Rating: 
Summary: Exposes the agenda of radical Jesus scholarship
Review: My recent interest in reading books concerning the search for the "Historical Jesus" is rather ironic since I believe I have to go no further than the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to find the Jesus of history. Today's more radical Jesus scholars, as exemplified by the Jesus Seminar, put very little stock in the canonical gospels (except what is considered part of the imaginary "Q" gospel) and instead appropriate more dubious sources, like the Gospel of Thomas and other apocryphal works, to construct a Jesus more to their liking. Philip Jenkins does a masterful job in bringing these issues to light. He exposes many of the ultra-liberal scholars as being on a par with the most rabid conspiracy theorists. ("Here is the Jesus THEY don't want you to see!") Of particular interest is the discussion of the media factor, and how popular media latches on to more radical ideas because there is nothing inherently "interesting" about more orthodox ideas about Jesus. Thus, the likes of Crossan, Funk, and Mack get to have their 15 minutes of fame (and greatly increased book sales), while more conventional Bible scholars are mired in the obscurity of academia. Unfortunately, as the radical edge receives more publicity, the mainstream consensus of Jesus scholarhip will have a tendency to drift further to the left. This book is an extremely worthwhile purchase for anyone interested in the modern quest for the historical Jesus as it gives a much needed corrective to the radical left of the Jesus Seminar and their ilk.
Rating:
Summary: Exposes the agenda of radical Jesus scholarship
Review: My recent interest in reading books concerning the search for the "Historical Jesus" is rather ironic since I believe I have to go no further than the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to find the Jesus of history. Today's more radical Jesus scholars, as exemplified by the Jesus Seminar, put very little stock in the canonical gospels (except what is considered part of the imaginary "Q" gospel) and instead appropriate more dubious sources, like the Gospel of Thomas and other apocryphal works, to construct a Jesus more to their liking. Philip Jenkins does a masterful job in bringing these issues to light. He exposes many of the ultra-liberal scholars as being on a par with the most rabid conspiracy theorists. ("Here is the Jesus THEY don't want you to see!") Of particular interest is the discussion of the media factor, and how popular media latches on to more radical ideas because there is nothing inherently "interesting" about more orthodox ideas about Jesus. Thus, the likes of Crossan, Funk, and Mack get to have their 15 minutes of fame (and greatly increased book sales), while more conventional Bible scholars are mired in the obscurity of academia. Unfortunately, as the radical edge receives more publicity, the mainstream consensus of Jesus scholarhip will have a tendency to drift further to the left. This book is an extremely worthwhile purchase for anyone interested in the modern quest for the historical Jesus as it gives a much needed corrective to the radical left of the Jesus Seminar and their ilk.
Rating:
Summary: A breath of fresh air
Review: The reviewer that wrote there is "nothing new" in this book is seriously in error as he/she dismisses it as a prototypical defense of Catholic Christianity. First, Jenkins does NOT claim that the Gnostic Gospels are heretical because they were composed later than the canonical Gospels. Instead, he claims that portions of the Gnostic writings, especially in Thomas, are quite early but were edited by persons within a Gnostic community. It is not the date of the Gospels that makes them heretical, its that the Gospels were composed by persons who subscribed to beliefs that were at odds with those held by the earliest Christian communities.
Second, Jenkins does NOT accept the automatic authority of catholic tradition and the canonical Gospels without question. In fact, one section of the book deals with precisely why the four Gospels were chosen over others and that Constantine had nothing to do with their canonization. In short, the two star reviewer must not have read this book all that closely, for his views are flat out incorrect.
The book is great for what it is, a sober account on how the search for Jesus has indeed "lost its way". One can disagree with Jenkins on many points, as I do, yet still appreciate his insights on the highly popular views held today by those involved in the Jesus controversy. It is readible and clearly worded, allowing the central message to be grasped by all who read it.
Rating:
Summary: Exposing The X Files Approach to Biblical Studies
Review: The X Files tells us that "The truth is out there" and anyone who has enjoyed this series knows that its appeal to (post?)modern Americans is its vast conspiracy involving aliens, repressive and secretive institutions, supernatural phenomena, the concealment of the truth for sinister reasons and lone rebels who risk life and limb to uncover the truth. Moulder and Scully are our heroes seeking to find what has been hidden from our eyes -- the truth -- and thereupon free us from our ignorance and darkness. It makes a great television show, but its appeal and success lies in the fact that at least some Americans suspect that there are dark forces out there oppressing us. The success of the movie the Matrix, a clever retelling of an ancient gnostic myth, shows this as well. In "Hidden Gospels" Philip Jenkins ably shows how these type of conspiracy stories help to explain the ongoing appeal of the possibility of hidden gospels. For many Americans, today and yesterday, the possibility that there is a hidden gospel in which the "real Jesus" will finally be revealed -- free from all the alleged distortions of St. Paul, the Evangelists, ecumenical councils and historic Christianity, especially the Catholic Church -- is too seductive to relinquish. Jenkins successfully shows that the discoveries of Qumran & Nag Hammadi and the subsequent body of scholarship produced on account of them do not represent a significant contribution to that which was already known. For example, Jenkins shows how many of the Nag Hammadi texts were already well-known and popularly disseminated in the 19th Century. Having dealt with the question of their relative novelty, Jenkins then considers the reasons for their ongoing appeal. He concludes that a variety of factors have given rise to the success of hidden gospel industry. These include changes in the society and scholarly institutions, current ideological tastes, clever self-promotion of showmen-scholars and the financial interests of mass media and publishing houses. All of these factors contribute to a credible explanation for the enduring appeal of this pursuit. The truth is out there -- and Jenkins has found it. Anyone interested in biblical studies and their popularization will do well to read this important and incisive study.
Rating:
Summary: Courses in Sources
Review: This book is not perfect. Perfect would be making all the points I would make with the same goals in mind as mine. That being said, I think this book makes a point that needed to be made forcefully and systematically for a long time. Some scholars have reacted negatively to the Jesus seminars. Others have put forth their own interpretations. This book does a good, scholarly job of showing two things. The Jesus seminar ideas are not new. The Jesus seminar conclusions are wrong conclusions based on wrong interpretations standing on largely irrelevant source material. Someone needed to take the fallacies of the Jesus seminar apart one by one. This Jenkins does. One sees immediately the connection between the thinking of someone like Spong and the early Gnostics. "Spiritualizing" Jesus, taking away his history, manhood and flesh, is an old heresy. Jenkins deconstructs this fallacious thinking bit by bit. Having done the essential job of once and for all discrediting the "new gnostics," we can settle in to divide the spoils and discuss the minor points.
Rating:
Summary: Courses in Sources
Review: This book is not perfect. Perfect would be making all the points I would make with the same goals in mind as mine. That being said, I think this book makes a point that needed to be made forcefully and systematically for a long time. Some scholars have reacted negatively to the Jesus seminars. Others have put forth their own interpretations. This book does a good, scholarly job of showing two things. The Jesus seminar ideas are not new. The Jesus seminar conclusions are wrong conclusions based on wrong interpretations standing on largely irrelevant source material. Someone needed to take the fallacies of the Jesus seminar apart one by one. This Jenkins does. One sees immediately the connection between the thinking of someone like Spong and the early Gnostics. "Spiritualizing" Jesus, taking away his history, manhood and flesh, is an old heresy. Jenkins deconstructs this fallacious thinking bit by bit. Having done the essential job of once and for all discrediting the "new gnostics," we can settle in to divide the spoils and discuss the minor points.
Rating: 
Summary: Jenkins Has Done It Again
Review: This book needs to be taken for what it is. It's not a refutation of the Jesus Seminar and its findings, at least not primarily. Rather, it is a sociological study of the modern "Quest for the Historical Jesus," including theories as to why it has taken the turns it has. This quest is not really a search for truth, as it is for self-validation of mores and principles deeply ingrained in the heart of modern, democratic man (eg. individualism, freedom from dogmatic strictures, etc.). I think this book is an excellent companion to Luke Timothy Johnson's "The Real Jesus." (Johnson's book should be read for a specific critique of the Seminar and its methods.) The only fault I find with "Hidden Gospels" is Jenkins's tendency to repear himself over and over. This tendency is better syited to a classroom lecture rather than a book, I believe. I wouldn't classify this book as a "must read," as I would Johnson's, but it's an excellent read nonetheless. Like Johnson, I don't know if Jenkins can be said to have a conservative bias. If so, I don't see why on earth he ever would have left Catholicism for Anglicanism. The Anglican Communion isn't exactly known for moral conservatism or dogmatic conviction. I think this is why orthodox Christians, especially Catholics, find him so appealing. "Why would a 'liberal' support 'conservative' positions unless they were genuinely true?" With cleverly disguised works of pseudo-scholarship like "The da Vinci Code" making the bestseller lists, "Hidden Gospels: How the Search for Jesus Lost Its Way" is a well-needed wake-up call for those wanting a clearer understanding of American religion, and the directions it has been, and is, heading.
Rating:
Summary: Gospel truths--and untruths
Review: This work is a useful review and critique of the 'hidden gospel syndrome', familiar from living throught the generation of the New Age movement where the secret text, the next esoteric tidbit, might finally do the trick. The issue of the Q and Thomas gospels is given a hopefully not too hasty dressing down and the confusions surrounding the still fascinating gospel of Thomas is especially useful, if only because that work is of enduring interest, and needs a correct historical account. To put the gnostic literature in perspective is essential in the flood of contemporar confusions, for a whole generation of New Agers have been left with essentially nothing in the massive heap of useless literature.
Rating:
Summary: Don't confuse them with the facts.
Review: While reputed Jesus "scholars" run through various media outlets declaring their newfound pet theories on the Nazarene to be the latest sensation since The Beatles, Philip Jenkins has provided the public with a much needed jolt back to reality. This book should be read by anyone gullible enough to swallow such ridiculous notions as the claim that Jesus ran off to India to start a family with Mary Magdalene. Likewise, it should be read by those who believe less ludicrous, but still equally false claims regarding the priority of the Gospel of Thomas in comparison to the canonical gospels along with the seeming infallibility of the Jesus Seminar. Jenkins provides bushels of reminders regarding the fact that the importance of Thomas and other radical claims made by the left-wing of biblical "scholarship" are not "new discoveries" now available due to recent archaeological finds. Rather, the Jesus Seminar and other radicals provide textbook examples of attempts to create a Jesus in their own image or a Jesus that will make them some money: "Jesus the Vegetarian", "Jesus the Mushroom Cult Leader", and "Jesus the Cynic philosopher" are all feeble attempts made by current "scholars" attempting to sell as many copies of their latest books before the unsuspecting, biblically and historically illiterate, public comes to their senses. Jenkins condemnation of the inability, or unwillingness, of the mainstream media to provide balanced reporting on the latest claims relevant to early Christianity is right on the mark. Book publishers, newspapers, TV networks, and talk show hosts often aren't interested in the facts nearly as much as they are in getting a few bucks or a front row seat for a good battle between the "good scholars" and the "bad, oppressive, traditional Christians". If you're the type who doesn't like it when the facts interfere with your beliefs, then I'd suggest skipping this book. For the rest of us, Jenkins has provided a refreshing return to the real world.
| 
