|
Review Summary: Sorry, not Quite |
Date: 2008-11-11 |
|
| |
|
Details: I was unimpressed. I'm a believer, but this book does not answer the many questions that have been asked surrounding the veracity of the gospels and the historical Jesus, except in a superficial way. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Excellent textual critique |
Date: 2008-07-28 |
|
| |
Details: Reinventing Jesus is a an excellent exegesis of the Orthodox New Testament texts vis-a-vie the Gnostic texts using internal and extra-Biblical evidence. I had been exposed to some of the concepts of this type of study when I took a course on ancient Israel in graduate school, and found its extension to this topic of great interest.
I have to admit that after reading the very well balanced account of the two sets of texts, that they are very different from one another, and that the survivor simply met the needs of the people of the time more fully. I'm not certain that this has to do with their being "closer" to the teachings of Jesus, however, as almost everyone who witnessed the events of this time probably had his or her own take on the situation. I suspect the entire 1st Century was spent deciding just what the message actually was, and ultimately it came down to two almost opposite concepts. The Gnostic notions of Christianity are much more esoteric, exclusive, and intellectual and focus on perfecting "the self," while those of orthodoxy are more directive, inclusive, require belief more than introspection and focus on others.
I'm not certain however, that I agree with the authors when they insist that the Gnostic texts were later. While I agree that an argument from absence is not a strong one, I also believe that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The secrecy of the Gnostic teachings would almost guarantee that they would not be committed to writing as early as the more open and inclusive teachings of what became orthodoxy. I'm more surprised that they were put on paper at all. This tendency to secrecy and elitism is probably why they did not survive as doctrines into modern times.
I also agree that, far from dictating the content of the new imperial religion or suppressing alternatives, Constantine's primary motive was consensus, order and peace in the kingdom--this one, not the next one. He was nothing if not a pragmatist. That he remained a pagan himself until converting on his deathbed suggests that he had very little religious stock in the outcome of the council of Nicea at that time.
A superb discussion of the topic.
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Excellent introduction to issues within NT scholarship. |
Date: 2008-07-09 |
|
|
| |
Details: Reinventing Jesus contains a well thought out and scholarly introduction to a number of issues currently being discussed within New Testament scholarly circles, and I'd wholeheartedly recommend it to the layman in high school, college or the workforce, and also to the scholar. This book also served as a great primer for me into the work of Wallace and Sawyer, and Komoszewski's book on the deity of Christ co-authored with Robert Bowman is on its way to me now!
The book covers a large range of topics including oral tradition, textual criticism, early church history, Christology, and the newly internet-revived pagan copycat thesis. Komoszewski et al address (but also in some cases, build upon) the arguments of both popular and academic writers, providing a fair yet critical evaluation of the claims of authors such as Bart Ehrman, Acharya S, Robert M. Price, and Freke and Gandy. They also provide a list of books for further reading in each topic they write about, giving the reader an opportunity to move on once passing the popular introduction to these issues to more academic sources.
All in all, great book, and I would be pleased to see this cohort assemble again for another quality work. |
| |
|
Review Summary: An Excellent Work of Apologetics |
Date: 2008-06-25 |
|
|
| |
Details: In recent years there have been a number of works attempting to undermine any traditional belief in Christianity. Likewise, there have been a number of Christian apologetics books designed to counter them. I found this particular one to be very interesting and it has a number of very appealing aspects.
For one, this book is a work written by scholars who are specialized in their subject. The authors focus a fair amount of the book on textural criticism. Some scholars such as Bart Earhman and some members of the Westar Group (Jesus Seminar)have been very critical of the New Testament in this regard and the authors seek to respond. Komoszewski, Sawyer, and Wallace also do a fine job refuting supposed links between Christianity and pagan religions as well as theories found in Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code." This book is more detailed and technical than the works of some apologetics such as Strobel, but generally avoids getting tedious. Actually, I think it does a good job attempting to bring a complicated subject such as textual criticism down to a lay audience. "Reinventing Jesus" received some very good endorsements from people such as Gary Habermas and Paul L. Maier. The endnotes are quite detailed and worth looking at as well. Overall, this book was an enjoyable and informative reading experience. I would also recommend Craig Evan's book "Fabricating Jesus" and some of Paul L. Maiers books such as "In the Fullness of Time." |
| |
|
Review Summary: Sectarianism not scholarship |
Date: 2008-05-09 |
|
| |
|
Details: The authors are sectarian scholars at sectarian institutions, not really scientific biblical scholars. They assume but do not demonstrate that the Pauline-Hellenistic church knew the real Jesus. They ignore entirely his brother James who led the earliest followers of Jesus and knew him best. The Gospels were written under the influence of Paul's invention of his own Jesus, a Jesus that James did not know or agree with. One wants real biblical scholarship not this sort of special pleading. Dallas is not the place to find out the truth about the real Jesus; it is the place for redneck Christianity. |
| |
|
out of 41 Reviews
