Jesus Seminar --a 200-member group of biblical scholars
Miami Herald, The (FL)
March 15, 1991
Section: LIVING TODAY
Edition: FINAL
Page: 1E
WAR OF THE WORDS AFTER SIX YEARS, CONTROVERSIAL PANEL CONCLUDES MUCH OF THE GOSPEL WASN'T SAID BY JESUS
FRED TASKER Herald Staff Writer
Jesus never said 80 percent of the things attributed to him in the gospels -- the crucial first four books of the Bible's New Testament.
That's the controversial conclusion of the Jesus Seminar, a 200-member group of biblical scholars from universities and seminars around the United States , after six years of minutely reasoned debate.
The announcement of the group's findings last week is sure to trigger intense debate between the modernist members of the seminar and religious conservatives, who take the Bible at its literal word.
And it comes at a time when one of America 's largest protestant denominations, the 14.9-million- member Southern Baptist Convention, is threatened by a split between fundamentalists and moderates within its ranks over the same issue, among other things. The picture of Jesus emerging from the Jesus Seminar is of a sage and a prophet who preached the word of God in simple, striking phrases but who did not himself claim to be the son of God. And who did not prophesy a coming apocalypse after which God's imperial rule on Earth would begin.
The new description of Jesus will "feed a hunger" among modern churchgoers, said seminar member Marcus Borg of Oregon State University .
"Many mainstream Christians can no longer believe the picture of Jesus they got as children," Borg said.
Conservative criticism of the seminar's conclusions has been quick and heated.
"It's a gnat on a bull's horn," snorted Paige Patterson, president of Criswell College , a conservative evangelical Baptist school in Dallas , Texas . "These people are meeting to amuse and amaze themselves. They came to the documents with an anti-supernatural bias and arrived at anti-supernatural conclusions.
"They will not be taken seriously."
Jerry Falwell, the fundamentalist TV preacher, is also certain to dispute the seminar's findings, a spokesman said.
"He obviously holds to a literal interpretation of the entire Bible -- every word, every story and certainly every word of Christ. He would suggest that these (Jesus Seminar) scholars probably ought to be in a different line of work, rather than to devote their lives and careers to something they believe is only partly true."
The seminar's work has created anxiety even among those who agree with many of its views.
"What they're doing is crucially important," said John Fitzgerald Jr., a New Testament scholar and professor of religion at University of Miami . "It brings to public consciousness the fact that most mainstream New Testament scholars do not believe that everything the New Testament attributes to Jesus actually goes back to him.
"I just hope the public doesn't say, 'Oof! Eighty percent! This group is not to be taken seriously.' If they had said 50 percent, it would coincide much better with the convictions of more New Testament scholars.
"I hope there is informed discussion about it."
"We don't know how this is all going to turn out," said David Carter, aide to Robert W. Funk, a retired University of Montana religion professor and founder of the Jesus Seminar. "We're at the front end of something. It's a hot topic."
The debate actually goes back at least as far as 1906, when Albert Schweitzer published his book, The Quest for the Historical Jesus. It pits those who believe in the "Historical Jesus" against those who believe in the "Christ of Faith."
And the seminar's findings aren't quite as radical as they sound, its participants said.
"We don't claim to have discovered a totally new Jesus, nor do we claim absolute certitude," said Robert Fortna, professor of religion at Vassar College and a seminar member. "But we're trying to achieve as precise a definition of Jesus as possible."
The problem with many quotes attributed to Jesus in the Gospels, the seminar scholars said, is that they were written 30 to 60 years after his death. And the men who wrote the Gospels, while faithful believers, did not hesitate to alter, expand and re-interpret Jesus' words to fit their own beliefs and the problems of their own times, the scholars said.
The Jesus Seminar scholars were particularly hard on the book of John, written by John the Apostle 60 or more years after Jesus' death. One of the crucial verses ruled out was the popular John 3:16, which quotes Jesus as saying: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
"That did not reflect Jesus' ideas," Carter said. "Most scholars agree that Jesus did not have a messianic self- consciousness."
That doesn't mean Jesus is not the son of God, Carter stressed, but only that he never claimed himself to be. The idea that he was the son of God was developed decades later by his followers, Carter said.
"It's perfectly legitimate that later his followers came along and mythologized him," Carter said. "There's no way the seminar would devalue that.
"We're trying to accurately describe Jesus as a historical figure. If you're doing theological speculation, it should be with some regard to history.
"It's not a theological discussion; it's a historical discussion."
Disagreement with that view is voiced by Alan Culpepper, of Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville , Ky. , who quit the Jesus Seminar two years ago in disagreement with its developing views.
"My particular area is the Gospel of John. That's one area in which I have a strong disagreement with the work of the seminar. I feel much more of the tradition goes back to Jesus."
He believes Jesus did claim to be the son of God.
"I think on balance that he did say it."
The Jesus Seminar was founded in 1985 by Funk, who taught biblical studies at the University of Montana but now runs Westar Institute and Polebridge Press in Sonoma, Calif. Researching a book on Jesus, he was struck that no one had ever tried to reach a consensus among religious scholars on the authenticity of sayings attributed to him.
During their six years of study, the Jesus Seminar scholars developed a unique and controversial method of voting on sayings attributed to Jesus. After discussion, they would drop colored beads into a ballot box.
A red bead was a vote that the quote under scrutiny was actually said by Jesus.
A pink bead meant Jesus probably said not that, but something similar.
A gray bead meant Jesus didn't say it, but that it reflected something close to his beliefs.
A black bead meant Jesus never said it, and that it probably reflected the ideas of later followers.
Fifty percent of the more than 1,100 sayings attributed to Jesus in the first four books -- Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- got black beads. Another 30 percent got gray beads.
From 30 to more than 100 of the 200 scholars voted on each passage under debate.
The scholars reached their conclusions by studying, among other things, patterns of speech characteristic of Jesus. The scholars concluded his style was terse, striking. He spoke in brief aphorisms and parables, not in long, organized speeches like the Sermon on the Mount, they concluded.
As an example of an aphorism, the scholars cite Mark 10:25: "It is easier for a camel to squeeze through a needle's eye than for a wealthy person to get into God's domain."
As an example of a parable, they cite Mark 4:30-32, about how Christians should see God's domain: "Consider the mustard seed: When it is sown . . . it is the smallest of all the seeds on the Earth . . . (eventually) it becomes the biggest of all garden plants."
Says the seminar's concluding document: "If we examine the surviving gospel records closely . . . it is readily observed that Jesus speaks regularly in adages or aphorisms or in parables or in witticisms formulated as rebuff or retort in the context of dialogue or debate. It is clear that he did not speak in long monologues of the type found in the Gospel of John."
Fortna cautioned: "This doesn't radically change the view of Jesus. It confirms and fills out what scholars have come to believe in the past 25 years. Jesus wasn't speaking of himself as God's son. He was concerned with the kingdom of God , not with
himself.
"The idea that he predicts his own return is also rejected," Fortna added.
Thus the seminar ruled out the "little apocalypse" verses in Mark 13, which quote Jesus saying:
"For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows.
"And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds. . . . "
Such statements were actually put on Jesus' lips by Gospel writers trying to bolster their courage in the trying times decades after his death, the scholars concluded. Such statements quoting Jesus predicting the apocalyptic coming of God's kingdom also contradict what Jesus said -- in a phrase accepted as accurate by the seminar -- in Luke 11:20: "But if it is by the finger of God that I drive out demons, then for you God's imperial rule has arrived," the seminar concluded. That means Jesus said God's kingdom was already there, not something to come, the scholars said.
The debate over the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar is certain to intensify next fall, when a Red Letter Gospel of the Bible is published, with the words of Jesus printed in red, pink, gray or black according to how the seminar voted on their authenticity.
It could be a spirited debate.
"You're asking what all this means," Carter said. "I guess I have to say the bag has been all shaken up, and we're not sure yet what it means."
This article is supplemented with information from the Los Angeles Times Service.
Illustration:photo: CHRIST
Copyright (c) 1991 The Miami Herald
SOURCE:
http://nl.newsbank. com/nl-search/ we/Archives? s_site=miamii&p_multi=MH|&p_product=MH&p_theme=realcities2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_text_search- 0=jesus%20semina r&s_dispstring= jesus%20seminar&xcal_numdocs= 20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=_rank_ %3AD&xcal_useweights= no&p_field_date- 0=YMD_date&p_params_date- 0=date%3AB% 2CE&p_text_date- 0=
(you need to go to their archive to search for this).
Archive number 1863. Miami Herald - March 15, 1991 - 1E LIVING TODAY
http://www.westarinstitute.org/Seminars/seminars.html
March 15, 1991
Section: LIVING TODAY
Edition: FINAL
Page: 1E
WAR OF THE WORDS AFTER SIX YEARS, CONTROVERSIAL PANEL CONCLUDES MUCH OF THE GOSPEL WASN'T SAID BY JESUS
FRED TASKER Herald Staff Writer
Jesus never said 80 percent of the things attributed to him in the gospels -- the crucial first four books of the Bible's New Testament.
That's the controversial conclusion of the Jesus Seminar, a 200-member group of biblical scholars from universities and seminars around the United States , after six years of minutely reasoned debate.
The announcement of the group's findings last week is sure to trigger intense debate between the modernist members of the seminar and religious conservatives, who take the Bible at its literal word.
And it comes at a time when one of America 's largest protestant denominations, the 14.9-million- member Southern Baptist Convention, is threatened by a split between fundamentalists and moderates within its ranks over the same issue, among other things. The picture of Jesus emerging from the Jesus Seminar is of a sage and a prophet who preached the word of God in simple, striking phrases but who did not himself claim to be the son of God. And who did not prophesy a coming apocalypse after which God's imperial rule on Earth would begin.
The new description of Jesus will "feed a hunger" among modern churchgoers, said seminar member Marcus Borg of Oregon State University .
"Many mainstream Christians can no longer believe the picture of Jesus they got as children," Borg said.
Conservative criticism of the seminar's conclusions has been quick and heated.
"It's a gnat on a bull's horn," snorted Paige Patterson, president of Criswell College , a conservative evangelical Baptist school in Dallas , Texas . "These people are meeting to amuse and amaze themselves. They came to the documents with an anti-supernatural bias and arrived at anti-supernatural conclusions.
"They will not be taken seriously."
Jerry Falwell, the fundamentalist TV preacher, is also certain to dispute the seminar's findings, a spokesman said.
"He obviously holds to a literal interpretation of the entire Bible -- every word, every story and certainly every word of Christ. He would suggest that these (Jesus Seminar) scholars probably ought to be in a different line of work, rather than to devote their lives and careers to something they believe is only partly true."
The seminar's work has created anxiety even among those who agree with many of its views.
"What they're doing is crucially important," said John Fitzgerald Jr., a New Testament scholar and professor of religion at University of Miami . "It brings to public consciousness the fact that most mainstream New Testament scholars do not believe that everything the New Testament attributes to Jesus actually goes back to him.
"I just hope the public doesn't say, 'Oof! Eighty percent! This group is not to be taken seriously.' If they had said 50 percent, it would coincide much better with the convictions of more New Testament scholars.
"I hope there is informed discussion about it."
"We don't know how this is all going to turn out," said David Carter, aide to Robert W. Funk, a retired University of Montana religion professor and founder of the Jesus Seminar. "We're at the front end of something. It's a hot topic."
The debate actually goes back at least as far as 1906, when Albert Schweitzer published his book, The Quest for the Historical Jesus. It pits those who believe in the "Historical Jesus" against those who believe in the "Christ of Faith."
And the seminar's findings aren't quite as radical as they sound, its participants said.
"We don't claim to have discovered a totally new Jesus, nor do we claim absolute certitude," said Robert Fortna, professor of religion at Vassar College and a seminar member. "But we're trying to achieve as precise a definition of Jesus as possible."
The problem with many quotes attributed to Jesus in the Gospels, the seminar scholars said, is that they were written 30 to 60 years after his death. And the men who wrote the Gospels, while faithful believers, did not hesitate to alter, expand and re-interpret Jesus' words to fit their own beliefs and the problems of their own times, the scholars said.
The Jesus Seminar scholars were particularly hard on the book of John, written by John the Apostle 60 or more years after Jesus' death. One of the crucial verses ruled out was the popular John 3:16, which quotes Jesus as saying: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
"That did not reflect Jesus' ideas," Carter said. "Most scholars agree that Jesus did not have a messianic self- consciousness."
That doesn't mean Jesus is not the son of God, Carter stressed, but only that he never claimed himself to be. The idea that he was the son of God was developed decades later by his followers, Carter said.
"It's perfectly legitimate that later his followers came along and mythologized him," Carter said. "There's no way the seminar would devalue that.
"We're trying to accurately describe Jesus as a historical figure. If you're doing theological speculation, it should be with some regard to history.
"It's not a theological discussion; it's a historical discussion."
Disagreement with that view is voiced by Alan Culpepper, of Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville , Ky. , who quit the Jesus Seminar two years ago in disagreement with its developing views.
"My particular area is the Gospel of John. That's one area in which I have a strong disagreement with the work of the seminar. I feel much more of the tradition goes back to Jesus."
He believes Jesus did claim to be the son of God.
"I think on balance that he did say it."
The Jesus Seminar was founded in 1985 by Funk, who taught biblical studies at the University of Montana but now runs Westar Institute and Polebridge Press in Sonoma, Calif. Researching a book on Jesus, he was struck that no one had ever tried to reach a consensus among religious scholars on the authenticity of sayings attributed to him.
During their six years of study, the Jesus Seminar scholars developed a unique and controversial method of voting on sayings attributed to Jesus. After discussion, they would drop colored beads into a ballot box.
A red bead was a vote that the quote under scrutiny was actually said by Jesus.
A pink bead meant Jesus probably said not that, but something similar.
A gray bead meant Jesus didn't say it, but that it reflected something close to his beliefs.
A black bead meant Jesus never said it, and that it probably reflected the ideas of later followers.
Fifty percent of the more than 1,100 sayings attributed to Jesus in the first four books -- Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- got black beads. Another 30 percent got gray beads.
From 30 to more than 100 of the 200 scholars voted on each passage under debate.
The scholars reached their conclusions by studying, among other things, patterns of speech characteristic of Jesus. The scholars concluded his style was terse, striking. He spoke in brief aphorisms and parables, not in long, organized speeches like the Sermon on the Mount, they concluded.
As an example of an aphorism, the scholars cite Mark 10:25: "It is easier for a camel to squeeze through a needle's eye than for a wealthy person to get into God's domain."
As an example of a parable, they cite Mark 4:30-32, about how Christians should see God's domain: "Consider the mustard seed: When it is sown . . . it is the smallest of all the seeds on the Earth . . . (eventually) it becomes the biggest of all garden plants."
Says the seminar's concluding document: "If we examine the surviving gospel records closely . . . it is readily observed that Jesus speaks regularly in adages or aphorisms or in parables or in witticisms formulated as rebuff or retort in the context of dialogue or debate. It is clear that he did not speak in long monologues of the type found in the Gospel of John."
Fortna cautioned: "This doesn't radically change the view of Jesus. It confirms and fills out what scholars have come to believe in the past 25 years. Jesus wasn't speaking of himself as God's son. He was concerned with the kingdom of God , not with
himself.
"The idea that he predicts his own return is also rejected," Fortna added.
Thus the seminar ruled out the "little apocalypse" verses in Mark 13, which quote Jesus saying:
"For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows.
"And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds. . . . "
Such statements were actually put on Jesus' lips by Gospel writers trying to bolster their courage in the trying times decades after his death, the scholars concluded. Such statements quoting Jesus predicting the apocalyptic coming of God's kingdom also contradict what Jesus said -- in a phrase accepted as accurate by the seminar -- in Luke 11:20: "But if it is by the finger of God that I drive out demons, then for you God's imperial rule has arrived," the seminar concluded. That means Jesus said God's kingdom was already there, not something to come, the scholars said.
The debate over the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar is certain to intensify next fall, when a Red Letter Gospel of the Bible is published, with the words of Jesus printed in red, pink, gray or black according to how the seminar voted on their authenticity.
It could be a spirited debate.
"You're asking what all this means," Carter said. "I guess I have to say the bag has been all shaken up, and we're not sure yet what it means."
This article is supplemented with information from the Los Angeles Times Service.
Illustration:photo: CHRIST
Copyright (c) 1991 The Miami Herald
SOURCE:
http://nl.newsbank. com/nl-search/ we/Archives? s_site=miamii&p_multi=MH|&p_product=MH&p_theme=realcities2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_text_search- 0=jesus%20semina r&s_dispstring= jesus%20seminar&xcal_numdocs= 20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=_rank_ %3AD&xcal_useweights= no&p_field_date- 0=YMD_date&p_params_date- 0=date%3AB% 2CE&p_text_date- 0=
(you need to go to their archive to search for this).
Archive number 1863. Miami Herald - March 15, 1991 - 1E LIVING TODAY
http://www.westarinstitute.org/Seminars/seminars.html
Views: 132
Comment
Join us in Seeking knowledge!
TUITION FREE
Come Join us in seeking knowledge for the SAKE of Allah ta'ala Alone.
Abu Hurayrah relates that the Prophet(peace be upon him) said, "For him who embarks on the path of seeking knowledge, Allah will ease for him the way to paradise." (Related by Muslim)
Why did we embrace ISLAM? (Bakit ko niyakap ang Islam)
Please share your story on the blog and we will add the link here.
1. Sister Zahra Salvacion
2. Sister Aminah from US
3. Brother Jameel Lumanog
4. Arvin Ahmed Cayabyab
5. Priest and preachers enter Islam by Yusuf Estes
6. Dr. Dirks is a former minister (deacon) of the United Methodist Church. He holds a Master's degree in Divinity from Harvard University and a Doctorate in Psychology from the University of Denver.
7. Reverend Armando Barcelon
Top Content
© 2012 Created by Reverts to Islam.
You need to be a member of Spread the WORD of ISLAM to add comments!
Join Spread the WORD of ISLAM