Jesus Under Fire - Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus by Wilkins - Essay Example

? Michael J. Wilkins. Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan. 254 pages. 978-0310211396. Michael J. Wilkins, the author of Jesus Under Fire, is Distinguished Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Talbot School of Theology. Having been born in Glendale, California, Wilkins served with the US Army in Viet Nam in the late 1960s. After leaving the US Army, Wilkins received Jesus Christ into his life, and then went to college where he originally studied psychology and the social sciences. From here, his interested in the New Testament and other pieces of Biblical literature started, and from here he went on to study for a Master’s degree. His PhD was in New Testament with specialisms in 2nd Temple Judaism and Old Testament Theology. He went on to work as a pastor, then accepting an appointment at the Talbot School of Theology, where he is currently based. He has worked on several research articles, books and chapters in his chosen fields of New Testament theology, Christology and discipleship. About Jesus Under Fire Jesus Under Fire is essentially an examination of the critics and criticisms of Jesus Christ throughout history. It is an academic work comprising of contributions from eight authors who put forward accounts of the life of Jesus and assess the historicity of the way that Jesus is perceived in the Bible. These scholars take into account the work of the Jesus Seminar and the role in which this has played on the view of Jesus and His life throughout history. The work is essentially a criticism of the methodology of the Jesus Seminar, and presents different accounts which give evidence that the Jesus of the Bible is historically accurate. It does this by examining the New Testament and the words and actions of the Jesus contained within. It can be classified as a work of religious non-fiction opinion. The book starts with the question “Where Do We Start Studying Jesus?” This is an interesting one, and sets the tone for the rest of the book by describing how scholars and laymen alike should approach the Bible and Jesus’ teachings. Interestingly, this section covers the issue of scholarly scepticism regarding the Gospels and how this has affected the approach to Biblical study in modern times. Blomberg, the author of this chapter, argues that this scepticism of modern times is not warranted, and goes on further to examine reasons why this is the case and where the scepticism arose from. This sets the tone for the whole book, which aims to prove that the texts found in the Bible are generally trustworthy and are not deserving of such a response from the academic communities. Scot McKnight is the author of the second chapter, which investigates Jesus studies and the correct way of approaching the historicity of Jesus as found within the Bible. This is a very informative chapter that introduces some methodology. Many of those who disagree with the Jesus seminar suggest that the methodology is faulty, so this section is necessary to examine the different ways of approaching the study of Jesus that may be more appropriate and useful in determining historicity. The book then moves on to examine the words of Jesus. Firstly, it ascertains that there were no tape recorders or newspapers, and this makes it difficult to understand how information may have travelled in these earlier times. The culture in which Jesus lived was an oral one, and therefore most information travelled by word-of-mouth, including a number of Jesus’ teachings. This chapter argues that some of the differences between the Gospels where similar events are reported can be said to be due to differences in priorities between the reporters and their reporting style. This is a middle ground between those who think everything in the Bible literally records everything like a Memorex tape recorder and those (like the Jesus Seminar) who believe that the Bible represents only a loose idea of what the historical Jesus was saying. Chapters four and five cover what Jesus did in his lifetime. The first gives an overview of the events in the Bible and how to tell whether these are historically accurate and again, putting forth views about why some of the accounts of Jesus’ life differ slightly between Gospels and how to explore the authenticity of the Bible’s reporting. Chapter five investigates the miracles of Jesus. An interesting point raised by this chapter concerns the use of resurrection and miracle stories from the ancient world. Some scholars have used the existence of these to suggest that Jesus’ miracles are somewhat lesser, or perhaps to argue that the existence of these stories means that Jesus’ miracles should be seen in the same light. The author of this chapter argues that there is no evidence whether these elder tales are true or false, and that their similarity with the life of Jesus does not prove either one false. This is another attack on parts of the methodology of the Jesus seminar. Chapter six is a look at the resurrection of Jesus, and begins with the author analysing a previous work that had said that the resurrection of Jesus was a false tale, although this was made without any real evidence. The chapter examines the methods behind assessing historical explanations using the event of Jesus’ resurrection as a starting point. Chapter seven discusses the “Jesus Question” and the problems with saying that Jesus is the only way in modernity. From here, the entire book begins to draw to a close and discuss the historical presentations of Jesus in texts outside the Old Testament. This section suggests that these sources can be used for information but should be seen as inferior to the information given in the Gospels. The conclusion brings all of this information together to prove a case for believing the historicity of the Gospels. Essentially, the book is trying to solve the problem which stems from the fact that many of the Gospels report on similar events but use different terminology or talk about them in different ways. This fact, combined with modern scepticism, has meant that the historical Jesus is often purported to be wildly different from that found in the Bible. The author and editor has collected together eight essays that examine the problem from a conservative Christian viewpoint to attack the methodology of the Jesus Seminar and attempts to prove the authenticity of the accounts in the Gospels. Critical Analysis Perhaps the biggest problem with trying to address the authenticity of the accounts in the Gospels in Jesus Under Fire comes from the fact that a lot of things are assumed to be true before the arguments are put in place. The reader is assumed to have some knowledge of the Christian faith and in many parts is assumed to be a Christian, and therefore many of the arguments stem from this starting point (with the exception of the chapter regarding the Jesus Question). The most obvious example of this comes from Edwin M. Yamauchi in chapter 8. He starts off with an anecdote about his classes, and mentions that these sources ‘are inferior to the information provided by the Gospels’. Evidently, Yamauchi believes that the Gospels provide accurate information about the life of Jesus. This is not a problem in itself, but the statement above seems to be suggesting that all other accounts should be disregarded, and there is no real clear information as to why this should be the case. Another area in which the questions about Jesus’ life are not answered particularly well is that concerning the oral tradition and how we should read the Gospels. The author of this chapter presents three views; one that the Gospels are literal, one that the Gospels are mostly false, and one middle ground which the author takes. The author is correct in saying that the Gospels should not be taken literally because many of the accounts differ greatly and therefore it is impossible for Jesus to have said the same thing in two or more different ways at one event. However, it seems as though the author of this chapter is mainly arguing from a semantic viewpoint, in that there is no real scholarly difference in claiming that the Gospels are mostly reported inaccurate and claiming that they are just due to differences between Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. It seems a petty to argue this middle ground when the question is “did Jesus really say/do this?” because only a yes or no answer is required. Aside from these two instances, the arguments put forth by the various authors in this book are very interesting. They do not rely on false logic, which makes them valid, and a lot of them approach the topic with scientific reasoning. Although it is clear that the authors are Christians, the book does not come across as a religious text and does not aim to persuade readers to convert to Christianity (perhaps because the reader is assumed to be a Christian in many cases, as previously mentioned). This means that the text is quite accessible and interesting and does not tackle some of the more ideological issues of Christianity which are often an issue of personal choice and viewpoints. The book seems generally complete in the analysis and the way that the Jesus Seminar is deconstructed. However, it may have been useful to include a chapter about the development of the oral tradition and how this may have shaped the Gospels in their recording to further illustrate the process that went into their creation. This would help the reader to understand further the points made in chapter three regarding the use of different viewpoints and different recording techniques, and allow the reader insight into Biblical development. Additionally, it may help to strengthen some of the arguments made by the authors in different areas by showing exactly how the historicity of Jesus can be authenticated and explained. Conclusion Overall, the book was enjoyable to read. It was clearly written and explained everything well, particularly when explaining particular incidences in the Bible that may cause some problem for scholars. Some of the explanations and interpretations were fairly dense and perhaps may be difficult to understand without context, but overall it was aimed to a more general audience which made it readable. It is hard to say whether the book presents information that is true. It offers some very convincing explanations, but it may help to read the Gospels alongside this book to ascertain the truth of the opinion here, as well as some of the other references made. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in learning about the modern interpretations of Jesus, and anyone that is interested in how the accounts of Jesus’ life came to be. Read More