© 1994 Meredith Sprunger
© 1994 The Christian Fellowship of Students of The Urantia Book
Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and The Jesus Seminar, Macmillan, 1993, pp. 553
The Five Gospels is a collective report of New Testament scholars working closely together for six years on a common question: What did Jesus say? The Scholars Version is a translation of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the Gospel of Thomas in a readable form of the common street language used in the original Greek text. Since the Scholars Version is free of ecclesiastical and institutional control, its content and organization vary from traditional bibles. It is authorized by the Jesus Seminar scholars.
The Scholars Version is a translation of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the Gospel of Thomas in a readable form of the common street language used in the original Greek text. Since the Scholars Version is free of ecclesiastical and institutional control, its content and organization vary from traditional bibles.
Since the Enlightenment biblical scholars and theologians have attempted to distinguish between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith. During the decades of the oral tradition information about Jesus circulated largely by word of mouth. Transmitters of these stories do not ordinarily remember the exact wording of Jesus’ teaching. So, in a sense, they creatively invented speech for Jesus. Various people, in time, preserved these teachings in writing. Scholars currently know of approximately twenty gospels.
“The level of public knowledge of the Bible borders on the illiterate. The church and synagogue have failed in their historic mission to educate the public in the fourth ”R,“ religion.”(p. 34) Over the years, New Testament scholars have hesitated to correct or contradict TV evangelists, pulp religious authors, and conservative Christian groups for fear of political reprisal and public controversy. “At least one Fellow of the Jesus Seminar lost his academic post as a result of his membership in the group. Others have been forced to withdraw as a consequence of institutional pressure. Latter-day inquisitors among Southern Baptist and Lutheran groups have gone witch-hunting for scholars who did not pass their litmus tests.” (p. 35)
Critical biblical scholars use empirical, factual evidence as the controlling factor in making historical judgments. They rely heavily on the seven pillars of scholarly wisdom: (1) The distinction between the historical Jesus and the Christ of history. (2) The conviction that the synoptic gospels are much closer to the historical Jesus than the Fourth Gospel. (3) The recognition of the Gospel of Mark as prior to Matthew and Luke, and the basis for both. (4) The identification of a hypothetical source to explain the material which Matthew and Luke have in common beyond their dependence on Mark. (5) The liberation of the noneschatological Jesus of the aphorisms and parables from Schweitzer’s eschatological (belief in a cataclysmic “end event”) Jesus. (6) The fundamental contrast between the oral culture (in which Jesus lived) and a print culture (like our own). (7) The gospels are assumed to be narratives in which the memory of Jesus is embellished by mythic elements that express the church’s faith in him.
Over 200 professionally trained specialists, called Fellows, joined the Jesus Seminar; however, only 74 are listed in “Roster of Fellows” on pages 533-537. Each Fellow voted on all of the gospel statements of Jesus and weighted averages were used to print the Scholars Version of Jesus’ statements in four colors:
Red: Jesus undoubtedly said this or something like it.
Pink: Jesus probably said something like this.
Gray: Jesus did not say this, but the ideas contained in it are close to his own.
Black: Jesus did not say this; it represents the perspective or content of a later or different tradition
Reasons for the Fellow’s decisions are given in the text, and additional comments are presented that make The Five Gospels a rich source of scholarly information. Votes, of course, even by scholarly people, do not determine truth. It is possible to be correct in fact but wrong in truth, and vise versa. The faith assumptions of the early Christian community may be a more reliable guide to truth than many of the intellectual-historical judgments of critical scholars. Usually, however, empirical research and reason help us in discerning truth. Certainly studies of this kind can be helpful in leading us to the religion of Jesus which is the essence of the Christian faith rather than stagnating in the doctrinaire religion about Jesus.
Christianity has indeed done a great service for this world, but what is now most needed is Jesus. The world needs to see Jesus living again on earth in the experience of spirit-born mortals who effectively reveal the Master to all men. It is futile to talk about a revival of primitive Christianity; you must go forward from where you find yourselves. Modern culture must become spiritually baptized with a new revelation of Jesus’ life and illuminated with a new understanding of his gospel of eternal salvation. (UB 195:10.1)