The Jesus Seminar

[palmera]

I've heard a variety of viewpoints regarding the importance, relevance, and legitimacy of The Jesus Seminar and would like to further parse out issues surrounding this controversial endeavor.

Their journey is of utmost importance for learning about the origins of Christianity and the historical Jesus as we look to the present and future. This is not to say that TJS is not without it's problems (I had a professor who excused himself from the project) and yet I understand the great importance of taking the Gospels (and indeed the whole Bible) into an academic setting and parsing out the text with acute attention to its historical realities.

An academic setting (as shown here by TJS) provides a reading of the Bible that is attentive to details which is inadequate or unheard of in most Churches within the United States.

Are the challenges and rigors of such study worth it? Is the Jesus Seminar full of liars or scholars seeking truth? Hopefully the scope of this forum will go beyond the Jesus Seminar, the academics of Bible study, and into what it means to read the Bible: how are we doing it? what are we bringing to the table (biases, prejudices, assumptions etc.) when we do and do we even realize it?

So we have a specific issue with a broad scope. Let's know what you think.

[micatala]

This is the first I've heard of the Jesus Seminar.

After looking over a few of their pages, my initial reaction is that this seems to be a worthwhile project and they are certainly being thorough.

I applaud efforts to find the best information we can about the history of the Gospels and the early church. It can potentially provide important and useful information for self-reflection as we "work out our salvation in fear and trembling."

[AlAyeti]

Definiely read the Jesus Seminar stuf.

Also go to sensible Christian apologetics sites like equip.org and always realize that false teachers are a fact.

The Jesus Seminar is anti-Christ.

"If Christ be not raised then our faith is in vain."

Paul wrote about these guys two-thousand years ago.

Guys like John Dominic Crossan and John Shelby Spong are the product of Jesus seminar theology.

"Study to show yourself approved . . ."

Paul knew what was coming.

[Lotan]

Is the Jesus Seminar full of liars or scholars seeking truth?

Most definitely the latter. The members of the Jesus Seminar include some of the finest minds in historical Jesus research. That said, it's not without problems either, particularly with regard to methodology and a tendency toward 'groupthink'. Their findings are a kind of argument from authority/consensus and while they shouldn't be taken as fact, they do provide food for thought. The Five Gospels : What Did Jesus Really Say? is a fun read too.

[youngborean]

I still don't understand how accepting the authority of the Gospel of Thomas is the key to understand what Jesus really said. But since that is the trend that will be "the Scholarly truth". It hasn't ever been establish that that text is anymore truthful then any of the other gospels. So the logic: giving all texts equal representation = truth doesn't necessarily fly for me. But it does sound scholarly to say "we have read everything". It is only a bais towards Thomas that is represented in current scholarship. Not more truthful, just more texts.

[AlAyeti]

Lotan, good post. (I'll kick myself in just a minute.)

There's no problem with these kinds of guys having opinions. But, Jesus being eaten by dogs, puts a person believing that outside of the ability to call themselves, or be considered, a Christian. Yet the Jesus seminary guys believe that.

The Gospels and the Books of the New Testament disagree with with Jesus seminary guys.

It is that easy.

But the fascinating points they prop up are interesting to read. And then quickly lay aside.