|
Review Summary: Thought provoking and controversial |
Date: 2005-07-25 |
|
| |
Details: Bishop Spong has long been a controversial figure for his interpretation of Christianity. His latest book, _Liberating the Gospels_ will certainly anger Christians who have a more conservative and literal interpretation of the Bible. With that said, it seems a number of reviewers are quick to criticize Spong without benefit of having read the book. Nonetheless, I found his arguments and evidence well written and well presented, if troubling.
The main point the Bishop makes is that the Gospels were never intended to be taken literally, and that the message the early Church fathers wanted to make is diluted and misunderstood when they are. Rather, Spong believes the story of Jesus needs to be understood in the Jewish "midrashic" tradition of drawing from the sacred past of the Jewish faith in order to describe the reality at the time of their writing.
Spong begins by stating that early Christians were Jews - a point that most Biblical historians (and theologians) would not dispute. He then goes on to argue that given the "Jewishness" of the gospel writers, we need to read the gospels with this understanding. As a result, Spong arrives at some startling conclusions: that there may not have been a Joseph or Mary or a manger in which Jesus lay as a newborn; that there was no literal raising of Lazarus from the dead; no miraculous feeding of the multitude; the Jesus did not make the Sermon on the Mount; Judas Iscariot is a midrashic invention; and that there was no literal Jerusalem resurrection appearances. These claims to some are tantamount to blasphemy, hence the controversial nature of the book.
But Spong claims he does not seek to destroy Christianity (as some may accuse him of) - instead, he seeks to remove the fantastic and magical from the Gospels (Spong refers to these examples as "legends") with what he feels is the true message of Christianity: that Jesus "called people into wholeness and oneness ... open(ing) the ultimate sign of human finitude ... and transformed it."
From a historical perspective, Spong cannot be criticized. Theologically, his ideas have some merit, but are not without a great deal of controversey. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Can read the bible through Jewish eyes when you are not ? |
Date: 2005-04-10 |
|
| |
|
Details: Bishop Spong is very interesting, instead of attacking conservatives he attacks Christ Himself. The sad thing is for all the good points he has unless you reimagine faith (or lack of faith) like him, you can easily discount his ideas and some of the true things he says. He is an important figure, not because of his scholarship which is laughable... he is important because he does prompt discussion and challenges the complacent. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Very Thought Provoking, Very Opinionated |
Date: 2005-01-06 |
|
|
| |
Details: This is the first Spong book I have ever reviewed, and I liked it. He is a clear, easy to understand writer, and he has some very novel views about the formation of the four gospels. He feels that the four gospels are a midrash on the Old testament tradition and that they are legendary rather than historical. He belives that the Gospel of Mark was composed based on the Jewish holidays, beginning with Rosh Hashanah and concluding of course with the Passover when Jesus was crucified. He also believes that the Gospel of Luke was like a Christian Torah, following the pattern of the first 5 books of Moses. His view of the Gospel of Matthew is that it follows the Jewish lectionary. All of this is highly conjectural, but it is very interesting, and he has me convinced at least about the Gospel of Mark. Yet since we have no actual lectionary from this period, it is difficult to be dogmatic and clear about the liturgical composition of Matthew.
The book really helped me to see the gospels with Jewish eyes, and that was Spong's goal all along. Having said that, I found his criticisms of other scholars to be condescending and disrespectful, (especially his statements about the great Catholic scholars Raymond Brown and Joseph Fitzmyer) and I found him to be needlessly pessimistic about the historical claims of the text.
But in the main, I'd have to say that this book was an eye opener and I recommend it, even if there is much with which to disagree. |
| |
|
Review Summary: knowledge is the light |
Date: 2004-08-24 |
|
| |
|
Details: I have read Mr, spong books and i find them very in tuned to the way of all mans rewording of history then and now,, i think knowlege is the way to the truth,, if one does not seek beyond the limited words of man, he will not find the awe of all that is to be known, Mr Spong is of this knowledge,, a true seeker of god has to seek untill his foot is in the grave, and i belive, life is in knowlege, and knowlege is in all that seek, jewish,geltile , or spiritual,, if jesus is the way to salvation, then we must understand it is not of his nature, for the spirit is life, and the spirt is of not jew, or gentile, but of truth, and truth is the way into the light and only through knowledge, that means understanding the gospels, beyond the, limit understanding of man,, yet all men who seek the light is the way that points to god,, thank you for those who seek,, |
| |
|
Review Summary: Simply Amazing! |
Date: 2003-06-24 |
|
|
| |
|
Details: This is one of the poorest attempts at finding the Historical Jesus ever written, which is why it is so amazing! How did he ever get it published?! If he were not touting his title as "bishop", I doubt the publisher would have seen any value in it. The scholarship is seriously flawed, and the book that I recommend in its place will show why. I confess-- I have something in common with most of the Rt. Rev. Spong's fans. Like them, I've read very little of what he's written. (For example, "Can A Bishop Be Wrong" has two five-star reviews from Spong fans who are under the impression that Spong wrote this book-- apparently, they feel comfortable praising Spong's work sight-unseen).
Don't get me wrong. I've tried to read Spong. But, alas, the Rt. Rev. S. is a ghastly writer. After a while, the charms of Spong's writing-- his relentless self-congratulation, his presenting of hackneyed 19th-century pop-biblical-criticism as his own daring innovation, his use of the passive voice to hide sweeping and questionable assertions ("...there is surprise at how insignificant were the theological issues dividing the two sides [of the Reformation]"), his utter lack of a sense of humor, his unforgivably poor skill with words-- begin to pall. I haven't yet met someone who can read an entire chapter of Spong at one sitting. That's where another book comes in handy- "Can a Bishop Be Wrong?". The authors don't exhaustively categorize the intellectual sins of the Rt. Rev. Spong-- such a task could never be worth the trees killed. But they provide a good survey of his looking-glass kingdom. "Can A Bishop Be Wrong" isn't a work of Christian apologetics, because it doesn't have to be. Spong's main contention-- the foundation of all his work-- is his claim that no intelligent person of the twentieth century can be an orthodox Christian. To respond, one doesn't have to prove Christianity-- one just has to provide a counterexample. This book categorizes his errors and logical lapses with admirable thoroughness. Not an exhaustive thoroughness, to be sure, but sufficient to the silly task at hand. This book has its flaws. As others have noted, it is a collection of essays, and they repeat some of the same points over and over. The authors sometimes let Spong goad them into anger. And they don't argue much against Spong's theological outlook-- but since Spong's outlook is just rehashed nineteenth-century "modernism", you can find plenty of orthodox arguments against heavier intellectual forces than Spong. (Try Chesterton's _The_Everlasting_Man_, for starters.) This book has a limited market. Spong's fans will not be moved by what they read here, if they were inclined to try reading it. But to the traditional theist of whatever religion, who wonders whether he ought to read Spong and find out what all the fuss is about, this book offers a strong and well-reasoned answer: "Nope." |
| |
|
out of 40 Reviews
