What do you think?
Rate this book
Born of a Woman: A Bishop Rethinks the Birth of Jesus
"Only the church that manages to free itself from its sexist definition of women, anchored significantly in the Virgin Mary tradition, will survive", writes Bishop Spong. He challenges the doctrine that Jesus's mother Mary was a virgin, traces its development in the early Christian Church and the Christmas narratives, and reveals its legacy in our contemporary attitudes toward women and female sexuality. Other books by Spong include "Living in Sin", "Beyond Moralism", "The Easter Moment" and "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism".
237 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1992
39 people are currently reading
345 people want to read
About the author
John Shelby Spong
42 books302 followersJohn Shelby Spong was the Episcopal bishop of Newark before his retirement in 2000. As a leading spokesperson for an open, scholarly, and progressive Christianity, Bishop Spong has taught at Harvard and at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. He has also lectured at universities, conference centers, and churches in North America, Europe, Asia, and the South Pacific. His books include: A New Christianity for a New World, Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, Resurrection: Myth or Reality? Why Christianity Must Change or Die, and his autobiography, Here I Stand.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews
August 16, 2022
Honestly, I don't even know where to begin with my review of this book. How about this:
Don't read it.
Seriously,
DON'T READ IT!
If you are searching for a scholarly work on the birth traditions found in the gospels, there is an abundance of great material out there. It doesn't matter if you are looking for evangelical, liberal, or even nonchristian scholarship. It is there to find. If you are looking for something easier to read that popularizes the scholarship of others, again there is plenty to find no matter what perspective you are coming from (or seeking to read). This book is neither scholarly nor honest. This book is simply a blatantly agenda-driven piece of deceptive propaganda.
I really want to give him the benefit of doubt but it is all too clear that this is not possible. There are others coming from similar viewpoints that I love reading but it was a struggle for me to work my way through this piece of garbage. On pretty much every page I found myself shaking my head and saying, "That is simply not true... you know better than that... this has already been proven/disproven hundreds of times by..."
Spong isn't arguing against the Bible... not really. He isn't arguing against opposing Biblical scholarship. Not really. What he is mostly doing is arguing against some of the popular myths that are part and parcel of the Christmas story as it is told to our kids in the West. If he were to admit that were the case perhaps I would not be so frustrated.
The disinformation he is spreading is done in many ways. One of his most common is by using a false dichotomy. For example, he says, "Our 20th-century world, distorted by religious claims to possess objectivity and literalness, asks, "Did it happen?" The Biblical writers deeply involved in the Midrash tradition were attempting to answer a quite different tradition, "What does it mean?" Is he trying to imply that those who believe the birth of Christ was an actual fact of history don't care about the spiritual meaning behind the event? Do all those who believe there is a spiritual reason for a historical event automatically have to deny the historicity of said event? This and similar contrasts are presented over and over, probably at least 4-5 times a chapter.
Another very common trait is to present an apparent contrast as evidence to "prove" that one or both stories are "made up". Often there are easy or common explanations for this which he completely ignores. An example is an apparent difference in the two genealogies of Christ. There are three different commonly given explanations for these that are all suggested in the text itself. I would not have minded if Spong addressed each in turn and explained why he didn't agree with those explanations. Instead. he ignores all three completely and says "it is obvious" to any thinking person that somebody is making something up whole cloth. Sorry... no.
If this wasn't bad enough, he is also deliberately deceptive with his use of citations. One example near the conclusion of one chapter he writes: "The birth narratives that we now possess may well represent two quite distinct, even divergent, traditions." Then there is a citation number where he cites a particular scholarly article with the caveat that the author actually says the opposite but he disagrees with the author. Did you catch that? He is citing a work that specifically says that they aren't two distinct, divergent, traditions. Anyone who is just reading through and not checking the footnotes would just assume that he is citing someone who agrees with his unfounded claim. After I noticed this I started checking and found at least two other times he pulls this same dirty trick.
I could go on and on, but already this review is going longer than I would like. If I were to critique every false claim, incorrect assumption, or misrepresentation he presents I would end up writing my own book. Instead, I will point you to another book by a real scholar written shortly after this piece of propaganda: NT Wright's Who Was Jesus?
Don't read it.
Seriously,
DON'T READ IT!
If you are searching for a scholarly work on the birth traditions found in the gospels, there is an abundance of great material out there. It doesn't matter if you are looking for evangelical, liberal, or even nonchristian scholarship. It is there to find. If you are looking for something easier to read that popularizes the scholarship of others, again there is plenty to find no matter what perspective you are coming from (or seeking to read). This book is neither scholarly nor honest. This book is simply a blatantly agenda-driven piece of deceptive propaganda.
I really want to give him the benefit of doubt but it is all too clear that this is not possible. There are others coming from similar viewpoints that I love reading but it was a struggle for me to work my way through this piece of garbage. On pretty much every page I found myself shaking my head and saying, "That is simply not true... you know better than that... this has already been proven/disproven hundreds of times by..."
Spong isn't arguing against the Bible... not really. He isn't arguing against opposing Biblical scholarship. Not really. What he is mostly doing is arguing against some of the popular myths that are part and parcel of the Christmas story as it is told to our kids in the West. If he were to admit that were the case perhaps I would not be so frustrated.
The disinformation he is spreading is done in many ways. One of his most common is by using a false dichotomy. For example, he says, "Our 20th-century world, distorted by religious claims to possess objectivity and literalness, asks, "Did it happen?" The Biblical writers deeply involved in the Midrash tradition were attempting to answer a quite different tradition, "What does it mean?" Is he trying to imply that those who believe the birth of Christ was an actual fact of history don't care about the spiritual meaning behind the event? Do all those who believe there is a spiritual reason for a historical event automatically have to deny the historicity of said event? This and similar contrasts are presented over and over, probably at least 4-5 times a chapter.
Another very common trait is to present an apparent contrast as evidence to "prove" that one or both stories are "made up". Often there are easy or common explanations for this which he completely ignores. An example is an apparent difference in the two genealogies of Christ. There are three different commonly given explanations for these that are all suggested in the text itself. I would not have minded if Spong addressed each in turn and explained why he didn't agree with those explanations. Instead. he ignores all three completely and says "it is obvious" to any thinking person that somebody is making something up whole cloth. Sorry... no.
If this wasn't bad enough, he is also deliberately deceptive with his use of citations. One example near the conclusion of one chapter he writes: "The birth narratives that we now possess may well represent two quite distinct, even divergent, traditions." Then there is a citation number where he cites a particular scholarly article with the caveat that the author actually says the opposite but he disagrees with the author. Did you catch that? He is citing a work that specifically says that they aren't two distinct, divergent, traditions. Anyone who is just reading through and not checking the footnotes would just assume that he is citing someone who agrees with his unfounded claim. After I noticed this I started checking and found at least two other times he pulls this same dirty trick.
I could go on and on, but already this review is going longer than I would like. If I were to critique every false claim, incorrect assumption, or misrepresentation he presents I would end up writing my own book. Instead, I will point you to another book by a real scholar written shortly after this piece of propaganda: NT Wright's Who Was Jesus?
December 31, 2009
John Shelby Spong is a terrific champion of women! He does much justice, in Born of a Woman, to the Sacred Feminine or Divine Feminine - whatever words you choose - the feminine aspect of God.
No matter how far we think we've progressed, we still live in a culture that is dominated by male patriarchal religion. Spong is not a proponent of upheaval, but one of balance. In his characteristic visionary thinking, he sees that many of society's ills are due to life out of balance. Religion is part of that imbalance in that it has not evolved into a state that encompasses the fullness of a loving God.
Spong understands that, like in our human relationships, our relationship to the Divine must be more complete - more inclusive of the different energies that comprise the rest of life. That means masculine & feminine energy. He shows us how Christianity has taken its central female figure & fashioned her into a sexless entity in order to keep her "pure". The implication is that one of life's most precious & basic gifts - that of sex - is impure.
Spong, as always, provocatively suggests that Christians rethink their beliefs regarding the sexless Mother of Jesus - to dive deeper into the symbolism of the birth story in order to derive its essence & therefore its beauty & relevance to our lives.
No matter how far we think we've progressed, we still live in a culture that is dominated by male patriarchal religion. Spong is not a proponent of upheaval, but one of balance. In his characteristic visionary thinking, he sees that many of society's ills are due to life out of balance. Religion is part of that imbalance in that it has not evolved into a state that encompasses the fullness of a loving God.
Spong understands that, like in our human relationships, our relationship to the Divine must be more complete - more inclusive of the different energies that comprise the rest of life. That means masculine & feminine energy. He shows us how Christianity has taken its central female figure & fashioned her into a sexless entity in order to keep her "pure". The implication is that one of life's most precious & basic gifts - that of sex - is impure.
Spong, as always, provocatively suggests that Christians rethink their beliefs regarding the sexless Mother of Jesus - to dive deeper into the symbolism of the birth story in order to derive its essence & therefore its beauty & relevance to our lives.
January 21, 2010
This is another book many would consider heresy, so if offended by different perspectives ignore this.
According to the creation story, Adam was “created in the image of God”, but Eve was an afterthought to provide companionship to Adam. And this is where it all began. The book talks about how the Bible, written by men, has influenced Western civilization in so many ways.
There seems to be only two kinds of women in the Bible. Eve (had sex therefore bad) vs. Mary (the virgin, good).
So many issues revolve around sex. Celibacy, birth control, abortion, female priests, homosexuality and sexual desire. In many in the early church, marriage was considered a compromise for sin….marriage is only for the weak.
The Seventh Commandment talks about adultery, yet during the time of Moses, polygamy was widespread and acceptable. So much for “traditional marriage”. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. And what is a concubine? A woman, who cohabits with a man, without being legally married to him. So much for God wanting a marriage between one man and one woman. So what exactly is adultery, when someone has 700 wives and 300 mistresses? The original meaning of the Seventh Commandment was that a man should not have sex with a woman “who belongs to someone else”. The custom seemed to be having sex with whomever, as long as the woman is not already married or someone’s mistress.
What would this world be like had God, the Mother, sent Her only begotten Daughter?
Spong says the stories about Jesus in the Gospels are that …stories. They are not to be considered biographical. “To force these narratives into the straight jacket of literal history is to violate the intentions of the author”.
Many “pagan” gods were born a virgin, rose from the grave and ascended into heaven. Gautama Buddha was said to have been born of a virgin birth in about 600 BC. The Holy Spirit descended upon his mother. Egyptian god Horus was born a virgin around 1500 BC and he received gifts from three Kings. Indra was born a virgin in Tibet around 1700 BC. He died and later ascended into heaven. Zoroaster was also born a virgin. Krishna was born a virgin around 1200 BC.
Many of the Roman and Greek gods were born of virgins. The idea that Jesus was born a virgin did not surface until about 100 years after he was born.
Spong says that the resurrection was not to be taken literally, but “the dawning internal realization that this life of Jesus reflected a new image of God”.
Spong makes a good argument that Jesus was married. He refers to the wedding feast in Cana of Galilee (John 2:1-11). Jesus was at this wedding and so was his mother. Spong asks why his mother would be at a wedding with Jesus. Could be a family member or it could be Jesus’ wedding. In the story Mary, his mother, is concerned this is not enough wine. Spong suggests Mary would not be concerned about this, unless she was a major player in the wedding entourage.
Spong also refers to Mary Magdalene as his possible wife. Spong uses the story of Mary Magazine visiting the grave of Jesus after his death. It was common in those days for the wife to claim the body of a deceased. In this story, she sees Jesus in front of the empty grave, but he tells her not to touch. In those days, according to Spong, women did not embrace a man unless they were married to that man.
Mary turned into someone, who would go to God on your behalf, but it was the men (God and Jesus) who had the real power.
Overall interesting book. Dry at times. It is a good book to skim.
According to the creation story, Adam was “created in the image of God”, but Eve was an afterthought to provide companionship to Adam. And this is where it all began. The book talks about how the Bible, written by men, has influenced Western civilization in so many ways.
There seems to be only two kinds of women in the Bible. Eve (had sex therefore bad) vs. Mary (the virgin, good).
So many issues revolve around sex. Celibacy, birth control, abortion, female priests, homosexuality and sexual desire. In many in the early church, marriage was considered a compromise for sin….marriage is only for the weak.
The Seventh Commandment talks about adultery, yet during the time of Moses, polygamy was widespread and acceptable. So much for “traditional marriage”. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. And what is a concubine? A woman, who cohabits with a man, without being legally married to him. So much for God wanting a marriage between one man and one woman. So what exactly is adultery, when someone has 700 wives and 300 mistresses? The original meaning of the Seventh Commandment was that a man should not have sex with a woman “who belongs to someone else”. The custom seemed to be having sex with whomever, as long as the woman is not already married or someone’s mistress.
What would this world be like had God, the Mother, sent Her only begotten Daughter?
Spong says the stories about Jesus in the Gospels are that …stories. They are not to be considered biographical. “To force these narratives into the straight jacket of literal history is to violate the intentions of the author”.
Many “pagan” gods were born a virgin, rose from the grave and ascended into heaven. Gautama Buddha was said to have been born of a virgin birth in about 600 BC. The Holy Spirit descended upon his mother. Egyptian god Horus was born a virgin around 1500 BC and he received gifts from three Kings. Indra was born a virgin in Tibet around 1700 BC. He died and later ascended into heaven. Zoroaster was also born a virgin. Krishna was born a virgin around 1200 BC.
Many of the Roman and Greek gods were born of virgins. The idea that Jesus was born a virgin did not surface until about 100 years after he was born.
Spong says that the resurrection was not to be taken literally, but “the dawning internal realization that this life of Jesus reflected a new image of God”.
Spong makes a good argument that Jesus was married. He refers to the wedding feast in Cana of Galilee (John 2:1-11). Jesus was at this wedding and so was his mother. Spong asks why his mother would be at a wedding with Jesus. Could be a family member or it could be Jesus’ wedding. In the story Mary, his mother, is concerned this is not enough wine. Spong suggests Mary would not be concerned about this, unless she was a major player in the wedding entourage.
Spong also refers to Mary Magdalene as his possible wife. Spong uses the story of Mary Magazine visiting the grave of Jesus after his death. It was common in those days for the wife to claim the body of a deceased. In this story, she sees Jesus in front of the empty grave, but he tells her not to touch. In those days, according to Spong, women did not embrace a man unless they were married to that man.
Mary turned into someone, who would go to God on your behalf, but it was the men (God and Jesus) who had the real power.
Overall interesting book. Dry at times. It is a good book to skim.
April 29, 2008
My thanks to my lil Sis for giving this one to me to read. It is a well-thought out and researched book. I can't join the author in his complete dismissal of literal readings of the bible. I don't take it all that way, but a lot I do. I do think the Church has suffered a sad incompleteness in its long history of male-dominated interpretation of the bible. That is changing. The female voices are being heard which is wonderful, but I think they are equally capable of misinterpretation as we menfolk are. The author is also very suspicious of tradition, which to a degree I agree with, but tradition is also very valuable and still giving meaning, even to young people today. I also think the opposite pole from literalism is at least equally(I think more) dangerous(that-could-mean-anything interp.) for the Church. I see wisdom in holding to a canon within the canon, (Scriptures that have more weight than others), and the Gospels have a lot of pull with me. Context is also always important in bible study and the context is within a culture that like ours still today devalued women to its serious detriment. However, I believe the Bible interpreted properly uplifts women and that Jesus certainly does. I read Mary to be a blessed woman, a sinner like all of us, but filled with strength and amazing faith, especially when she was visited 1st by an Angel and then by the Holy Spirit when she became the Theotokos(mother of God). That God chose a woman to work thru in such a huge way is a great honor for all women, as was the creation of Eve as a fitting companion for Adam.(last created doesn't likely mean worst, certainly far from it in my view). I do like the idea of thinking of the Holy Spirit as female though(even though not supported by Scripture, it seems good to me for balance in the Trinity! Sorry if I was preachy, I am a preacher after all.
March 19, 2022
This is an excellent book! Published in 1992, I purchased an ex-church library edition which had obviously been withdrawn after only having been checked out one time in 2002! As a long-term admirer of the late Bishop Spong and his controversial yet succinct books in which he re-interpreted the accepted cannon of the Bible, this book didn't disappoint. It's a well-documented refutation of the accepted versions of male-dominated and male-written versions of the birth narrative of Jesus, and why these were so important to the early church; plus the damage such writings have done to the place of women both in Jesus's time and 2000+ years later in the more conservative and narrow-thinking branches of today's church.
Only problem is, it's obvious that people in many church circles are leery of reading radical critique and rethinking about how the church is STILL largely run by traditionalists who believe the Bible is a literal written account, and have accepted that as a fact 'hook, link and sinker', both in still largely male leadership and among submissive female readership among the flock.
This is one of the reasons why I eventually left the organized church in 2005. Even then, to my eyes, the accounts were still adhered to unquestioningly by most of the membership of the church I was partly leading (I was a Licensed Lay Minister in the CofE for 5 years by that time). People went along with what they had learnt to believe, which are still seen (even now) as 'orthodox' versions of what happened around the time of Jesus's birth (including the myths surrounding his conception and birth), AND his words and actions during his lifetime and the writings of Bible accounts since then, based on the writers' inclusion of certain material, exclusion of other material and why this has come to be so.
This makes me unsurprised that a church copy of the book was withdrawn and sold on after only one person had read it. This was a woman - who actually highlighted bits of the text, so maybe she was part of a small movement to change at least her church's thinking in 2002. I guess it didn't work as nobody else felt led to borrow the book from the church library thereafter.
Old habits die hard. I set myself free from so-called Christian orthodoxy in 2005, and have since come to appreciate that there needs to be a move towards changing that accepted orthodoxy to an even greater degree than I've observed since then. I haven't thrown out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. I have my own interpretations, beliefs and understanding of the life of Jesus and the place of women in his entourage and how that has been undermined in the years since he left this mortal coil.
To me the most enlightening chapter of the book was the last one, 'The Cost of the Virgin Myth'. I wish I could quote the whole chapter, but I can't. I shall, however, quote a couple of paragraphs.
"Sexual harassment arises out of two realities. The first is the unequal distribution of power that has historically placed women into dependent, subservient roles." This is the view that women like Mary, mother of Jesus, has been traditional portrayed as meek, mild, and acquiescent in reaction to God's will, here to be obedient and chaste (outside the bedroom, where sex is simply ONLY for procreation)...
"The second is the primary description of women as sexual objects who exist for the purpose of providing men with sexual pleasure, a definition that (still) pervades the life of our society." This is based on a long-held mistaken and denigrating view of who and what Mary Magdalene must have been - a whore who led men into 'sin' - when there is absolutely no evidence in the Bible that she was the prostitute many have said she was. And there is some evidence that she held a VERY special place in Jesus's life and ministry.
"A major contributor to this pejorative view has been the Judeo-Christian faith story." This is a view which accepts without question the Bible as written and never changed, and the church's attitudes ever since.
"A literalized Bible produced a literalized theology, which produced a Christianity that believed itself, in its various forms, to be inerrant and/or infallible. But that institutionalized Christianity with its
infallible, theological pronouncements and its claims of an inerrant Bible is now confronting a new consciousness, an unwillingness to leave unchallenged the faith and practice of our fathers from which our mothers were systematically excluded. The feminine aspect of God so long oppressed by the masculine patriarchy is roaring back into our awareness, sweeping away our male prejudices and even our male definitions of the ideal woman."
Bishop Spong wrote this in the early 1990s and, in my view, things have moved in this direction oh, so painfully slowly. It has moved, but patriarchal power is so difficult to let go of in a society which attributes value to masculine 'macho-ness', and which still sees feminine innate and intuitive confidence and understanding as 'inferior' to the left-brain approach of the male leadership that still predominates today. Maybe things will only change for good when the institutionalized church collapses and dies, figuratively speaking. People are leaving in droves, and those who are never-attenders prefer to view Jesus and the other characters of the Bible as who they really were, and believe that how they were described was - and still is - faulty and written with a patriarchal agenda in mind. I'll quote part of a final paragraph from Bishop Spong's book...
"A male-dominated church will resist (reinterpretation of womanhood and of women's place in the church) with its dying breath. If that resistance succeeds, however, the church will die. The church will have won the battle only to discover it has lost the war. Only the church that manages to free itself from the sexist definitions of women, anchored significantly in the virgin Mary tradition, will survive."
So, 40 years later, things have changed but still not enough to encourage those who may be inclined to join the faith community of Christians. I certainly won't be returning to the narrow, dogmatic and oft error-laden church. My freedom to see God as Jesus saw God (both male and female) has grown exponentially since I left in 2005. I can't be squeezed back into the box of enforced orthodoxy when I know it's a fallible place, simply because it's comprised of fallible human beings.
Only problem is, it's obvious that people in many church circles are leery of reading radical critique and rethinking about how the church is STILL largely run by traditionalists who believe the Bible is a literal written account, and have accepted that as a fact 'hook, link and sinker', both in still largely male leadership and among submissive female readership among the flock.
This is one of the reasons why I eventually left the organized church in 2005. Even then, to my eyes, the accounts were still adhered to unquestioningly by most of the membership of the church I was partly leading (I was a Licensed Lay Minister in the CofE for 5 years by that time). People went along with what they had learnt to believe, which are still seen (even now) as 'orthodox' versions of what happened around the time of Jesus's birth (including the myths surrounding his conception and birth), AND his words and actions during his lifetime and the writings of Bible accounts since then, based on the writers' inclusion of certain material, exclusion of other material and why this has come to be so.
This makes me unsurprised that a church copy of the book was withdrawn and sold on after only one person had read it. This was a woman - who actually highlighted bits of the text, so maybe she was part of a small movement to change at least her church's thinking in 2002. I guess it didn't work as nobody else felt led to borrow the book from the church library thereafter.
Old habits die hard. I set myself free from so-called Christian orthodoxy in 2005, and have since come to appreciate that there needs to be a move towards changing that accepted orthodoxy to an even greater degree than I've observed since then. I haven't thrown out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. I have my own interpretations, beliefs and understanding of the life of Jesus and the place of women in his entourage and how that has been undermined in the years since he left this mortal coil.
To me the most enlightening chapter of the book was the last one, 'The Cost of the Virgin Myth'. I wish I could quote the whole chapter, but I can't. I shall, however, quote a couple of paragraphs.
"Sexual harassment arises out of two realities. The first is the unequal distribution of power that has historically placed women into dependent, subservient roles." This is the view that women like Mary, mother of Jesus, has been traditional portrayed as meek, mild, and acquiescent in reaction to God's will, here to be obedient and chaste (outside the bedroom, where sex is simply ONLY for procreation)...
"The second is the primary description of women as sexual objects who exist for the purpose of providing men with sexual pleasure, a definition that (still) pervades the life of our society." This is based on a long-held mistaken and denigrating view of who and what Mary Magdalene must have been - a whore who led men into 'sin' - when there is absolutely no evidence in the Bible that she was the prostitute many have said she was. And there is some evidence that she held a VERY special place in Jesus's life and ministry.
"A major contributor to this pejorative view has been the Judeo-Christian faith story." This is a view which accepts without question the Bible as written and never changed, and the church's attitudes ever since.
"A literalized Bible produced a literalized theology, which produced a Christianity that believed itself, in its various forms, to be inerrant and/or infallible. But that institutionalized Christianity with its
infallible, theological pronouncements and its claims of an inerrant Bible is now confronting a new consciousness, an unwillingness to leave unchallenged the faith and practice of our fathers from which our mothers were systematically excluded. The feminine aspect of God so long oppressed by the masculine patriarchy is roaring back into our awareness, sweeping away our male prejudices and even our male definitions of the ideal woman."
Bishop Spong wrote this in the early 1990s and, in my view, things have moved in this direction oh, so painfully slowly. It has moved, but patriarchal power is so difficult to let go of in a society which attributes value to masculine 'macho-ness', and which still sees feminine innate and intuitive confidence and understanding as 'inferior' to the left-brain approach of the male leadership that still predominates today. Maybe things will only change for good when the institutionalized church collapses and dies, figuratively speaking. People are leaving in droves, and those who are never-attenders prefer to view Jesus and the other characters of the Bible as who they really were, and believe that how they were described was - and still is - faulty and written with a patriarchal agenda in mind. I'll quote part of a final paragraph from Bishop Spong's book...
"A male-dominated church will resist (reinterpretation of womanhood and of women's place in the church) with its dying breath. If that resistance succeeds, however, the church will die. The church will have won the battle only to discover it has lost the war. Only the church that manages to free itself from the sexist definitions of women, anchored significantly in the virgin Mary tradition, will survive."
So, 40 years later, things have changed but still not enough to encourage those who may be inclined to join the faith community of Christians. I certainly won't be returning to the narrow, dogmatic and oft error-laden church. My freedom to see God as Jesus saw God (both male and female) has grown exponentially since I left in 2005. I can't be squeezed back into the box of enforced orthodoxy when I know it's a fallible place, simply because it's comprised of fallible human beings.
July 6, 2013
Excellent book. Enlightening and educational. The work of the Church to establish what they feel are "facts" to keep people in their power and women especially. My hat is off to Bishop Spong for this eye-opening book.
September 26, 2017
It wasn't a virgin birth, people. Searching and seeking are good. Science and religion should join forces. Together they just might prove the existence of God.
June 27, 2023
Bishop Spong once again shows us why a literal interpretation of the Christian scriptures cannot survive into the 21st century. He does this by walking us through Paul's letters and the gospels in chronological order, with a view to the changes in the Church's understanding of when the Holy Spirit entered the life of Jesus. Paul says it happened at the resurrection; Mark says at Jesus's baptism; Matthew and Luke, whose birth stories are the source of our Christmas pagents, say at conception. Finally John, whose gospel warns us time and again not to read it literally, and who takes care to distinguish between physical birth and spiritual birth, tells us that Jesus was the preexisting and eternal Word who was incarnated into human life via his birth. John's account was blended into Matthew and Luke's accounts and the result is, ironically, the most literal interpretation of all the birth narratives.
In the process of this "dehumanizing" of Jesus, Mary his mother was also dehumanized, moving from virgin birth, to perpetual virgin, to her own immaculate conception, to Mother of God, to bodily assumption, and finally to a place in the expanded Trinity.
The consequences for women of this idealized view of womanhood, the perpetually virgin Mother, reverberate to this day, but only the final chapter, "The Cost of the Virgin Myth," talks about this cost in any detail. More space could have been devoted to this topic, but the book was published in 1992, so maybe I'm just looking at it from my perspective 30 years later. I have not yet read "Living in Sin? A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality," and I'm sure the topic is covered in more detail there.
Another topic that could be a book of its own, and has been from other authors, is Mary Magdalene, who is mentioned in all four gospels more often than Mary the mother of Jesus. Mary was among several women -- wives, sisters, mothers, and other relatives and followers -- who traveled with Jesus and the male disciples. All four gospels agree that Mary Magdalene was the first at the empty tomb. I was always under the impression that "Magdalene" meant she was from a town named Magdala, but no such village in ancient Palestine has ever been identified in any historical records. The word "magdal" is from the Hebrew and means 'great' or 'large,' and it is possible that Mary Magdalene was originally "Mary the Great." In no event is she ever identified in the gospels as a prostitute, but that is how she was being portrayed by the Church as early as the second century. At the same time that Mary Magdalene was being disparaged, Mary the mother of Jesus was being elevated. Spong attributes this shift to the influence of the non-Jewish converts (Gentiles) who had become the majority of the new religion by this time, and who considered mind (the 'higher' aspirations) and body (the 'lower' nature) to be in conflict with each other. I've read some fiction about Mary Magdalene, and of course I read Dan Brown's first book, The DaVinci Code, in which he suggests that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, but I'd like to read what women theologians have to say about this topic.
In the process of this "dehumanizing" of Jesus, Mary his mother was also dehumanized, moving from virgin birth, to perpetual virgin, to her own immaculate conception, to Mother of God, to bodily assumption, and finally to a place in the expanded Trinity.
The consequences for women of this idealized view of womanhood, the perpetually virgin Mother, reverberate to this day, but only the final chapter, "The Cost of the Virgin Myth," talks about this cost in any detail. More space could have been devoted to this topic, but the book was published in 1992, so maybe I'm just looking at it from my perspective 30 years later. I have not yet read "Living in Sin? A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality," and I'm sure the topic is covered in more detail there.
Another topic that could be a book of its own, and has been from other authors, is Mary Magdalene, who is mentioned in all four gospels more often than Mary the mother of Jesus. Mary was among several women -- wives, sisters, mothers, and other relatives and followers -- who traveled with Jesus and the male disciples. All four gospels agree that Mary Magdalene was the first at the empty tomb. I was always under the impression that "Magdalene" meant she was from a town named Magdala, but no such village in ancient Palestine has ever been identified in any historical records. The word "magdal" is from the Hebrew and means 'great' or 'large,' and it is possible that Mary Magdalene was originally "Mary the Great." In no event is she ever identified in the gospels as a prostitute, but that is how she was being portrayed by the Church as early as the second century. At the same time that Mary Magdalene was being disparaged, Mary the mother of Jesus was being elevated. Spong attributes this shift to the influence of the non-Jewish converts (Gentiles) who had become the majority of the new religion by this time, and who considered mind (the 'higher' aspirations) and body (the 'lower' nature) to be in conflict with each other. I've read some fiction about Mary Magdalene, and of course I read Dan Brown's first book, The DaVinci Code, in which he suggests that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, but I'd like to read what women theologians have to say about this topic.
December 15, 2021
Spong was a well-known interlocutor of fundamentalist Christianity. This is the first I've read from him, published in 1992. It's an absorbing and thoughtful read from a liberal Christian (Spong was a bishop in the Episcopal Church) trying valiantly to free Christianity from some of its worst historical commitments.
My old teacher, Dr. Randal Helms, used to say in class the the virgin birth was one of Christianity's great embarrassments, and I suspect he may have been influenced by this book when he said so. Spong lays out a convincing case that the church's history of male leadership has used the concept of the virgin birth to uphold patriarchal power dynamics and ensure their positions are not challenged.
Much of the book is getting into the weeds of how this understanding came into existence in the first place, the tradition of "midrash" readings of Jewish scripture, and the competing and contradictory needs of various writers of the gospels and other early Christian literature. He also opens back up that never ending fount of speculation about whether Jesus was himself married, and uses close readings of the gospels to argue the case that he was the husband of Mary Magdalene. (I find it plausible!)
Born of a Woman will be easier to engage with if you are familiar with the Bible and have at least a passing familiarity with modern Biblical scholarship, but to the degree possible given its subject matter, it is written for a popular audience, and Spong's prose is readable. He has a talent for making arguments based on the details of scripture while not losing sight of the larger importance of the discussion.
My old teacher, Dr. Randal Helms, used to say in class the the virgin birth was one of Christianity's great embarrassments, and I suspect he may have been influenced by this book when he said so. Spong lays out a convincing case that the church's history of male leadership has used the concept of the virgin birth to uphold patriarchal power dynamics and ensure their positions are not challenged.
Much of the book is getting into the weeds of how this understanding came into existence in the first place, the tradition of "midrash" readings of Jewish scripture, and the competing and contradictory needs of various writers of the gospels and other early Christian literature. He also opens back up that never ending fount of speculation about whether Jesus was himself married, and uses close readings of the gospels to argue the case that he was the husband of Mary Magdalene. (I find it plausible!)
Born of a Woman will be easier to engage with if you are familiar with the Bible and have at least a passing familiarity with modern Biblical scholarship, but to the degree possible given its subject matter, it is written for a popular audience, and Spong's prose is readable. He has a talent for making arguments based on the details of scripture while not losing sight of the larger importance of the discussion.
September 1, 2014
OK, I'll admit it: I've read so many books by Bishop John Shelby Spong that it's often challenging to pick up one of the remaining few that I haven't yet read: my standards - driven by the profundity of his oeuvre - are so high now that's it's hard not to be disappointed. Simply put, his stuff is so routinely great - profound, challenging, well-researched and -reasoned, etc. - that his 'merely good stuff' can seem like a disappointment (though it would be exceptional work coming from any other author.)
So, this book seemed to be in the 'merely good stuff' category (and thus a little disappointing) ... until I got to Chapter 12, "Facing the Implications of Scripture." Wow! Frankly, this is some of the most piercingly insightful, faith-inspiring/-inducing and spirit-lifting analysis and writing that I've ever encountered, including in the dozen other Spong books that I've read!
Yes, the analysis of the Birth Narratives is insightful and instructive. Yes, the Bishop's urging against the tendency toward literalism is well-taken (especially in light of the historical, et. al., context that he shares about how the Scriptures [and especially the Gospels] were developed). And, yes, his elucidation of the development of the early church is both illuminating and, I suspect, as unsettling for some as it is informative and inspiring for others.
But when the chapter started with the following, I had a sense that something meaningful and great was coming:
"Like all theological statements, the creeds are filled with symbolic words and time-distorted meanings. Creedal phrases always look backward to their origins as well as forward beyond their limits. Behind the words is always an experience that cries out for a rational explanation. Beyond the words is always a realm of truth that can never really by (sic) reduced to words. Even the most important word - God - central in every religious tradition, is finally nothing more than a symbol, growing out of an experience and pointing to a truth that must be beyond all of its time-honored traditions. It is probably inevitable that the common minds of men and women will always literalize the symbols of their religious heritage.... But this also means that these very literalized symbols will inevitably have to die in the passage of time. The only way to keep symbols alive forever is to crack them open periodically so that they can be filled with new meanings."
Or:
"The legitimacy of slavery, the chattel status of women, the flatness of the earth, the understanding of epilepsy as demon-possession, all asserted in the Bible, will not be saluted in the twentieth century. Most religious leaders just do not have the honesty to say so publicly."
Or:
"... there is only one literal fact of history in the historic creeds of the church, and that is found in the phrase 'he suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.' That is the phrase that ties Christianity to history. Everything else in the creeds constitutes an attempt to put into words an experience of God that was beyond history and to explain theologically just who it was who suffered and died, why he was of importance, and why his life had meaning far beyond its historic and finite limits. The creeds are also a faith affirmation spelled out inside a premodern worldview of a three-tiered universe that hardly makes sense to a space-age generation.... Literal truth the words of the creeds are not! Yet profound truth is that to which these words point us."
Or:
"So intense was the integrity of his humanity, so complete was the self-giving quality of his life, so total was the life-giving power of his love that men and women found themselves when in his presence to be in the presence of nothing less than the Holy God.... Jesus was of God."
Or, finally:
"... the birth of Jesus of Nazareth means many things for human life. It means that God could be experienced fully in human history. It means that the whole created order proclaims constantly the reality of God. It means that people the world over are always drawn to that place when heaven and earth seem to meet and to that life where the divine and the human flow together as one. It means by faith we perceive in the life, love, and being of Jesus the life, love, and being of God."
In sum, what the Bishop does in this book is simple: to use his term, he cracks open the symbols of Christianity - from the Scriptures/Gospels generally to the Virgin Birth/Birth Narratives specifically to the age-old speculation as to whether Jesus was married - to imbue them with new meaning appropriate to the age in which we live. And, in so doing, he shares an understanding of Christianity that can affirm the current faithful as well as attract (and re-attract) those for whom its previous incarnations were not persuasive (or, as the Bishop so artfully points out, were understandably off-putting). And all of this in the context of exploring the origins of Jesus and the extent/nature of his humanity....
Accordingly, I recommend this book to those who are interested in understanding the development of the Christian Scriptures, to those wanting to consider the myths and likely realities of the origins of Jesus and to those who just want to be induced to think about what they believe and why. Whatever brings you to Bishop Spong's work, I can assure you that you will leave it both greatly enriched in Spirit and greatly enabled to divine and follow that spiritual path that's uniquely yours....
So, this book seemed to be in the 'merely good stuff' category (and thus a little disappointing) ... until I got to Chapter 12, "Facing the Implications of Scripture." Wow! Frankly, this is some of the most piercingly insightful, faith-inspiring/-inducing and spirit-lifting analysis and writing that I've ever encountered, including in the dozen other Spong books that I've read!
Yes, the analysis of the Birth Narratives is insightful and instructive. Yes, the Bishop's urging against the tendency toward literalism is well-taken (especially in light of the historical, et. al., context that he shares about how the Scriptures [and especially the Gospels] were developed). And, yes, his elucidation of the development of the early church is both illuminating and, I suspect, as unsettling for some as it is informative and inspiring for others.
But when the chapter started with the following, I had a sense that something meaningful and great was coming:
"Like all theological statements, the creeds are filled with symbolic words and time-distorted meanings. Creedal phrases always look backward to their origins as well as forward beyond their limits. Behind the words is always an experience that cries out for a rational explanation. Beyond the words is always a realm of truth that can never really by (sic) reduced to words. Even the most important word - God - central in every religious tradition, is finally nothing more than a symbol, growing out of an experience and pointing to a truth that must be beyond all of its time-honored traditions. It is probably inevitable that the common minds of men and women will always literalize the symbols of their religious heritage.... But this also means that these very literalized symbols will inevitably have to die in the passage of time. The only way to keep symbols alive forever is to crack them open periodically so that they can be filled with new meanings."
Or:
"The legitimacy of slavery, the chattel status of women, the flatness of the earth, the understanding of epilepsy as demon-possession, all asserted in the Bible, will not be saluted in the twentieth century. Most religious leaders just do not have the honesty to say so publicly."
Or:
"... there is only one literal fact of history in the historic creeds of the church, and that is found in the phrase 'he suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.' That is the phrase that ties Christianity to history. Everything else in the creeds constitutes an attempt to put into words an experience of God that was beyond history and to explain theologically just who it was who suffered and died, why he was of importance, and why his life had meaning far beyond its historic and finite limits. The creeds are also a faith affirmation spelled out inside a premodern worldview of a three-tiered universe that hardly makes sense to a space-age generation.... Literal truth the words of the creeds are not! Yet profound truth is that to which these words point us."
Or:
"So intense was the integrity of his humanity, so complete was the self-giving quality of his life, so total was the life-giving power of his love that men and women found themselves when in his presence to be in the presence of nothing less than the Holy God.... Jesus was of God."
Or, finally:
"... the birth of Jesus of Nazareth means many things for human life. It means that God could be experienced fully in human history. It means that the whole created order proclaims constantly the reality of God. It means that people the world over are always drawn to that place when heaven and earth seem to meet and to that life where the divine and the human flow together as one. It means by faith we perceive in the life, love, and being of Jesus the life, love, and being of God."
In sum, what the Bishop does in this book is simple: to use his term, he cracks open the symbols of Christianity - from the Scriptures/Gospels generally to the Virgin Birth/Birth Narratives specifically to the age-old speculation as to whether Jesus was married - to imbue them with new meaning appropriate to the age in which we live. And, in so doing, he shares an understanding of Christianity that can affirm the current faithful as well as attract (and re-attract) those for whom its previous incarnations were not persuasive (or, as the Bishop so artfully points out, were understandably off-putting). And all of this in the context of exploring the origins of Jesus and the extent/nature of his humanity....
Accordingly, I recommend this book to those who are interested in understanding the development of the Christian Scriptures, to those wanting to consider the myths and likely realities of the origins of Jesus and to those who just want to be induced to think about what they believe and why. Whatever brings you to Bishop Spong's work, I can assure you that you will leave it both greatly enriched in Spirit and greatly enabled to divine and follow that spiritual path that's uniquely yours....
October 11, 2024
A logical argument against sexism in Christianity
J. S. Spong offers o clear view of how the use of the virgin Mary as part of the life of Jesus Christ degrades the power of women themselves. This is a clearly written text with a very strong argument of how the assumption of the virginity in Matthew and Luke requires the female to never be on an equal level as the male in Christian society.
J. S. Spong offers o clear view of how the use of the virgin Mary as part of the life of Jesus Christ degrades the power of women themselves. This is a clearly written text with a very strong argument of how the assumption of the virginity in Matthew and Luke requires the female to never be on an equal level as the male in Christian society.
November 25, 2018
Wonderful comprehension
This book gave me a new insight into how the gospels developed. I will read the book over again to get more insight into what he is saying. It has really enchanted my view of the gospels and made them more significant without the literalism I have been so affected with in the past. Thank you for your book. I am now reading more of his books.
This book gave me a new insight into how the gospels developed. I will read the book over again to get more insight into what he is saying. It has really enchanted my view of the gospels and made them more significant without the literalism I have been so affected with in the past. Thank you for your book. I am now reading more of his books.
July 19, 2024
WAS JESUS "CONCEIVED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT"? SPONG SAYS "NO”
John Shelby Spong (born 1931) is a retired Episcopal bishop, formerly of Newark; he has written many other books, such as 'Living in Sin?: A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality,' 'Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism: A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture,' 'This Hebrew Lord,' 'Resurrection: Myth or Reality?,' etc.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1992 book, "Long ago I decided that I could no longer sacrifice scholarship and truth to protect the weak and religiously insecure. I see another audience that the church seems to ignore... I hope this book will illumine those who still find the church to be their spiritual home. I know thousands who remain in the church out of habit or hope but at the price of turning off their minds. I hope this book will entice those who are members of the church alumni association to take another look..."
He states quite bluntly that "I do not believe that Mary was in any biological sense literally a virgin." (Pg. 3) Jesus' being "born of a woman" became "the Maginot Line designed to preserve at least a vestige of his humanity." (Pg. 41) He argues that "no recognized New Testament scholar, Catholic or Protestant, would today seriously defend the historicity of these (birth) narratives." (Pg. 44-45) He summarizes, "it was not history. It was never meant to be. It cannot be literalized. It is so filled with inconsistencies as to be nonsensical." (Pg. 135)
Interestingly, however, while Spong admits Raymond Brown (e.g., 'The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives') to be "the world's leading New Testament scholar," Spong states that "he does not draw the inescapable conclusion required by his scholarly probing that the virgin birth is nothing but Luke's theological invention." (Pg. 124) He offers some qualified support for Jane Schaberg's thesis in her book 'Illegitimacy of Jesus'." (pg. 158, 164, 172).
Perhaps inconsistently, Spong also states that "I would be the first person, however, to oppose removing the phrase, 'He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary' from the creeds... but to allow, indeed to encourage, the cracking open of the literalized symbols so that the truths to which the symbols point..." (Pg. 179)
This book may be ever more controversial than some of Spong's other books; but as always, it is thought-provoking and well worth reading.
John Shelby Spong (born 1931) is a retired Episcopal bishop, formerly of Newark; he has written many other books, such as 'Living in Sin?: A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality,' 'Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism: A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture,' 'This Hebrew Lord,' 'Resurrection: Myth or Reality?,' etc.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1992 book, "Long ago I decided that I could no longer sacrifice scholarship and truth to protect the weak and religiously insecure. I see another audience that the church seems to ignore... I hope this book will illumine those who still find the church to be their spiritual home. I know thousands who remain in the church out of habit or hope but at the price of turning off their minds. I hope this book will entice those who are members of the church alumni association to take another look..."
He states quite bluntly that "I do not believe that Mary was in any biological sense literally a virgin." (Pg. 3) Jesus' being "born of a woman" became "the Maginot Line designed to preserve at least a vestige of his humanity." (Pg. 41) He argues that "no recognized New Testament scholar, Catholic or Protestant, would today seriously defend the historicity of these (birth) narratives." (Pg. 44-45) He summarizes, "it was not history. It was never meant to be. It cannot be literalized. It is so filled with inconsistencies as to be nonsensical." (Pg. 135)
Interestingly, however, while Spong admits Raymond Brown (e.g., 'The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives') to be "the world's leading New Testament scholar," Spong states that "he does not draw the inescapable conclusion required by his scholarly probing that the virgin birth is nothing but Luke's theological invention." (Pg. 124) He offers some qualified support for Jane Schaberg's thesis in her book 'Illegitimacy of Jesus'." (pg. 158, 164, 172).
Perhaps inconsistently, Spong also states that "I would be the first person, however, to oppose removing the phrase, 'He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary' from the creeds... but to allow, indeed to encourage, the cracking open of the literalized symbols so that the truths to which the symbols point..." (Pg. 179)
This book may be ever more controversial than some of Spong's other books; but as always, it is thought-provoking and well worth reading.
December 28, 2017
D'accord.
December 28, 2020
A perfectly mind-blowing read for the third day of Christmas 😉
November 17, 2022
As with all of John Shelby Spong’s books if you seek truth, his books will help you on your journey.
July 14, 2025
Good read
Interesting, thought provoking. For those who are not afraid to ask questions. Gives a perspective that one cannot get from following traditional Christian views
Interesting, thought provoking. For those who are not afraid to ask questions. Gives a perspective that one cannot get from following traditional Christian views
June 28, 2016
This is an interesting read. He compares the different gospel accounts about Mary and then relates them to old testament texts. He also uses other references, which are historical, non canonical books, and other religious beliefs of that era or earlier. He makes a good case to debunk the virgin birth, even without the biological information that Mary could have gotten pregnant if Joseph ejaculated near her vagina,without ever entering it. It is possible some sperm entered from the outside and pregnancy would result. Both parties would believe that since they never had intercourse, she was a pregnant virgin. Other issues are discussed as well.
Mary Magdalen is also the focus and he lifts from the gospels information about her interactions with Jesus and vice versa that would have led anyone living at that time to understand that they were married. Then he discusses why the church would suppress this information.
If you have an a strong faith and an open mind I think you could accept these view about Jesus.
If you read the book, you may be surprised at how your thinking about some of these issues changes. I was.
The author goes on to relate how he can continue to hold on to his Anglican faith, and you can do similarly.
Mary Magdalen is also the focus and he lifts from the gospels information about her interactions with Jesus and vice versa that would have led anyone living at that time to understand that they were married. Then he discusses why the church would suppress this information.
If you have an a strong faith and an open mind I think you could accept these view about Jesus.
If you read the book, you may be surprised at how your thinking about some of these issues changes. I was.
The author goes on to relate how he can continue to hold on to his Anglican faith, and you can do similarly.
October 26, 2023
I read this book in 1992. I was thirty-three and pregnant with my third child. It changed my life.
I was raised a Catholic but had so much difficulty accepting its doctrine. When I read Born of a Woman it was like a doorway opened in my mind. I had been in Catholic school for twelve years, heard the nativity story over and over and never realized that there was more than one infancy narrative in the New Testament. I never knew that the manger scene that I had seen so many times was a conflation of two separate and very different stories in the gospels of Matthew and Luke. I began to read everything I could find on New Testament biblical criticism, notably the work of Raymond Brown, a prominent scholar and Catholic priest.
Born of a Woman was the right book for me at the exact right time. Thirty years later and I cannot call myself a Catholic or a Christian anymore but I do like Jesus more than ever. And I feel at peace with my understanding of him. Thank you, John Shelby Spong.
I was raised a Catholic but had so much difficulty accepting its doctrine. When I read Born of a Woman it was like a doorway opened in my mind. I had been in Catholic school for twelve years, heard the nativity story over and over and never realized that there was more than one infancy narrative in the New Testament. I never knew that the manger scene that I had seen so many times was a conflation of two separate and very different stories in the gospels of Matthew and Luke. I began to read everything I could find on New Testament biblical criticism, notably the work of Raymond Brown, a prominent scholar and Catholic priest.
Born of a Woman was the right book for me at the exact right time. Thirty years later and I cannot call myself a Catholic or a Christian anymore but I do like Jesus more than ever. And I feel at peace with my understanding of him. Thank you, John Shelby Spong.
June 10, 2014
Really interesting theory that the New Testament birth stories are not to be taken literally.
Spong also explains how women got ousted or put into second place by male religious scholars over the centuries. No- Catholicism didn't spring fully formed at the Nicean Council like I thot ( I didn't grow up Catholic- maybe they know this?) And how guilt over sexuality became enconced in the Christian doctrine. And how women were so sinful they were good for only 2 things- motherhood & taking care of men or virginity- again to take care of men.
It's a short book. Long enough for Spong to make his points but not so long that it gets bogged down in religious theory and parlance.
He didn't reconvert me to Christianity tho...yet.
Spong also explains how women got ousted or put into second place by male religious scholars over the centuries. No- Catholicism didn't spring fully formed at the Nicean Council like I thot ( I didn't grow up Catholic- maybe they know this?) And how guilt over sexuality became enconced in the Christian doctrine. And how women were so sinful they were good for only 2 things- motherhood & taking care of men or virginity- again to take care of men.
It's a short book. Long enough for Spong to make his points but not so long that it gets bogged down in religious theory and parlance.
He didn't reconvert me to Christianity tho...yet.
April 19, 2016
There is a paragraph at the beginning of this book that serves as a sort of premise for what Spong is attempting to show throughout. If you don't buy into this premise, just put the book down and walk away. Even though the book is filled with copious examples of researched information that discusses the issue he's working through, if your mind is not open to that, it will do little good to read it. That said, I hope that you can set aside preconceived notions and look at the information presented. Even if you already "know" everything there is to know about the birth of Jesus and the role of women in the Bible and in the church, my guess is that you'll learn something new.
December 30, 2020
Spong asserts a fundamentalist interpretation does harm to the scripture. He's known for boldly confronting fundamentalist Christians and he delights in this. I agree that reading the Bible as allegorical is closer the the style in which the gospels were written. The writers are conveying theology in narrative form and not giving an objective historians view of past events. Spong does research in Biblical criticism and depends on the work of scholars for the material in this text. So the Bishop's work reads like a students term paper written for a general audience.
Read
July 24, 2011A convincing discussion of inconsistencies found in Jesus' birth narrative within the four canonical Gospels, and the lack of corroboration between the narrative and other historical records. The author, who was the bishop of Newark when the book was written, postulates that "Virgin Mary is a male-created figure who embodies the kind of woman dominant males think is ideal - docile, obedient, powerless" and advocates against literal interpretation of the bible.
July 1, 2023
As with all of Spong's writing I have read, this book will challenge the more traditional Christian especially those born and raised with religion and not used to having aspects of Chriistianity and the Bible questioned and at times challenged. Spong has served as rector and bishop and is highly respected for his research and writings and has traveled the world speaking of what he believes. I would encourage anyone interested in history and religion to read his books with an open mind.
July 30, 2011
Fascinating to read a different view point from a Christian. Not quite sure how he reconciles his faith with how he views the Bible, but it makes more sense to me to read the Bible with these ideas in mind.
February 28, 2013
Born of a Woman provides readers with exceptional insight into how the Virgin narrative has affected women over the centuries. This is a very important and provocative book.
Patti Sheehy, author
The Boy Who Said No: An Escape to Freedom
Patti Sheehy, author
The Boy Who Said No: An Escape to Freedom
March 4, 2020
Spong’s level of intellect in the first chapter alone is so sophomoric it may actually make the reader more stupid. I was hoping to find a well thought out argument against a literal virgin birth, but I found no in-depth thought process and couldn’t bring myself to read past page 5.
August 6, 2008
It was partly shocking at first and educational.
February 13, 2009
I really like John Shelby Spong's writing though if your faith is literal you will find him difficult. I don't always agree with him but I enjoy the challenge of his beliefs.
March 7, 2009
Notes the Midrash background of the 'gospel' and various indicators that Jesus was human and likely married to Mary Magdalene.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews