What Jesus Meant

by Garry Wills

“Garry Wills brings his signature brand of erudite, unorthodox thinking to his latest book of revelations. . . . A tour de force and a profound show of faith.” ( O, the Oprah Magazine)
 
In what are billed “culture wars,” people on the political right and the political left cite Jesus as endorsing their views. But in this New York Times-bestselling masterpiece, Garry Wills argues that Jesus subscribed to no political program. He was far more radical than that. In a fresh reading of the gospels, Wills explores the meaning of the “reign of heaven” Jesus not only promised for the future but brought with him into this life. It is only by dodges and evasions that people misrepresent what Jesus plainly had to say against power, the wealthy, and religion itself. But Wills is just as critical of those who would make Jesus a mere ethical teacher, ignoring or playing down his divinity. An illuminating analysis for believers and nonbelievers alike, What Jesus Meant is a brilliant addition to our national conversation on religion.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, Christianity, Theology, Spirituality, Faith, Christian

176 pages, Paperback

First published March 2, 2006

About the author

Garry Wills is an American author, journalist, political philosopher, and historian, specializing in American history, politics, and religion, especially the history of the Catholic Church. He won a Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction in 1993.
Wills has written over fifty books and, since 1973, has been a frequent reviewer for The New York Review of Books. He became a faculty member of the history department at Northwestern University in 1980, where he is an Emeritus Professor of History.

Reviews

[Bill Kerwin · Rating 3 out of 5]

A thoughtful, insightful meditation on what Jesus said and--more important--what he was: the unique, prophetic embodiment of the Divine message of unconditional love.

[Quo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Garry Wills' What Jesus Meant represents an extraordinary, very personal, though perhaps non-traditional attempt at understanding who Jesus was and how he has been interpreted over time, by a distinguished scholar, a historian with a background in classical languages.


Beginning with headings such as Christ was not a Christian, Wills contends that "to believe in the gospels is to take everything that Jesus meant, though at various levels of symbolization--to keep asking what Jesus meant."

Wills is very much a believer but hardly in the sense of Thomas Jefferson's secular rendering of "Christ without the miracles"; instead, Wills believes in Christ's miracles, his divinity and "the saving death & resurrection of Christ", while desiring to strip away all of the dogma & trappings that he feels have come to subvert Christ's message.

The author speaks of Jesus the Radical who was "never afraid to speak truth to power or to wealth." In fact, Jesus was apolitical but his original message was to adhere to:

the most egalitarian society then in existence, with Jesus' injunctions to the voluntary community of his followers against acquiring wealth, leading to a kind of Christian communism. To the Jewish priests, Jesus declared that the tax collectors & prostitutes will enter heaven before they do.

In the eyes of Garry Wills, the message of Jesus was that of an extremist, a radical. But the author asks if anyone but radicals can justly claim his name? As an example, Jesus had sympathy for the Samaritans, though they were treated by many Jews as heretics & unclean and their temple at Gerizim burned in 128 BCE.

Religion killed Jesus is Wills' response to who or what killed Jesus. For he was against the formalism of religion of his day & called authentic only "religion of the heart", being against ritual sacrifice & the concept of priesthood. Beyond that, Jesus foresaw the destruction of the temple & the priests who were the most active plotters against him.

In this I am reminded of the quote from the wonderful book, A Tale of Love & Darkness, by the late Amos Oz, who when he asked his uncle who Jesus was, received this response:

Jesus of Nazareth was one of the greatest Jews of all time, a wonderful moralist who loathed the uncircumcised of heart & fought to return Judaism to its original simplicity & wrest it from the power of the hair-splitting rabbis.

Jesus apparently saw himself as the "last priest". In Wills' research, the early church apparently functioned without priests. Instead, there were references to "elders" and the "apostles" merely referenced those sent out to preach the message of Jesus.


Also, Jesus was anti-hierarchical. Peter was head of the twelve but he was also a disciple, not a priest or a bishop. Further, the concept of an "apostolic succession" is a fiction in Wills' telling of what Jesus intended.

Jesus is the fulfillment of myth but not a mythical figure. There is a rather different take on Judas as well. And while Wills suggests that this is not meant to be a scholarly book, the level of scholarship & analysis is ever-present.

While so much of the life of Christ is shrouded in mystery, particularly the "missing years", in this book, Garry Wills causes Jesus to come alive in a rather different manner, illuminated with a mystical aura, deeply influencing those he encountered, going against the grain of his time & of those who had power over it. I have found worth reading and very much worth rereading.

*Within my review are 3 images of the author, the last one taken during a discussion of his book, What the Qur'an Meant, a gathering that I attended.

[Szplug · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thanks to Goodreader AC, I've become reacquainted with Garry Wills' copacetic combination of rigorous thought and felicitous prose. The Jesus as revealed through the author's careful and probing exegesis bears an appreciable resemblance—at least superficially—to my own personal and more ignorantly acquired understanding of the Son of Man: so that bodes either well for Mr. Sastre or ill for Mr. Wills.

How, if Jesus was God, could he be deserted by himself? He was both man and God—but fully man. Jesus did not wear merely the outer shell or facial mask of a man. He had to enter into the full tragedy of humanity, its bewildered helplessness, its shame, its sense of inadequacy and despair. That is the meaning of the dark cry from the cross saying that even the Father had abandoned him. To experience all the aspects of human contingency, to plumb those depths, is a way of descending into hell. All that is nondivine in him must leap into oblivion, fully understanding that that is what he does. Only by being completely crushed as a human can he accomplish the utmost in human heroism.

Jesus is just alright with me.

[Ron · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wills has no idea what Jesus meant. Reading this book makes one suspect he's never read the new Testament. Anyone who publishes three pages of unattributed Internet urban legend twaddle as scholarly fact deserves to be trashed.

[Book2Dragon · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure what I think about this book. Some of his theology I agree with, some not; but religion/spirituality is an intimately personal thing. His other book is "Why I Am A Catholic" yet he criticizes the church often in this book. He re-writes biblical passages according to his own translation, somewhat based on Greek, Aramaic and Latin.
What Jesus meant was to love one another. One thing I agree with the author on is that it is that simple. All the rituals and rites are superficial. It's the Spirit that matters.

[Kathryn Bashaar · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love Garry Wills. His biography of Augustine was the book that inspired my novel about Augustine's mistress. This meditation on the essentials of Jesus' message was equally satisfying to read. He emphasizes that Christ's core message was the Golden Rule, but debunks "meek and mild" as the whole picture of Christ and reminds us that Jesus was God and so he is infinitely powerful (and therefore terrifying) as well as infinitely loving. His command that we love radically is an enormous, life-changing challenge. He also tries to explain what, for me, is the biggest puzzle of Christianity: why was it necessary that Jesus die to redeem us? If God is all-powerful, why couldn't he just forgive us without that horrible sacrifice? Wills suggests that we see it as a rescue rather than a sacrifice. The only way we could be rescued was for God to come down here and do it in person. He likens it to his own feelings when his young son asked him, "Daddy, what if I go to hell?" Wills replied, "If you do, I'll go with you."
It was also interesting to me that Wills reacts strongly against the modern church's demonstrations of power and dominance. He feels very strongly that this is directly counter to Christ's message of equality and the meek inheriting the earth. He seems to feel the same about the Vatican that Al and I felt when we went there in 2008. It is very beautiful and I'm glad I saw it. Even as a Protestant, I understand the debt that all Christians owe to the Catholic Church for spreading the faith over hundreds of year. But in no way did I sense the presence of the Holy Spirit at the Vatican. I sensed the presence of human power and desire to intimidate.
This is the first intellectually challenging book that I've read since my surgery on December 29, and it was a good one to pick. Now that I'm past the most physically challenging phase of my recovery, I find that I'm very emotionally and spiritually open, and messages that I've heard all my life in church feel more meaningful.

[Cathryn Conroy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jesus was one strange man who did and said a lot of strange things. Pulitzer Prize-winning author, historian, and prolific religious writer Garry Wills believes that to truly understand it all we must read the gospels in the spirit in which they were written. That means, we can't just ask what Jesus did or said; instead, we need to figure out what he meant by it all.

This short book is a fascinating discourse that upends a lot of meek and mild Sunday school teaching—and that's a good thing! Wills's refreshing take helped me view the tried-and-true gospel stories in a whole new light. Written for the layman and not the scholar, this devotional text is bold and honest. "Jesus ghosted in and out of people's lives, blessing and cursing, curing and condemning," writes Wills.

He states the obvious, but in daring and almost brash ways, citing gospel chapter and verse where Jesus was called an agent of the devil, unclean, consorter with Samaritans and loose women, a promoter of immorality, a glutton, a drunkard, and a mocker of Jewish law. Whew! So what does it all MEAN? That is where this book excels, offering different explanations of the same old stories.

Jesus was defiant. I love this description by Wills: "He walks through social barriers and taboos as if they were cobwebs." It's easy to forget how contrary and rebellious Jesus was in the first century Jewish culture where everything was governed by the law laid out in the scriptures. Jesus upended all that with his most radical stance of all: love. He taught us to treat everyone—no matter their social position or income—as if we were dealing with Jesus himself. "Love is the test. In the gospel of Jesus, love is everything. But this love is not a dreamy, sentimental, gushy thing. It is radical love, exigent, searing, terrifying," writes Wills.

If you're ready to think of Jesus—and your Christian faith—in these terms, read this book. Some of Garry Wills's words are hard-hitting, especially when he describes what Jesus would think of our modern-day churches, priests, bishops, and cardinals. And that's just the poke we all need!

[Derrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is remarkably short, with even remarkably shorter chapters but what the author - Garry Wills lacks in breadth he makes up in depth. He begins by bemoaning how extensive translation gaffs conceal the Bible’s original meaning, admonishes our efforts to live as Christ did since "he(Jesus) has higher rights and powers, that he has an authority as arbitrary as God's ... He is a divine mystery walking among men. The only way we can directly imitate him is to act as if we were gods ourselves - yet that is the very thing he forbids."

Our only hope is to be good Christians, not Christ. Apparently, Jesus Christ, whoever or whatever he was, was certainly not a Christian. This is somehow opposite to what Nietzsche once said in regard to Christianity: “The word "Christianity" is already a misunderstanding; in reality, there has been only one Christian, and he died on the cross.” I did find the book to very engaging and I'll most definitely give it a second read.

[Erika · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting discourse on the language difficulties and interpretive contexts that have led to errors in the literal interpretations of the various translations of the Bible.

Basically, Wills says that the basic translations of the Bible err from the beginning, by translating from the classical Greek in which they were written. Jesus and his contemporaries spoke to each other in "market Greek," a pidgin language where tenses change randomly, articles and prepositions are often lost, and words are used to represent concepts and ideas rather than specifics.

Wills also takes on the "WWJD" concept, and the the blending of religion and politics. I don't necessarily agree with everything his says, but it's interesting and he makes some very good points.

[Lobstergirl · Rating 3 out of 5]

“A religion that limits itself to assuaging earthly hunger seals off the greater promise of God’s reign, his justice that is a judgment.... Jesus is not a social reformer.....

Marx said that religion drugs man with heavenly hopes that take away the need to do good here and now. There is another way that religion can become an opiate – by satisfying earthly needs, making heavenly aspirations unnecessary, occluding broader horizons. Jesus will not be satisfied with anything that holds the Father to a lesser glory than he promises.”

[Richard Kearney · Rating 4 out of 5]

This 142-page devotional work offers a compelling explication of Jesus' message and his significance, firmly grounded in the Gospels from which Wills quotes extensively. Its eight chapters emphasize Jesus' spiritual radicalism. The chapter on the beginning of Jesus' public ministry, for example, centers around several examples of Jesus rejecting every category of "unclean" person defined by Jewish law and custom. Wills argues that a major component of Jesus' ministry was to extend God's love, compassion, and mercy to the "outcasts" of the world and to denounce the multitude of external purity standards used to exclude and shun people. Bringing Jesus' message into the present day, Wills notes the numerous "Christian" attempts to cast homosexuals as contemporary unclean pariahs, and comments:

"Is there any doubt where Jesus would have stood in these episodes - where, in his mystical members, he was standing then? He was with the gay man, not with his haters."

Wills' argument is equally powerful in his chapter on "The Radical Jesus," where he documents Jesus' consistent condemnation of wealth, power, and exploitation as forms of idolatry that promote inequality and misery. Jesus combined a radical egalitarianism with a steadfast dedication to nonviolence, yet Wills is careful to point out that all of this was in service to non-political ends, for Jesus had no political agenda on earth. Nevertheless, the very spiritual demands he made of his followers and of all those who received his message made him a threat to both religious and secular authorities in his day, and he spent most of his life in constant danger.

Perhaps the most interesting chapters, however, are "Against Religion" and "Heaven's Reign," where Wills makes a strong case that Jesus did not establish a new church through his life and ministry but rather recast religious practice in a manner that made it accessible to all. Jesus preached that God sought reconciliation rather than sacrifice and a direct relationship for salvation rather than a hierarchy of ecclesiastical authority. Wills discusses Jesus' arguments about the Sabbath and the Temple to support his claims that Jesus had no interest in a new church, and Wills finds no evidence that Jesus supported a formal priesthood either, let alone an episcopacy. Instead, he explained to his followers that he would be present in the smallest of gatherings in his name, where all would be equal before God and in their relations with each other.

Wills carries this theme forward in his account of Jesus' death and resurrection, noting as other Christian writers have that Jesus announced through his person the arrival of God's reign on earth and its realization over time, something Jesus' followers have struggled with ever since.

I strongly recommend Wills' book to anyone with an interest in the life and message of Jesus. Although Wills concludes that "what Jesus meant is clearly laid out in the gospels," the Jesus we meet in these pages may be quite different from the one we have received through the various churches and contemporary religious figures who claim to profess his message today. Wills himself is a devout Roman Catholic, but as he makes clear through the book he has very serious reservations about the Church in our time. In addition to its value for individual reading, "What Jesus Meant" is also an excellent tract for religious study groups, as its arguments are likely to stimulate much discussion and debate.

[Tim]

Wills, the well-known historian and writer, is also a trained classicist who studied for the priesthood. Now a step removed from the academy he has taken to writing his religious mind in books such as this. Through his own close reading of original New Testament Greek and his wide reading in Catholic theology, literature, and history he offers an insightful commentary on the meaning of the Gospels. Above all, the message is that love, as Hedges discovered in war, is the highest human faculty.

[Mercurialgem · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this short read. Highly recommend.

[John McCaa · Rating 5 out of 5]

wonderful

This book is worth your time. It is inspiring. And requires careful concentration. However it is well worth your time.

[Neil · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was an alright book that took me a lot longer to read than it should have(!). It actually took me about a week; I misplaced it for three weeks, sadly, otherwise I would have finished it sooner.

Anyway. It held my interest throughout the entire book, overall. I do not necessarily agree with all of the author's assertions or statements, but that is okay. Granted, some of them seemed quite a bit out there, for me like when he calls Judas a saint for committing suicide after betraying Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, or that the first person Jesus rescued from hell was Judas (in the author's opinion), though. Regardless, I did like some of the points he made over the course of the book such as reminding Christians/Catholics that Jesus did not come to create earthly kingdoms or to seek any kind of religious or political power; He came to serve people, especially the 'least members' of society; or how that whatever we do to the people we would consider to be 'the least,' we are actually doing to Jesus as well (which is something I am sure most Christians do not think about). There were other points, but these three stick out the most to me. I felt that it started strong in the first chapter or two, but then started losing its 'strength' the further I read; I felt the last chapter or two were the weakest in the book (and it only had eight chapters and an afterward).

He does focus quite a bit on 'love' over the course of the book. On the one hand, I guess that makes sense. In the New American Standard Bible (the version I tend to read the most), "love" is mentioned 480 times in both Testaments and 234 times in the New Testament alone. The world "holy" is mentioned 416 times in both Testaments and "only" 167 times in the New Testament. The word "righteousness" is mentioned 433 times in both Testaments (either as "righteous" or "righteousness") and 147 times in the New Testament. So, it would appear that 'love' is pretty important to God. However, that being said, I had the distinct impression from the author that he felt love should ignore sins, that if a person loved somebody, they would excuse that person's sinful behavior or look the other way. He gave an example in the book with his son that he could have used as a teachable moment with his son and instead sugarcoats his son's concern(s) by ignoring the question. I, personally, felt he was wrong to do so, but he justified his response to his son by quoting Scripture as the basis for his feeling 'safe' and 'secure' in what he said to his son. Again, that is my opinion, but I kept getting the impression he was all about compromising God's holiness all in the name of 'love' (which is something Jesus never did).

Some other random thoughts:
Page xiv – the author admits he has an image of Jesus in his own mind on how Jesus spoke and acted. Because of this, when he attempts to “translate” the original koine Greek into English, he puts it in the words he believes Jesus would have used.

He does make an interesting point on pages xii and xiii – he claims that translators do not like how some things are phrased in the original Greek language, so they have tried to change what was actually said to make it ‘more accommodating’ and ‘churchy’ to readers, they try to make what was said more ‘elegant’ and ‘acceptable’ to Christians today. So, is he implying things are changed to change or control the perspectives of the readers because “religious leaders” do not want the ‘lay people’ to get the wrong idea when reading what was “originally” said in the original language?

He feels the “original” versions of the Gospels have a rough-hewn earthiness that is missing in today’s translations, so he admits he has attempted to ‘retranslate’ verses into what he believes they really mean as opposed to how they are translated today by trained professionals and scholars.

p. xx – the author claims that because Jesus ate with sinners and tax collectors, that somehow makes Jesus a promoter of immorality (Mark 2:16) – on what basis does he make that accusation about Jesus? The religious leaders of the day might have judged Jesus for doing such a thing, but why would the author make such a claim?

Churches and Christians focus on Jesus being meek and mild and full of mercy and gentle (xxi – xxii); they (we) tend not to focus on other aspects of Jesus. “there is something appalling, something that makes the blood run cold, in the idea of having a statue of Christ in wrath” (xxii).

It is interesting that this author disputes and disagrees with the works of the Jesus Seminar because this group acts (believes) just like Jefferson did – that anything odd or dangerous or supernatural is prima facie suspect and should not be believed (whereas Thomas Jefferson clipped the things he disagreed with out of the New Testament Gospels, the Jesus Seminar ‘merely’ highlights what they disagree with about Jesus’ life with different colors) (xxv). This group actually trims the Gospels far more than Jefferson ever did, believing Jesus to be a ‘wise secular sage’ (xxv). The author actually claims the group is very conservative because they are attempting ‘to tame the radical Jesus’ and cut Jesus ‘down to their own size’ by taking away His Deity and supernatural works (xxv).

It is ironic that the sayings that meet the Seminar’s approval have been saved by Christian communities whose contribution is discounted by the very people who use what was saved by these Christian communities (xxvi).

Trying to find a construct, ‘the historical Jesus,’ is a mixing of categories, or rather of wholly different worlds of discourse. The only Jesus we have is the Jesus of faith. If you reject the faith, there is no reason to trust anything the Gospels say. The Jesus of the Gospels is the Jesus who preached, who is the Jesus who is resurrected. Belief in His continuing activity in the members of his mystical body is the basis of Christian belief in the Gospels. If that is unbelievable to anyone, then why should that person bother with Him? The flat cutout figure they are left with is not a more profound philosopher than Plato, a better storyteller than Mark Twain, or a more bitingly ascetic figure than Epictetus (the only ancient philosopher Jefferson admired). If His claims are no higher than theirs, then those claims amount to nothing (xxvi).

God’s chosen people are commonly chosen to suffer (1). Jesus says as much in His ‘ironic description of happiness’ (2): Matthew 5:11 – 12.

The sword Jesus brings is wielded by others, as seen when Herod slaughtered the innocent male children under age 2 when trying to kill Jesus (2). Jesus is (was) seen as a threat to those in power from the very beginning.

p. 8 – there is a difference between being rebellious and ‘chafing against the boundaries of the past and panting to explore new horizons.’ I would not say Jesus was ‘rebellious’ as that implies He was disobedient and sinned by not obeying His earthly parents, but I could see Him being ‘restive’ and full of the ‘idealism of youth.’

Hebrew as the learned language of the day (10). Author believes Jesus learned Hebrew from desert ascetics and scholars; the common folk spoke Aramaic and the necessary second language was “marketplace Greek” (10).

On a side note, having gone back and looked up some of the Scripture references he lists throughout the book, I have come across numerous errors and typos, where he either puts down the wrong reference for a verse (like saying it should be verse 13 when it is actually verse 14) or claiming a verse says one thing when it says nothing of the sort. I cannot speak as to why he would make the claim a verse says one thing when it says something else; perhaps when he read it at the time, he interpreted it one way in his mind but a subsequent reading would have shown him he had misread it (I know I have done that before, myself). I will leave it at two stars, as I would probably drop the rating between 1.5 and 1.7 stars because of his errors which, when rounded, still equals two stars.

While I, in good conscience, could never recommend this book to anybody, I did find it interesting, and I did feel the author made numerous good points in the first half of the book. The latter half definitely started losing steam, and I really felt that the author was slipping quite a bit in the last chapter or two. While I do not agree with his 'minor' points and/or examples, I believe I can safely say I do agree with some of his 'more major points' in each chapter. That being the case, I am glad that I read it and (finally!) finished it.

[Todd Stockslager · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I was a kid, Garry Wills wrote scholarly historical treatises on the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, even Henry Adams as reviewed here. Lately, he's been busy writing essays on spiritaul issues as a devout Catholic, and as I always liked and respected historical work, I took this slim volume for a spin . . .

. . . And a worthwhile use of time it was. Wills explicates the difficulty we sinful humans have in dealing with Jesus as he was, not what we want him to be. With the lone exception of justifying homosexuality as natural and not sinful, through a rather self-consciously torturous argument, Wills makes cogent and though-provoking points. He relies on ideas from masters of the faith such as Augustine, St. Francis, and Chesterton, and his own translations of the "marketplace Greek" of the New testament.

A couple of interesting points. In the Garden, as Jesus returns to where he left Peter and a small set of the disciples with the admonition to stay awake while he prayed, Wills translates the aphorism "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" as a complete sentence, that may have applied to Jesus, not Peter, as the semi-colon in the NASB translation implies. And indeed, as the God-Man prayed prostrate on the ground and sweat blood in his anguish, His flesh was weak even as His spirit said "Not My will but Thine."

At another spot, discussing the Last Supper and the meaning of the breaking of bread, Wills refers to the "Our Father" and points out the difficulty of translating "daily" bread, as the word rendered "daily" means roughly "approaching" in English, and more literally can be rendered "to come", " or "to be". The "to be" sense is captured in "daily", but Wills links the prayer for the bread "To come" to the Lord's offering of the bread, representing His body, at the Last Supper! Intriguing, and spiritually powerful.

And not very Catholic! His ideas about the Last Supper seem decidedly non-transsubstantiational, if that's a word.

[Lisse · Rating 4 out of 5]

A friend's priest recommended I should pick up some Gary Wills' books (a Catholic author and historian)and I am glad he did. 'What Jesus Meant' is the first Wills book I have read, but it most certainly won't be the last. Wills takes the Gospels and breaks them down contextually...to what those words and actions meant during the time of Christ, instead of what they mean to us today. He talked about how Jesus and his followers would have spoken a more pidgin kind of Greek than what was translated. He broke down where Jesus would've been in society and how religion and society worked during this time. It was all very interesting to me. He talked about Jesus as a man who disliked the hierarchy of religion and was working to break down said structure, and that after he died, his followers for years still worked within that structure - no one was better than anyone else; men and women were equal; different races were equal; different cultures were equal. It reminds me of how far we have come from what seemed to be Jesus' main message. Wills doesn't blame the church or others for where religion now finds itself, but challenges us to look beyond the words we have heard over and over again to what they really meant.

[Ashley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Utterly fascinating. I was a bit apprehensive to read Wills' work because he authored a book entitled "Why I Am a Catholic." Uh--really? I just couldn't get behind that, having a recovering Catholic as a mother and one as a husband, and I find Catholicism, as a whole, just problematic. Anyway, I was absolutely stunned by Wills' work in this slim volume. One would, after reading this, think he was as far-left, as ultra-liberal as they come if one didn't know his background. He presents Jesus as the radical that he was, the tough messages he preached, how those words have been contorted and twisted and unconscionably appropriated. And, of course, how millions of poor schlubs have been mislead by those who would alter his life and his words. I have dogeared numerous pages in the book and intend to go back and pore over the pages in my journal. But the point is--this is what he said, it was tough to hear, it's even tougher to enact in one's daily life, but don't try to sugarcoat it or twist it to suit your needs. Oh man, was Jesus a badass.

[Matthew Hundley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lately I have been looking at Jesus through other people's eyes. Wills' is an interesting head to climb into. He draws a lot of his insights from GK Chesterton and NT Wright - which is fine in my book. He delves into the Greek and offers his own translations as scripture reference - also fine by me. He hones in on Jesus as the alien without a true home ushering in the new temple and the reign of his Father. He offers most of his criticism of WWJD Christianity in his introduction. He has a smattering of criticism for the Catholic church throughout the book - transubstantiation, priesthood, papacy - subjects he elaborates more on in his other books. He is a fan of Anselm, Ambrose and Augustine and this shows in his reading of the Gospels. While I did not sit toe-to-toe with him on his theology; I did walk away from this book with some new insights into "What Jesus Meant." And for that I'm thankful to this offering. I took in the unabridged audio book as read by the author which was also a good way to get a read on Wills intent with this book.

[Chuck · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book gives a brief, almost too brief, summary of the sayings and teachings of Christ. Wills' short chapters address such issues as Jesus' early life, his radical message, what he taught about money, equality, and religion, and the meaning of his death and resurrection. Wills does a good job of cutting through all the religious rhetoric of today and gets to the heart of the radical message that Jesus challenged the world with.

Though he is a practicing Catholic, Willis has no love for the hierarchy of the Catholic church. He points out again and again how the traditions and history of the church run counter to the actual message of Christ. Though he proves his argument well, his personal axe to grind often distracts from the purpose of the book.

Wills sums up my own beliefs quite well. All Jesus told us to do is to love God and love each other. Everything else that organized religion imposes on us is just window dressing and often separates us from Christ.

[Pete · Rating 5 out of 5]

you know i came back 9 years after the first time i read this and i think i'm bumping it up to five stars. i think my favorite part is when garry wills relates the time his nun-frightened young son asked him if he (the son) was going to hell, and gary wills describes his own being as "without an ounce of heroism" and simply tells his kid "i don't know, but if you are, i am too" which strikes me as unheroic but also profoundly honest, which is a kind of heroism. anyway i dunno if anyone reads these blabs i put on here and i suspect that if the answer is yes those anyones are even less curious about my personal views on salvation but if you are jesus-curious but struggling to get over the dumb stuff humans decorate jesus with/decorate with jesus, let garry wills, a non-dumb human, talk to you for a minute.

[Nancy · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been a follower of Jesus all my life; made personal decision at 5-years of age. I attend a Bible believing church, but I'm not a member. At 74 years, I've seen a lot of bad teaching and bad ctions from people professing to be "Christians."

Since Trump and the Far-Right, I've learned that "Christian" can meal lots of things to different people. Christianity frequently means power, Nationalism, and assumptions are made that everyone using that word believes the same way.

I now call myself a follower of Christ because that doesn't pidgin-hole me.

A friend recommended I read this book. It is brilliant and enlightening. Each chapter explains a time in Jesus' life on earth, but with deeper meaning into what Jesus meant in His actions and His words.

I appreciate the insights into main events in Jesus' life.

[Virginia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well, it was definitely short and a quick read. (However, I wonder if I would have enjoyed it more in small chunks over a longer period of time. I could've been far more contemplative in my approach.) I did enjoy Wills' translations of the Greek in the New Testament (who knew that the Greek spoken in those days was so messy and grammatically horrible and practically indecipherable?). Plus, several of his passages prodded at my cold, dark heart to make some changes.

However, mostly, I found his style a little too abrupt and bracing and choppy. I have no doubt of Wills' scholarship and abilities, I just didn't really care for his style.

I am, however, glad I read it!

[Audrey Babkirk Wellons · Rating 5 out of 5]

I. Love. Garry. Wills.
First of all, the man does his own bible translations. Second, he gives new meaning to bible stories I've heard a hundred times. Take. That. Benedict!

[Carlos Montijo · Rating 1 out of 5]

Full review:
https://thorncrownministries.com/blog...

[Glen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wills is a noted journalist with a distinct religious worldview. This book is part of a series of writings that reflect his personal viewpoints on the pressing issues of Christian spirituality.

I caught myself saying that the title should have been "What I Think Jesus Meant" for indeed Willis takes many liberties in retelling the story of Jesus. Essentially, he reduces the Messiah to an opaque holy man with no moral code. Jesus in this book is an anti-conformist out to overturn all external forms of religion (formalism) by espousing a heart religion.

There are distinct elements of truth in the book but where is the Jesus who speaks of a life of obedience to the Father and repeatedly calls His disciples to "obey [His] commandments" in John 14-16? Where is the Jesus who pays a debt for real sins on the cross? To read these pages you would have the impression that the most immoral individual in the Bible is a God who would judge humanity's sins...the Jesus who tells the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more". Mercy is merged with acceptance in my rendering of this book and this is what undermines the very redemptive mission of Christ on planet earth. If everything was about being more open-hearted and less judgmental then a sacrificial death on the cross seems like "overkill" (no pun intended).

The author repeatedly attacks any efforts to label certain behaviors as sin. Homosexuality, competing religious claims and a host of other social norms that conflict with Biblical beliefs are presented as acceptable by the anti-establishment Jesus. Stories of demoniac's delivered are diluted into people being freed from their gripping illnesses. In other words, social activism is at the center of What Jesus Meant.

Added to this retelling is the idea that Jesus never intended to establish external religion. He openly spoke against the temple, sacrificial system and priesthood. NT references to those institutions being fulfilled in Jesus are lightly treated or relegated to "Pseudo-Petrine" passages. In other words, counterpoints about Jesus fulfilling the established religion are muted by this central motif that only interprets what He meant as this non-conformist who breaks down all classifications of people.

Despite these aspects of the work, it is apparent that Wills loves the story of a Savior born, crucified and risen from the dead. His embracing God's redemptive work are evident. He delves into the nature of the sacrificial death and portrays it as a "rescue" of the lost instead of an "appeasement" of an overly demanding God.

In retrospect, I came away from the book appreciative for the glimpse into a reverential life. There are obvious points of departure for me and I ended up concluded that much of the angst in Wills' dismissal of organized religion seemed rooted in his struggles with Catholic traditions. That said, in this agnostic age, I'll always take time for a thoughtful mind that pursues a meaningful encounter with Jesus. At least, in that shared sacred bond, I find my reading of these well composed musings by an acclaimed author very fulfilling.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Did you ever wonder about the discrepancy between what others have said about Jesus, and what Jesus actually said?

Talk about finding a needle in a haystack of statements that reaches to the Moon!

But that's the Herculean task that Garry Willis undertakes in WHAT JESUS MEANT.

Willis' own background is Catholic, and he does reserve some digs (towards the end of his book) for one of the past popes. The one whose name starts with a B and was the only pope to retire, rather than die his way out of the Vatican. [OK, I'm teasing a little bit, it was Benedict XVI].

Other than this, I (as a former Catholic) didn't detect a drop of religious bias in Willis' book.

As a matter of fact, when it comes to religion, Willis is quite insistent that if Jesus walked inside the vast majority of churches today (at least in Western culture), he wouldn't recognize most of what they are doing or preaching as aligning with his teachings.

Among the points that Willis makes are:
. Jesus never meant to start an organized religion,
. Jesus never meant to establish a separation among his followers between laity and clergy
. Jesus would be appalled at any alliance between his followers and a political party
. Jesus was more interested in social justice and love than power and politics
. Jesus upset the religious leaders of his day and would probably upset most of today's religious leaders.

In particular, I appreciated what Willis had to say about Communion (aka Holy Communion, The Lord's Supper). In short, Willis sees Communion as primarily a celebratory invitation, a meal, and not a sacrifice.

Willis makes the point: "So Jesus' eating in his appearances after the Resurrection is a proleptic and partial anticipation of the feast that awaits us [at the Second Coming of Jesus]... It is a mystical communing with his comrades in the basic image of the afterlife. People often wonder how they should imagine life after death. Jesus used the imagery of the scriptures, presenting it as a great welcoming banquet."

As for the motivation behind Jesus' agreeing to be crucified, Willis writes: "If you want to know why Jesus died, the best place to look for an explanation is in John's account of the Last Supper, in the long passage called the Last Discourse [starting in chapter 14 of John's gospel]. This does not speak of divine anger to be allayed by sacrifice. It talks, over and over, of divine love entering into the human darkness and turning it to light."

It is love, says Willis that is the most important element in Jesus' life and teachings.

Willis concludes: "Jesus' followers have the obligation that rests on all men and women to seek justice based on the dignity of every human being... But heaven's reign makes deeper and broader demands, the demands not only of justice but of love."

[William Schram · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have heard of Garry Wills before, in fact, I believe I read What the Koran Meant and that was also by this author. What Jesus Meant subverted my expectations. From the title, I expected the book to be about focusing on Jesus teaching you to love your neighbor or respect God or something. Rather than that, the author claims that this is not a scholarly work, but is instead a devotional of sorts. He examines the tiniest references to what Jesus said in the Gospels and beyond, expanding on the Bible with outside sources and knowledge of what it would have been like as a Jew during the times of Jesus.

Since the childhood and formative years of Jesus are not documented and there are no corroborating bits of evidence of Jesus’ life and times, all we have to go on is conjecture. The author discusses the languages Jesus and friends would have spoken in various situations, adding their histories and so on. Jesus is generally made out to be a jerk in my opinion. Sure he heals people, but he does so at the expense of his familial ties. His mission is just that important. His family even worries that he might have joined a cult. The author takes care to put the word cult in quotes, as though this is some sort of higher calling different from a cult.

The first thing we hear about Jesus in the Bible is his birth of course, but then we also get to hear about him coming out of the desert as a weird prophet character. He ‘studied’ under John the Baptist and met with the Devil. The Devil wants to tempt Jesus for some reason, appealing to his human side. This book also discusses things we can’t possibly have knowledge of. For instance, what did Jesus look like? Was he a fine specimen of a man or a lanky waif? Would that matter in the long and short of things? The book even points out that Jesus was against organized religion, making all the pomp and circumstance surrounding Christianity even stranger to me. Then again, people make religions, gods do not do so.

This book gave me a lot to think about, but it also reminded me of being in Grade School. It was quite short, but I couldn’t finish it. After the first few chapters, I got the gist of the book and didn’t feel like finishing it.

[Phillip · Rating 3 out of 5]

I sort of go back and forth with how I enjoyed this book. On one hand, I don't think the author sticks to his thesis -- this devotional book (which is how I would describe it) is more the author's quick skip thru of the gospels, with his particular interpretations and emphases. But that isn't really focused on what Jesus "meant," but rather what the author think's of Jesus' message and the New Testament writings. On the other hand, I did find some of the author's interpretations interesting -- the criticism of the modern church and priesthood (I'm not saying I AGREE, but the author does bring up good points...), Jesus' approach to the organized religion and politics of his time, and early Christian traditions. However, the author is a bit disjointed in his presentations -- it is quality writing, but it comes across as a far-reaching sermon, hopping about the Bible, rather than focused areas of chapters. If you're looking for a Christian book to make you think a bit, I recommend this. But if you're looking for an in-depth analysis of Jesus' message ... I dunno. There are some approaches that I was turned off by -- the outright rejection of the "historical Jesus" (it has to be a PART of analyzing Jesus' message) and ignoring Jesus' rejection of the Temple & his mission of Jewish reform. I think the author should realize Jesus was preaching (in so many words) that the Temple was not where we should center our worship ("we" being 1st Century Jews), but how the "kingdom" is within us, and not just among the Temple authorities and leaders. I believe in the greater Jesus story, but you can't ignore his mission along with John the Baptist to recenter man's approach to G-d.

[Sandrrrrrrrinha · Rating 4 out of 5]

Penso não exagerar dizendo que este livro estava na minha estante de espiritualidade - quando nem sequer estava ciente que ela viria a materializar-se - há mais de uma década... já na altura andava às voltas com a minha educação tendencialmente católica mas essencialmente livre... desde a infância que algumas mensagens veiculadas pela Igreja Católica (tal como por outras Igrejas, cultos, dogmas...) soavam profundamente contraditórias, assentes numa profunda hipocrisia que Jesus Cristo - quem quer que ele possa ser - parecia rejeitar.
Na altura, este livro seduziu-me por ser a tentativa de resgate de um Jesus não romantizado por um autor católico, precisamente...
Agora que finalmente senti a tranquilidade necessária à sua leitura, confesso não ter ficado decepcionada... embora se trate de um livro técnico, já que muita da análise feita pelo autor assenta em desafios de tradução e interpretação - algo inevitável quando falamos dos Evangelhos - Garry Wills consegue cativar com o resgate de um Jesus humano e da sua verdadeira mensagem...
Nota de frustração: Gary Wills não se aventurou a analisar o papel de Maria Madalena... ela está nas entrelinhas várias vezes num vago "as mulheres"... Estávamos na época de Bento XVI quando o livro foi publicado e ainda longe da justa colocação de Maria de Madalena no seu lugar de Apóstolo dos Apóstolos... e, sendo justa, trata-se de um livro de poucas páginas (143), centrado na figura histórica de Jesus. De qualquer forma, já me levou a fazer algo que andava a adiar, a encomendar o Evangelho de Maria Madalena de Jean Yves Leloup, em versão francesa, a versão em português do Brasil parece muito difícil de encontrar...