Book Review - The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions

Earlier this week I finished reading this excellent work by two popular Anglican theologians -- N.T. Wright and Marcus Borg. This book is organized around a set of topics about Jesus where each author provides their respective views as well as comments on the other author's conclusions. Despite the fact that these two men have very different views on Jesus the debate in the book was quite friendly, and I think the book overall is a valuable contribution to the study of Jesus and the development of Christology in the early Church.

I like the fact that both men affirm a Jesus that is much different from that portrayed on the big screen over the past several decades. Their understanding of Jesus is firmly rooted in the historical context of first century Judaism rather than in the successive layers of piety that often obscure Jesus and make Him seem too otherworldly. A proper study of Jesus in His Jewish context in the larger Greco-Roman world leads to a better understanding of the Incarnation and its role in human history.

Both authors did a fine job of articulating their positions. I did tend to agree with Wright more often as his views are more consistent with the historic teachings of the Church. I did think that Borg's use of cross-cultural methods to study Jesus was very insightful, and I found his categories of Jesus as Jewish mystic, healer, and social prophet to be quite informative. After reading this book I think that Borg represents the best of the progressive movement.

Ultimately I think Wright came out ahead in the debate as his assumptions seemed to be more rooted in post-Exilic Judaism while Borg focused too much on 'history metaphorized'. I certainly agree with Borg that history as metaphor is common in the Bible, but I think to assume the metaphorical stance just because events in Matthew or Luke are not in the Gospel of Mark or Q is itself a modern anachronism.

It is certainly possible that the Matthean or Lucan communities simply remembered more things from the past as Mark circulated in the early Church. I do think that there is some later theology in the synoptic Gospels but it is not possible to select decisively where it occurs. There is also the whole problem as to whether or not Q even exists.

Overall I highly recommend this book as well as anything else by these particular authors. Regardless of your faith outlook you will find yourself challenged and might just find yourself thinking about Jesus from unexpected angles. After all, isn't the whole point to come to know Jesus more fully?