwtape Letters. Aside from the unfairness of ignoring the humor in a satire, I think the substance of Lewis' arguments, made more seriously in Fernseed and Elephants, is entirely sound, and makes an excellent critique of many recent historical Jesus reconstructions. I think Wright's historical reconstruction, and Lewis' literary critique of shoddy skeptical arguments, complement one another nicely.

In sum, I recommend this book both for people who have been bamboozled by the particular works it refutes, and also as an antidote to recent works of a similar nature, like the Da Vinci Code, Jesus Mysteries, The Jesus Puzzle, or perhaps Elaine Pagel's new book, Beyond Belief. I am working on a book that will combine Wright and Lewis' approaches, to answer recent attacks on the Gospels.

author, Jesus and the Religions of Man /

[e-mail]

14 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars State of the Quest, July 12, 2003

By 

Labarum (Philadelphia, PA United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Who Was Jesus? (Paperback)

Each year as we approach Christmas and Easter, we are inevitably greeted at magazine racks by news journals trumpeting the "latest scholarship" on the "historic Jesus". The fact that very little of what appears ever has lasting scholarly value seems to of little concern to the journals in question. The attraction of the sensational and the scandalous governs media coverage in our age and any "scholar" who claims things about Jesus Christ that ordinary Christians would find disturbing is enticing to a cynical media looking for a "story" - even if the views promoted lack any credibility with the vast majority of experts in the field.

N. T. Wright, one of the world's leading biblical scholars, has provided in Who Was Jesus? a potent antidote to the faddish output of several popular characterizations of Jesus making the rounds in press reports at the time it was written. With clarity and power, he destroys the arguments of popular revisionist arguments with comparative ease. By placing Jesus in the proper historical and cultural setting, the pet theories of various contributors to the radical fringe in studies of the historical Jesus are found to owe more to the temperaments and cultural presuppositions of the writers than anything likely to relate to the true life and times of Jesus. As a leading figure in the study into the historical and cultural settings of the New Testament, Wright could never be accused of putting his head in the sand. However, Wright insists an understanding of the complex interplay of cultures in fist century Judea is essential to grasping the true meaning of the New Testament writings,

Wright begins with an overview of the quest among scholars for the historic Jesus. While sympathetic to the goals of many of these investigations, he points out they are often as guided by their own prejudices as many forms of traditional Christian belief. The beliefs of many Christians about Jesus may be distorted at points but they are not without historical basis. Indeed, the beliefs of the Church certainly have a greater correspondence with the historical realities of the time than the pet theories of many revisionists. Wright assures traditional believers that any honest investigation into the Jesus of history should leave them with a more robust faith - not a weaker one.

Wright then turns to the particular projects of three major revisionists: Barbara Thiering, A.N. Wilson, and John Shelby Spong. Rather than dismissing them outright, Wright takes the path of considering their ideas seriously and applying the same critical analysis to them given to any serious scholarly hypothesis. In many ways this proves to be even more devastating, as rather than attempting a knockout blow, Wright counters their arguments with surgical precision and leaves their novelties to die of a thousand cuts. Thiering is particularly skewered as both a proper historical understanding of Judaism at the time and archeological discoveries of the period refute her concept of a coded pesher language in the New Testament. Once Wright is finished, her theories are exposed as little more than figments of a fertile imagination. Of the three, Wright shows the most empathy for Wilson for at least attempting to place Jesus within Judaism, but the rather bland figure from Wilson's account could hardly have been expected to found a movement to concern both Jewish and Roman authorities. Wilson's peculiar explanation of the Easter event (the Apostles mistook James for Jesus) comes in for severe criticism as an ad hoc conjecture giving no likely explanation for subsequent events. Spong is calmly refuted as simply taking part in a discussion over his head. Spong tries to paint the Gospels as an exercise in midrash , but as in Thiering's use of pesher, the description does not meet the reality. Spong simply has no idea what midrash is and misapplies it in an attempt to make the Gospels say something they do not. The critique by Wright in all three cases leaves the respective theories lying in ashes.

Wright finishes with an outline of the major points in an honest evaluation of the historical evidence about Jesus. First, the events chronicled in the Gospels must be understood in the context of a Judaism that had endured the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and their being taken into captivity, the rebuilding of the Temple and Jerusalem under Persian rule, the attempts to Hellenize the Jews under Greek dominance, and the current humiliations of pagan Roman occupation. It was these Jews, looking for the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies, to which Jesus came. The Gospels themselves must be understood within the literary forms of first century Judea. The language of the New Testament must not be read within a flat literalism but examined within the particular form in question. By moving forwards from first century Judaism and backwards from the Gospel, we are most likely to grasp the true Jesus. Most importantly, Wright sees nothing in such an endeavor to threaten the Jesus of faith. Wright even suggests the New Testament accounts of the resurrection make little sense as a developed tradition - unless it actually happened.

N. T. Wright has issued a challenge to both believers and skeptics alike for a greater appreciation of historical and cultural settings when interpreting the Gospel. Who Was Jesus? is a wonderful introduction to such a study and ideal for anyone looking to grasp the strengths and weaknesses of various theories commonly promoted in the national media. It also may serve as a primer for Wright's own more scholarly work. As a summary of the state (at the time of its writing) of modern scholarship into the historic Jesus, it is highly recommended.