Rating: 
Summary: THE CHRISTOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HIS WORK
Review: Whether you agree or disagree with Wright, he presents such a careful, cogent, and compelling argument that you must come to terms with his key position in working through your own. He has a rare talent for catching important points, making connections, viewing matters in their broader context, and putting things together in a manner that makes sense and is credible. The other reviewers have done a good job giving a flavor of the contents of the book; I wish to raise some questions pertaining to the Christological implications of his work.In the last chapter of his book, in the section which deals with the aims and beliefs of Jesus, Wright's argument becomes a bit more confusing than his previous chapters, which is to be expected since here he attempts to draw his points together and indicate the Christological implications of his treatment. It follows, therefore, that this is the place where many of the key issues will emerge. Wright maintains that certain key O.T. texts (e.g., Psalm 110 & Daniel 7) came together in Jesus' mind and, in their combination, constitute a claim to share the throne of God. He also argues this is the basic reason why he is charged with blasphemy at his trial. Wright seems to want to use this claim to support a view that Jesus was "more than" a prophet or the Messiah. While this might well prove to be the case, since even Wright himself points out that there were strands of Jewish thought which also held such belief, more will be needed to justify the claim itself that Jesus was "more than" these. Throughout his book, Wright has insisted that we should not, and cannot, conclude the "divinity" of Jesus based on certain historical claims (e.g., that he was the "Messiah," "one like a son of man," etc.). He rightly points out that such claims in their various historical contexts do not (at least necessarily) carry this meaning. This raises the question, if such phrases cannot be used as a stepping stone to derive the divinity of Jesus, then how can we ever conclude his being divine? Wright's main point is that when you put these various strands of thought (stories) together, particularly the underlying narrative that Jesus thereby intends to evoke, symbolize, and actually embody the coming of YHWH to Zion, this implies that he is "more than" simply a prophet or the Messiah. Is this where we must finally admit entrance of divinity into our concept of Jesus? Or, in view of the sharing of the throne, is the distinction between Jesus and God maintained? In many of his works, Wright (to use his own word) "teases" out the meaning, but seems to leave us asking, as Jesus' disciples, "tell us plainly." At one point in his book, he says about another theologian that his treatment of the materials does not justify, at the end, his suddenly concluding the traditional Christological formula. I simply raise the question, not whether Wright is justified, but what is the conclusion he draws? It is my own opinion that his treatment can be used as support for either view of Jesus (i.e. he was only a man, or, both God and man). I suggest that he intends neither--that he is working within a completely new model for which either of these options remains a parody.
Rating:
Summary: The Victory
Review: With his book, Jesus and the Victory of God, N. T. Wright has made his most significant contribution the new historical quest for Jesus. This book is Wright's second in a series of five volumes. For the most part, Wright uses the synoptic gospels as his primary biblical source of information, with occasional use of John and Acts, and extensive examination of Old Testament text. Wright sees the gospel stories as historically reliable. He arranges the material by themes rather than chronological events. He uses a technique of double similarity with double dissimilarity, where what is believable within first century Judaism and early Christianity, while at the same time enough dissimilar from both in some aspect, is likely to be historically accurate. Wright accounts for the variations in the synoptic stories by convincingly arguing that Jesus used the same stories on several different occasions. The book is divided into four parts. In the first section, Wright surveys the history, from the nineteenth century to the present, of the quest of the historical Jesus. I feel the first two chapters are the weakest part of the book, and will be the first to date what should otherwise be a long enduring work. Wright seems overly concerned about pointing out the weakness of more liberal scholars, and spends much time critiquing their work. He seems particularly concerned with the works of Crossan, Mack, and the Jesus' Seminar. He attacks their methods of "criteria of authenticity," and their narrow focus on the individual saying of Jesus. In the third chapter Wright presents some key questions in the study of Jesus and looks at how they are handled within the Third Quest. Answering these questions becomes the task of much of the remainder of the book. The largest section of the book, Profile of a Prophet, Wright shows that Jesus' public image within first century Judaism was that of a prophet, one who proclaimed the coming kingdom of Israel's God. The portrait of Jesus as a prophet fits well with what is known of his public career and praxis. Jesus, like John the Baptist before him, seems to consciously model himself after Elijah. Like John, Jesus issued solemn warnings about imminent judgement. Jesus delivers his prophecies with great authority, often in the form of parables. Wright sees the literary background of the parables as apocalyptic. As such, they were subversive stories told to articulate a new way of being a people of God. Jesus engaged in the characteristically Jewish activity of subversively retelling the basic Jewish story, accommodating them for the new situations. Wright argues that Jewish apocalyptic, for many, did not include the end of the world, but rather a renewed covenant with God was "this-worldly." Key to Wright's thesis, which he argues repeatedly, was that most first century Jews would have seen themselves as still living "in exile." The exile functioned, in the second-Temple period, as an eschatological hope, that the triumph over the pagan occupying rulers of Israel was yet to come. The Jews regarded themselves as still living in exile because of the Roman domination. While they had returned form exile in a geographical sense, the great prophecies of restoration had not yet come true. The coming kingdom of God is the true return from exile. Wright demonstrates that Jesus had prophetically announced that the promised restoration of Israel had started. This restoration was to take place in and through Jesus' ministry. Through Jesus, God is restoring his people. Wright contends that Jesus proclaimed this return from exile was not to be an armed revolution against the Romans, but a divinely appointed task of leading the Gentiles to worship the one true God. Israel's history is drawing to a climax. Rome was not the enemy of Israel, but Satan, and the true victory was the liberation from sin. Overall, I found Wright's book enlightening. At several points throughout the book, Wright uses diagrams, with arrows and words, to illuminate his point. Unfortunately, for me, these did more to confuse me than clarify anything. I found Wright's suggestion that Jesus' death on the cross was for the forgiveness of the nationalistic sin of Israel, and not for individual sin, to be the most disturbing. I feel his case was well made within the synopotics, but it was not the understanding of the early church, and certainly not the understanding of Paul. Wright's argument that the Second Coming was fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE is unconvincing in light of the rest of the New Testament's understanding, as well as that of the early church (page 341 and elsewhere). Throughout the book, Wright preferred to treat the synoptic text literally, but in the case of Mark 13, he inexplicably prefers the metaphorical approach. The writings of Paul and Revelation have more to say on the subject of the Second Coming, and they would make little sense if the fall of the Temple was all the Second Coming entailed. Wright does not give a rational interpretation the period of forty years that pasted between the death of Jesus and the destruction of the Temple. From our vantage point today, the fall of the Temple did not usher in a new world, one in which evil no longer exist, and certainly not one where God's will was done on earth as in heaven. I enjoyed most of Wright's book. Wright demonstrates that conservative viewpoints can be taken seriously. He is not a skeptic who reduces the historical Jesus to just a few lines of text. Wright believes that truth exists, and much of it can be recovered by historians. He does this without abandoning the Jesus of faith, as so many biblical historians have done.
Rating:
Summary: Weighty but Worth It
Review: With this volume, Wright has made a significant contribution to the search for the Historical Jesus. With the possible exception of Meier's "Marginal Jew" series, I know of no better introduction to the field. Wright provides concise, accurate sketches of the views of other scholars and cogently explains his reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.
Of particular note is his (re-)definition of "eschatology"; indeed, this may be said to be his central thesis. Also, he sets forth five inter-related questions that any theory regarding the Historical Jesus must answer; these questions, alone, provide a needed "check" against some of the nonsense parading as "research" in this field.
One caveat: I strongly suggest reading the first volume in the series before picking up this volume.
Rating:
Summary: Weighty but Worth It
Review: With this volume, Wright has made a significant contribution to the search for the Historical Jesus. With the possible exception of Meier's "Marginal Jew" series, I know of no better introduction to the field. Wright provides concise, accurate sketches of the views of other scholars and cogently explains his reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.
Of particular note is his (re-)definition of "eschatology"; indeed, this may be said to be his central thesis. Also, he sets forth five inter-related questions that any theory regarding the Historical Jesus must answer; these questions, alone, provide a needed "check" against some of the nonsense parading as "research" in this field.
One caveat: I strongly suggest reading the first volume in the series before picking up this volume.
Rating:
Summary: JESUS: YHWH'S COMING AS KING
Review: Wright attempts to portray Jesus by examining the synoptic accounts in light of the appropriate 1st century setting; challenging the views of other scholars on all sides along the way while offering what he considers to be the most probable historical reconstruction. In the process, he offers original and distinctive interpretations that bring the materials to life. Traditional scholarly criteria for determining the authenticity of Jesus material primarily utilizes the criterion of similarity (if it was the same or similar to his environment it was not authentic) and dissimilarity (if it was not something found in his environment it was authentic). Wright, as many other scholars finds these to be insufficient and arbitrary. The probability is that Jesus was both like and unlike contemporary Judiasm and the early Christian community, which is to say that there must be both continuity and discontinuity between Jesus and Judaism and the the early community. In his first volume to the series, The New Testament and the People of God, Wright has laid out the worldview of 2nd temple Judaism, as well as that of the earliest Christian community. In the present volune, Wright sets the Jesus material in this context. C.K. Barrett once stated that after years of study he was now reluctant to claim that the synoptics portrayed Jesus as Messiah. Wright, by setting Jesus in the context of the Judaism of his day, finds such a claim on virtually every page. Instead of focusing, as traditional scholarship has done, on individual words, phrases, forms, etc., or on explicit testimony, he shows that the symbols and stories everywhere portray Jesus as the eschatological prophet and Messiah of Israel, who speaks and acts for YHWH and embodies the coming of YHWH as King. According to Wright's standards for determining which portrayal is the best historical picture (e.g., simplicity, coherence of all data, explains other facts), discussed in his first volume, and the fact that his portrayal meets the criterion of double similarity and double dissimilarity with Judaism and the early Christian community, Wright urges that his historical reconstruction is most probable among all other views on offer. Several considerations make Wright's portrayal so convincing: 1) He thoroughly and carefully lays out the 2nd temple Jewish worldview via an extended treatment of its praxis, symbols, stories and beliefs. 2) The synoptic materials naturally fit into this framework and come alive. 3) His portrayal best meets the numerous and various critical standards and criteria for historical reconstruction. In short, Wright does not just argue points, he offers a massive reconstruction that allows us to see a real historical human being coming to meet us, as the actual embodiment of YHWH.
Rating:
Summary: Magnificent Scope and style
Review: Wright continues his series with a thorough examination of the life and works of Jesus. This book is not light reading, but should be required material for anyone seeking to fully understand the context of Jesus' messianic task. Wright is the perhaps the only researcher to adequately reconcile the compelling case for a completely coherent theology within an acurrate first century historical context. You will not find a more satisfying unabridged treatment of the message and work of Jesus.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Have
Review: Wright continues his series with a thorough examination of the life and works of Jesus. This book is not light reading, but should be required material for anyone seeking to fully understand the context of Jesus' messianic task. Wright is the perhaps the only researcher to adequately reconcile the compelling case for a completely coherent theology within an acurrate first century historical context. You will not find a more satisfying unabridged treatment of the message and work of Jesus.
Rating:
Summary: Wright has established himself as the premier Jesus scholar
Review: Wright is a must read for the serious student of Jesus. Setting Jesus firmly in the family of 1st century Jewry Wright examines, in the most exacting manner imaginable, not only the words of Jesus but the finely tuned symbolic "praxis" of a 1st century Jew who saw himself acting out the longed for Messianic age in which YHWH would redeem Israel, bring the exiles home, and once more establish his presence among his people. Most impressive is Wright's understanding of "2cd temple" Jewish apocalyptic, how it played out in the life of the children of Israel, and how it was understood and put into practice by Jesus
|
