|
15 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Mitchell's Jesus for teens and young adults, May 31, 2002
One of the editorial reviews of this book says: "his plug for the self-help work of Byron Katie seems out of place and disingenuous as Mitchell wrote the introduction for her new book." So let's clear that up right away: Stephen Mitchell is married to Byron Katie. His only "plug" for her work is a brief mention of some material available for free on her website, and it's offered as an alternative that some people find more helpful than the meditative techniques Mitchell is discussing at that point in the text. There's nothing disingenuous going on here.Now on to the book itself. If you've read Mitchell's _The Gospel According to Jesus_, there won't be many surprises for you here. This book is a stripped-down, somewhat simplified version of that one; the text is part new, part used. The style is intended to be accessible to teenagers and young adults. Mitchell's translation of the "gospel" is included as well, and it's essentially the same text as before but with some rewriting (mostly paraphrasing). Mitchell admits in his 1991 book that he may have excluded some passages "whose light [he hadn't] been able to see," so the reader may wonder whether he's added anything since that time. Well, not much -- two or three short parables, a paraphrase of a line from the Gospel of the Nazoreans, and a couple of excerpts from the epistle of James. (I think this latter is an excellent choice; I think well of James and there's good reason to think the text is based closely on Jesus's oral teachings.) What's really new here is Mitchell's introduction, in which he tells us quite a bit about how he came to write a book about Jesus in the first place. This stuff will be of interest not only to the book's ostensible target readership but also to readers of his earlier Jesus book who want to know more about what motivated him. And among other things, he admits candidly that in selecting what he regards as the "authentic" sayings and acts of the historical Jesus, he's deliberately erring on the side of leaving things out rather than including too much. Despite some disagreements with some of his interpretations (e.g. his downplaying of the political importance of Jesus's teachings), I really like the positive features of his 1991 other book; in fact it was instrumental in getting me re-interested in the world's most famous Jewish spiritual teacher. But in my review of that book (which see), I gave it only three stars because of its questionable scholarship and its attitude of "spiritual one-upmanship" toward believing Christians (of whom, for the record, I am not one, so I'm not speaking here out of personal pique). This new book gets four stars because so much of that stuff has been toned down or omitted altogether. Oh, some of the problems are still there. The resurrection, for example, is still treated as a "legend" with no explanation about why it can't be regarded as historical. Sure, the gospels' post-resurrection stories can't be reconciled with one another (e.g. did the disciples return to the Galilee or remain in Jerusalem?), but that doesn't mean _nothing_ happened. Jesus's being in some way "raised" doesn't commit anyone to a Christian theological understanding of the event. And if all Mitchell means is that Jesus's corpse didn't just get up and start walking around again -- well, I don't think that's what Christians believe either. And we're still suggesting that Jesus might have been illegitimate. For the record, folks: under Jewish law, _any_ child born in wedlock is "legitimate," no matter who the biological father is. Sure, if people suspected that Joseph wasn't Jesus's father, there might well have been some unpleasant talk. But that wouldn't make him "illegitimate"; "mamzer" is not the same concept as "bastard," and I (again) wish Mitchell had said so. But this time around, Mitchell has enough sense not to present his book as suitable for "believers and nonbelievers" (as per the subtitle of his earlier book). In fact he expressly warns Christians that some of them may _not_ want to read this book, which is a nice change (and an indication of why I awarded him that additional star). This new book is suitable for its intended audience as long as they (or their parents) know what they're getting. And as I said, it will also be of interest to readers who want a little more of the "backstory" for _The Gospel According to Jesus_. If you like Mitchell's work, this one is worth the investment.
|