© 1997 Meredith Sprunger
© 1997 The Christian Fellowship of Students of The Urantia Book
| The Religion of Jesus | Spring 1997 — Index | Significant Books: The Power Behind Positive Thinking by Eric Fellman |
Luke Timothy Johnson
Harper, SanFrancisco, 1996, 177 pp.
Dr. Luke Timothy Johnson, Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins at the Chandler School of Theology, Emory University, has written what I believe is the definitive book evaluating the “misguided quest for the historical Jesus” by the Jesus Seminar and other contemporary theologians. He first of all points out that only around 40 members of the Jesus Seminar, out of thousands of New Testament scholars, were actually involved in the production of The Five Gospels. To suggest that they represent New Testament scholarship, Johnson says, “is ludicrous.” The Jesus Seminar has been engaged in a ten year exercise in academic self-promotion that has succeeded in drawing an extraordinary amount of public attention.
Johnson asserts that the Jesus Seminar started out with preconceived ideas of Jesus. This raises serious questions concerning the Seminar’s self-proclaimed objectivity. "What sort of scholarship, then, do we find in The Five Gospels? It is not an impressive quality. The most notable lack in the publication is any discernible demonstration or even argument. Much is asserted here without either evidence or even substantial logic.” (p. 25)
Johnson asserts that the Jesus Seminar started out with preconceived ideas of Jesus. This raises serious questions concerning the Seminar’s self-proclaimed objectivity.
"The narratives of Acts and the Gospels are tossed out as mythical fabrications based on faith…And this is announced before the Seminar takes up its (equally portentous) work of figuring out which deeds attributed to Jesus ‘really’ came from him. This is not responsible, or even critical, scholarship. It is a self-indulgent charade. As Professor Richard Hays of Duke University concluded in a lengthy review of this book (‘The Corrected Jesus,’ First Things, May 1994, pp. 43-48, ‘…the case argued by this book would not stand up in any court.’) (p. 26)
Dr. Johnson also reviews books written by Barbara Thiering, Bishop John Spong, A. N. Wilson, Stephen Mitchell, Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, and Burton Mack in which he finds certain consistent features in common with The Five Gospels: (1) They reject the canonical Gospels. (2) These books shape their portrait of Jesus without reference to other canonical sources, such as Paul’s letters. (3) The mission of Jesus is portrayed in terms of social or cultural issues rather than religious or spiritual realities. (4) They have a theological agenda stating that the traditional view of Jesus is a distortion of the “real” Jesus. (5) They have a premise that historical knowledge is normative for faith. (6) These authors, except for Stephen Mitchell, come from inside the Christian culture and identify with the academic community rather than the church.
Cultural confusion, Johnson observes, is the basis for our theological disunity. Christianity in America is profoundly divided between traditional orthodoxy and Enlightenment modernity. “We see, then, a fascinating phenomenon: the form of Christianity most explicitly at odds with modernity is enjoying the greatest success in terms of growth and real political influence, while the form of Christianity that seeks to accommodate itself with modernity verges ever closer to the margins of irrelevancy and even extinction.” (p. 64) The heart of the problem centers around the dominance of historical criticism as a key determinative factor for faith. Johnson reminds us that a great deal of what human beings consider “real” escapes historical knowledge. Historical knowledge deals only in degrees of probability, never with certainty.
The heart of the problem centers around the dominance of historical criticism as a key determinative factor for faith. Johnson reminds us that a great deal of what human beings consider “real” escapes historical knowledge. Historical knowledge deals only in degrees of probability, never with certainty.
After considerable scholarly analysis Johnson makes the following summary statements: (1) “History is a limited mode of human knowing.” (2) The New Testament is analyzed best when its literary integrity is respected and appreciated. (3) Despite the diversity of the Gospels, there is a remarkable consistency in the image of Jesus throughout the New Testament. (4) The expression “the real Jesus” should not be used to refer to a historically reconstructed Jesus. Such a Jesus is only a product of scholarly preference and imagination. (5) There is a “real Jesus” in the texts of the New Testament. (p. 167)
Dr. Johnson ends his dissertation by presenting a more comprehensive model for critical scholarship which encompasses the anthropological, historical, literary, and religious aspects of the text. What a marvelous occasion it will be when Biblical scholars finally discover the wealth of research material found in the Life and Teachings of Jesus presented in The Urantia Book. Scholars will discover that it affirms and enhances the “real Jesus” found in the Gospels as Johnson so effectively points out.
| The Religion of Jesus | Spring 1997 — Index | Significant Books: The Power Behind Positive Thinking by Eric Fellman |