What do you think?
Rate this book
The Historical Jesus: Five Views
2011 Christianity Today Book Award winner!
The scholarly quest for the historical Jesus has a distinguished pedigree in modern Western religious and historical scholarship, with names such as Strauss, Schweitzer and Bultmann highlighting the story. Since the early 1990s, when the Jesus quest was reawakened for a third run, numerous significant books have emerged. And the public's attention has been regularly arrested by media coverage, with the Jesus Seminar or the James ossuary headlining the marquee.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views provides a venue for readers to sit in on a virtual seminar on the historical Jesus. Beginning with a scene-setting historical introduction by the editors, prominent figures in the Jesus quest set forth their views and respond to their fellow scholars.
On the one end Robert M. Price lucidly maintains that the probability of Jesus' existence has reached the "vanishing point," and on the other Darrell Bock ably argues that while critical method yields only a "gist" of Jesus, it takes us in the direction of the Gospel portraits. In between there are numerous avenues to explore, questions to be asked and "assured results" to be weighed. And John Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson and James D. G. Dunn probe these issues with formidable knowledge and honed insight, filling out a further range of options.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views offers a unique entry into the Jesus quest. For both the classroom and personal study, this is a book that fascinates, probes and engages.
The scholarly quest for the historical Jesus has a distinguished pedigree in modern Western religious and historical scholarship, with names such as Strauss, Schweitzer and Bultmann highlighting the story. Since the early 1990s, when the Jesus quest was reawakened for a third run, numerous significant books have emerged. And the public's attention has been regularly arrested by media coverage, with the Jesus Seminar or the James ossuary headlining the marquee.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views provides a venue for readers to sit in on a virtual seminar on the historical Jesus. Beginning with a scene-setting historical introduction by the editors, prominent figures in the Jesus quest set forth their views and respond to their fellow scholars.
On the one end Robert M. Price lucidly maintains that the probability of Jesus' existence has reached the "vanishing point," and on the other Darrell Bock ably argues that while critical method yields only a "gist" of Jesus, it takes us in the direction of the Gospel portraits. In between there are numerous avenues to explore, questions to be asked and "assured results" to be weighed. And John Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson and James D. G. Dunn probe these issues with formidable knowledge and honed insight, filling out a further range of options.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views offers a unique entry into the Jesus quest. For both the classroom and personal study, this is a book that fascinates, probes and engages.
312 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
33 people are currently reading
494 people want to read
About the author
James K. Beilby
16 books12 followersJames K. Beilby (PhD, Marquette University) is professor of systematic and philosophical theology at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
August 3, 2012
Just a heads up: This one is pretty academic and may not be for everyone. I actually wrote it for a seminary class but thought I'd share it with all of you.
Bethel University professors James K. Bielby and Paul Rhodes Eddy have put together a volume in The Historical Jesus: Five Views that provides a glimpse into the broad range of perspectives found among those who quest for the historical Jesus. Robert M. Price, a professor at Johnny Coleman Theological Seminary, begins the book with the most radical of views, followed by DePaul University emeritus professor of religious studies John Dominic Crossan. The works gradually move through the center toward the conservative end of the spectrum with essays by Emory University professor Luke Timothy Johnson and Durham University professor James D. G. Dunn. Finally, the book draws to a conservative close with an essay by Darrell L. Bock, research professor of New Testament studies, Dallas Theological Seminary.
The Historical Jesus begins with a survey of the quest for the historical Jesus, covering its beginnings in the late eighteenth century to today. Bielby and Rhodes provide the reader with a quick glimpse of each separate quest – or stage of the overall quest – as well as the views that drove it or, at times, brought it to a halt. The editors do not bring their own views to bear. They leave that to the contributors.
Their introduction is followed by each contributor’s essay, in which he puts forth his view. Each essay is then followed by responses from each of the other four authors.
Price’s essay, “Jesus at the Vanishing Point,” is easily the most liberal and radical. He has no qualms about sharing his view with the reader. “I will argue that it is quite likely there never was any historical Jesus” (55). He then proceeds to completely deconstruct the Gospels. He does this by relying on the criterion of dissimilarity and the idea that each of the Gospel stories is simply a retelling of an Old Testament story.
John Dominic Crossan’s work “Jesus and the Challenge of Collaborative Eschatology” reduces Jesus to a simple nonviolent revolutionary whose battle was against the Roman Empire. Though not the Messiah, he says, some Jews saw Jesus as “a nonviolent Davidic Messiah” (120). He attributes those of Jesus’ actions in the Gospels that he deems historically accurate to a political motivation, and the crufixion he attributes to Rome’s standard policy in dealing with nonviolent rebels.
Next comes “Learning the Human Jesus” by Luke Timothy Johnson. His conclusions are moderate when compared to those of his fellow contributors. Leaning more toward acceptance of the Gospels' portrayal of Jesus, he writes that, when taken strictly as narrative, the Gospels provide a valid perspective on the character of Jesus. The question of character “is a question that narrative is distinctly capable of addressing” (173). Johnson still doubts the historical validity of the Gospels.
James D. G. Dunn writes the essay “Remembering Jesus,” in which he accepts a faith-based viewing of the Gospels as a valid historical perspective. He states, “…it is the ear of faith which is likely to hear the Gospels most effectively” (225). Dunn seeks to convince the reader that the right course in the quest is to look for those characteristics of Jesus that can be seen across the Gospels (220). Dunn does not accept all the Gospel material as true, though he is more conservative than prior contributors.
Darrell L. Bock shows himself to hold the truly conservative view in this work. The entirety of his essay, “The Historical Jesus,” gives the reader a view of Jesus as He appears in the Gospels, spelling out His character and motivations as exhibited by His actions. Bock declares that the Gospels’ picture of a “messianic Jesus who saw himself standing at the hub of God’s program and completely vindicated as Son of Man at God’s side” (281) is the most accurate view to take.
In this reviewer’s opinion, Price’s view is the least well-researched. It appears to be based entirely on his own biases and reading of other liberal theologians, rather than on arguments from factual data. The essay’s greatest weakness is his stretching of the criterion of dissimilarity to contend that the Gospel stories are simple reworkings of Old Testament stories. While this reviewer doubts that the criterion in question has any value whatsoever, even the other authors in The Historical Jesus take issue with Price’s use of it. Dunn writes, “Such an extension of the criterion of dissimilarity simply undermines what value it has” (95).
Crossan’s view, while perhaps more informed, is no less biased. He draws upon a great deal of extrabiblical historical knowledge – some of which is dubious at best – but he discounts nearly as much of the Gospel material as does Price. He believes Jesus existed, but his picture of Jesus is shaped by his own values and knowledge of the fishing industry in ancient Palestine (116). Even Price states that Crossan reduces “Jesus to a function of the categories and methods through which he has decided to study him.” (133). Crossan infers in his essay, and outright insists in his response to Dunn, that the Jesus of the Gospels who taught love and pacifism cannot be the same as the Jesus of revelation who will return in violence (234). For Crossan, nonviolence is the one defining characteristic of Jesus, whose life and death hinge on “the crucial difference… between the eschatological kingdom of God and the imperial kingdom of Rome,” which is “Jesus’ nonviolence and Pilate’s violence” (132).
Johnson and Dunn, while espousing slightly different views, straddle the center. Johnson leans more heavily toward the liberal side, and Dunn leans toward the conservative side. However, they both – like the more liberal contributors to this book – rely on sources like Q that may or may not exist to determine which parts of the Gospel are true. For a conservative reviewer, Dunn’s view is easier to swallow, since he accepts faith as a valid historical perspective. Johnson, however, seems inexplicably to accept faith as faith and historical knowledge as something else altogether.
Bock is the one among these contributors who takes the Gospel texts seriously. He writes that the Gospels provide “a multiperspectival impression” that “can be as historical as the autobiographical words of the individual” (251). From there he provides a historical view of Jesus that is drawn entirely from Scripture and, therefore, reads more like a sermon – with generally solid exegesis – than the apparently scholarly views of the other contributors. The only real weakness this reviewer found in Bock’s contribution was that it might have fit better in a different book, but that appears to have been the point of The Historical Jesus: Five Views.
The Historical Jesusis a worthy read, providing opposing perspectives against which to hone one’s views. It strengthened this reader’s trust in the Gospels as the only reliable picture of the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith, who are one and the same.
Bethel University professors James K. Bielby and Paul Rhodes Eddy have put together a volume in The Historical Jesus: Five Views that provides a glimpse into the broad range of perspectives found among those who quest for the historical Jesus. Robert M. Price, a professor at Johnny Coleman Theological Seminary, begins the book with the most radical of views, followed by DePaul University emeritus professor of religious studies John Dominic Crossan. The works gradually move through the center toward the conservative end of the spectrum with essays by Emory University professor Luke Timothy Johnson and Durham University professor James D. G. Dunn. Finally, the book draws to a conservative close with an essay by Darrell L. Bock, research professor of New Testament studies, Dallas Theological Seminary.
The Historical Jesus begins with a survey of the quest for the historical Jesus, covering its beginnings in the late eighteenth century to today. Bielby and Rhodes provide the reader with a quick glimpse of each separate quest – or stage of the overall quest – as well as the views that drove it or, at times, brought it to a halt. The editors do not bring their own views to bear. They leave that to the contributors.
Their introduction is followed by each contributor’s essay, in which he puts forth his view. Each essay is then followed by responses from each of the other four authors.
Price’s essay, “Jesus at the Vanishing Point,” is easily the most liberal and radical. He has no qualms about sharing his view with the reader. “I will argue that it is quite likely there never was any historical Jesus” (55). He then proceeds to completely deconstruct the Gospels. He does this by relying on the criterion of dissimilarity and the idea that each of the Gospel stories is simply a retelling of an Old Testament story.
John Dominic Crossan’s work “Jesus and the Challenge of Collaborative Eschatology” reduces Jesus to a simple nonviolent revolutionary whose battle was against the Roman Empire. Though not the Messiah, he says, some Jews saw Jesus as “a nonviolent Davidic Messiah” (120). He attributes those of Jesus’ actions in the Gospels that he deems historically accurate to a political motivation, and the crufixion he attributes to Rome’s standard policy in dealing with nonviolent rebels.
Next comes “Learning the Human Jesus” by Luke Timothy Johnson. His conclusions are moderate when compared to those of his fellow contributors. Leaning more toward acceptance of the Gospels' portrayal of Jesus, he writes that, when taken strictly as narrative, the Gospels provide a valid perspective on the character of Jesus. The question of character “is a question that narrative is distinctly capable of addressing” (173). Johnson still doubts the historical validity of the Gospels.
James D. G. Dunn writes the essay “Remembering Jesus,” in which he accepts a faith-based viewing of the Gospels as a valid historical perspective. He states, “…it is the ear of faith which is likely to hear the Gospels most effectively” (225). Dunn seeks to convince the reader that the right course in the quest is to look for those characteristics of Jesus that can be seen across the Gospels (220). Dunn does not accept all the Gospel material as true, though he is more conservative than prior contributors.
Darrell L. Bock shows himself to hold the truly conservative view in this work. The entirety of his essay, “The Historical Jesus,” gives the reader a view of Jesus as He appears in the Gospels, spelling out His character and motivations as exhibited by His actions. Bock declares that the Gospels’ picture of a “messianic Jesus who saw himself standing at the hub of God’s program and completely vindicated as Son of Man at God’s side” (281) is the most accurate view to take.
In this reviewer’s opinion, Price’s view is the least well-researched. It appears to be based entirely on his own biases and reading of other liberal theologians, rather than on arguments from factual data. The essay’s greatest weakness is his stretching of the criterion of dissimilarity to contend that the Gospel stories are simple reworkings of Old Testament stories. While this reviewer doubts that the criterion in question has any value whatsoever, even the other authors in The Historical Jesus take issue with Price’s use of it. Dunn writes, “Such an extension of the criterion of dissimilarity simply undermines what value it has” (95).
Crossan’s view, while perhaps more informed, is no less biased. He draws upon a great deal of extrabiblical historical knowledge – some of which is dubious at best – but he discounts nearly as much of the Gospel material as does Price. He believes Jesus existed, but his picture of Jesus is shaped by his own values and knowledge of the fishing industry in ancient Palestine (116). Even Price states that Crossan reduces “Jesus to a function of the categories and methods through which he has decided to study him.” (133). Crossan infers in his essay, and outright insists in his response to Dunn, that the Jesus of the Gospels who taught love and pacifism cannot be the same as the Jesus of revelation who will return in violence (234). For Crossan, nonviolence is the one defining characteristic of Jesus, whose life and death hinge on “the crucial difference… between the eschatological kingdom of God and the imperial kingdom of Rome,” which is “Jesus’ nonviolence and Pilate’s violence” (132).
Johnson and Dunn, while espousing slightly different views, straddle the center. Johnson leans more heavily toward the liberal side, and Dunn leans toward the conservative side. However, they both – like the more liberal contributors to this book – rely on sources like Q that may or may not exist to determine which parts of the Gospel are true. For a conservative reviewer, Dunn’s view is easier to swallow, since he accepts faith as a valid historical perspective. Johnson, however, seems inexplicably to accept faith as faith and historical knowledge as something else altogether.
Bock is the one among these contributors who takes the Gospel texts seriously. He writes that the Gospels provide “a multiperspectival impression” that “can be as historical as the autobiographical words of the individual” (251). From there he provides a historical view of Jesus that is drawn entirely from Scripture and, therefore, reads more like a sermon – with generally solid exegesis – than the apparently scholarly views of the other contributors. The only real weakness this reviewer found in Bock’s contribution was that it might have fit better in a different book, but that appears to have been the point of The Historical Jesus: Five Views.
The Historical Jesusis a worthy read, providing opposing perspectives against which to hone one’s views. It strengthened this reader’s trust in the Gospels as the only reliable picture of the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith, who are one and the same.
March 1, 2011
Five noted scholars discuss what we can determine about the historical Jesus: Robert Price, Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson, James Dunn, and Darrell Bock. It’s a wide range, from confirmed believers to one who argues that no historical Jesus existed at all.
Jesus scholarship continues to evolve, but it seems to me to be spiraling the target instead of zeroing in. For example, virtually all scholars now accept that Jesus was recognized by his contemporaries as a miracle worker and healer, while less trust is being placed in the “embarrassment criteria” that has prompted scholars to trust the Gospel of Mark above others.
The book is presented in debate style, and the contributors pull no punches. Each presents a short argument, maybe 30 pages long, and then each of the other four write a few pages of critique in response.
Like any good debate, it may leave you more confused than when you began, but if I must choose a “winner,” this time I pick the conservatives. (Please understand that, by “conservative,” I mean relatively so; Christianity within reason—rejection of critical scholarship is not a prerequisite to believing.) I’ve gained a new respect for Bock, and I was especially impressed by Dunn’s discussion of oral tradition. Dunn argues that it’s reasonable, once we capture in our minds the faith of the first followers of Jesus, to trace the Gospel writings back through normal oral transmission to Jesus himself, and suggests that the Gospels are not taken seriously enough by Jesus scholars. It is those who were so greatly impressed by Jesus that can give us the best glimpse of why they were impressed. He closes with this provocative conclusion: “Those who still experience the Jesus tradition as living tradition may well be best placed to appreciate the initial stages of the traditioning process, that it is the ear of faith which is likely to hear the Gospels most effectively, and that the living quality of the Jesus tradition is most likely to be experienced by those who in effect sit with these early assemblies in sharing their memories of Jesus and in seeking to live by them.”
Jesus scholarship continues to evolve, but it seems to me to be spiraling the target instead of zeroing in. For example, virtually all scholars now accept that Jesus was recognized by his contemporaries as a miracle worker and healer, while less trust is being placed in the “embarrassment criteria” that has prompted scholars to trust the Gospel of Mark above others.
The book is presented in debate style, and the contributors pull no punches. Each presents a short argument, maybe 30 pages long, and then each of the other four write a few pages of critique in response.
Like any good debate, it may leave you more confused than when you began, but if I must choose a “winner,” this time I pick the conservatives. (Please understand that, by “conservative,” I mean relatively so; Christianity within reason—rejection of critical scholarship is not a prerequisite to believing.) I’ve gained a new respect for Bock, and I was especially impressed by Dunn’s discussion of oral tradition. Dunn argues that it’s reasonable, once we capture in our minds the faith of the first followers of Jesus, to trace the Gospel writings back through normal oral transmission to Jesus himself, and suggests that the Gospels are not taken seriously enough by Jesus scholars. It is those who were so greatly impressed by Jesus that can give us the best glimpse of why they were impressed. He closes with this provocative conclusion: “Those who still experience the Jesus tradition as living tradition may well be best placed to appreciate the initial stages of the traditioning process, that it is the ear of faith which is likely to hear the Gospels most effectively, and that the living quality of the Jesus tradition is most likely to be experienced by those who in effect sit with these early assemblies in sharing their memories of Jesus and in seeking to live by them.”
January 23, 2015
J. K. Beilby and P. R. Eddy’s edit of The Historical Jesus: Five Views fleshes out five views of five interesting facets of Jesus according to history. I will first go over the views and then respond to several resonating quotations in the work. Robert M. Price begins by stating several perspectives about the existence of the biblical Jesus. His view is mythicistic because he seems to believe that the Jesus we read about in the Bible never really existed. John Dominic Crossan responds to Price by being “historically convinced that Jesus existed as a still quite reconstructable historical figure” (86). Crossan tackles eschatology in his section as he declares that if we want to know about God’s relationship to the world, we need to determine what the world would be like if the grace of a Savior had never entered it. He defines eschatological as an adjective which “refers to God’s vision for that fifth or final kingdom of earth, for how the world would be run if God were its direct ruler” (109). In contrast more to Price’s view, Luke Timothy Johnson puts more weight in a literary reconstruct of Jesus. He seems to re-build the Messiah of history by boiling down the literary retelling of Jesus’ stories. James D. G. Dunn presents a case that those literary stories were based on oral retellings, and that they developed into the written Gospel over time. His emphasis is on critiquing the memories-based shaping of what we call Scripture today. Darrell L. Bock presents a much more balanced view where the pendulum of the evangelical Gospel is indeed supported in history. Though about history he states: “one must appreciate the nature of what historical Jesus work seeks to achieve as well as the limitations under which such a historically oriented study operates when it seeks to cross thousands of years to do its work” (249).
A few quotes I would like to focus on come from the first major section of the book. Price’s argument entitled “Jesus at the Vanishing Point” bring up many inconsistencies in Scripture. They seem to be birthed out of a general skepticism in the hope of Jesus, even though Price also exhibits some fear and admiration of certain aspects of our Lord. Early in the book he says: “the Christ of faith has all the more importance since I think it most probable that there was never any other” (56). The phrase “most probable” is troubling but helpful because it presents the faith-less platform on which Price stands as he counts the ways to view Jesus as a myth. Further comments like: “we should never guess from the Epistles that Jesus died in any particular historical or political context, only that the fallen angels (Col 2:15), the archons of this age, did him in, little realizing they were sealing their own doom” (63) help the reader understand that Price has an affinity toward mythicism in general. It is no wonder that he projects this philosophy onto any historical work such as the Bible. Crossan replies: “it is utterly pointless even to ask whether there was sufficient time for legends to grow up around Jesus” (81) in effort to dissuade readers of a mythological view and return to eschatology. As fantastical as many of Price’s arguments sound, though, we have to remember what the Scripture teaches about such arguments. Hebrews 13:7-9 states:
Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them. (ESV)
Hence, Christians should hear this and apply the words of the writer of Hebrews by imitating the faith of Christian forefathers who have had a godly outcome at the end of their lives. All this, remembering that we are strengthened by living out grace, which is where the asset of faith multiplies.
In conclusion, Bielby’s The Historical Jesus: Five Views presents four very educated although avant-garde assumptions concerning the historicity of Jesus. Though partial to Bock’s viewpoints, this reviewer regards the work as a healthily fragmented collection of research topics for which modern Christian theologians should be equipped to tackle.
A few quotes I would like to focus on come from the first major section of the book. Price’s argument entitled “Jesus at the Vanishing Point” bring up many inconsistencies in Scripture. They seem to be birthed out of a general skepticism in the hope of Jesus, even though Price also exhibits some fear and admiration of certain aspects of our Lord. Early in the book he says: “the Christ of faith has all the more importance since I think it most probable that there was never any other” (56). The phrase “most probable” is troubling but helpful because it presents the faith-less platform on which Price stands as he counts the ways to view Jesus as a myth. Further comments like: “we should never guess from the Epistles that Jesus died in any particular historical or political context, only that the fallen angels (Col 2:15), the archons of this age, did him in, little realizing they were sealing their own doom” (63) help the reader understand that Price has an affinity toward mythicism in general. It is no wonder that he projects this philosophy onto any historical work such as the Bible. Crossan replies: “it is utterly pointless even to ask whether there was sufficient time for legends to grow up around Jesus” (81) in effort to dissuade readers of a mythological view and return to eschatology. As fantastical as many of Price’s arguments sound, though, we have to remember what the Scripture teaches about such arguments. Hebrews 13:7-9 states:
Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them. (ESV)
Hence, Christians should hear this and apply the words of the writer of Hebrews by imitating the faith of Christian forefathers who have had a godly outcome at the end of their lives. All this, remembering that we are strengthened by living out grace, which is where the asset of faith multiplies.
In conclusion, Bielby’s The Historical Jesus: Five Views presents four very educated although avant-garde assumptions concerning the historicity of Jesus. Though partial to Bock’s viewpoints, this reviewer regards the work as a healthily fragmented collection of research topics for which modern Christian theologians should be equipped to tackle.
July 18, 2017
Here is a solid, multi-view book on the question of who, exactly, the historical Jesus is. The introductory essay by Beilby and Eddy on the history of the "historical quests for Jesus" is longer than most essays found in these type of books. So, that is very useful. The other contributors are Robert Price (an atheist who views Jesus as a myth), John Dominic Crossan (Jesus Seminar scholar who is very skeptical about the content of the Gospels), Luke Timothy Johnson (who seems to believe that asking if the Gospels are historical is asking the wrong question), James Dunn (who questions the "Jesus Questers'" assumptions and focuses on the accuracy of oral traditions which would be written down later), and Darrell Bock (a fairly standard evangelical view). Sometimes, the book is a bit dry. The most entertaining bit is Dunn's withering response to Price's essay.
Overall, this book is a good introduction to how various biblical scholars view the historicity of the Gospels.
(Finished reading on December 31, 2015.)
Overall, this book is a good introduction to how various biblical scholars view the historicity of the Gospels.
(Finished reading on December 31, 2015.)
June 2, 2021
What a great place to start when you want to critically think about Jesus as a historical human figure. This gives great ways to start exploration. I am also able to wholly deny that he never lived and thus totally disagree with Mr. Price's assessment, and the other 4 contributors have given me something other than faith to prove that.
July 14, 2021
It’s rather funny to have each of five scholars set forth their views only to have them trashed by the other four. It reinforces for me John Dominic Crossan's observation that historical Jesus studies has become something of a bad joke.
February 23, 2019
This book offered a wonderful panorama of the differing views that exist pertaining to the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. Quite honestly, I enjoyed all of the viewpoints except for Robert Price's. Price showed obvious bias against the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. His "evidence" was quite laughable and his responses were juvenile. Clearly, I thought Bock and Dunn's perspectives were the strongest. But, Johnson did show the literary character of the narratives of Jesus and the limitations of history which was, in my opinion, a fair assessment. Crossan, while accepting the historicity of Jesus, did see an apparent difference between the peaceable Jesus of history and the violent eschatological Jesus of Revelation. I didn't quite buy his distinction between the two. This was a fascinating read and one that anyone who is interested in historical Jesus studies will want to get.
May 17, 2025
What a treat to have a "textual conference" and discussion between leading Jesus scholars. Very helpful to get the heart of Crossan's and Dunn's work without having to read their thousand page books. I find Price's view that Jesus never lived fairly ridiculous and it was great to read the unanimous condemnation of his reasoning from the others. Likewise, it was helpful to see four of the five scholars accuse Crossan of forming a politically liberal Jesus in his own image. Overall, I find myself agreeing with aspects of Johnson's literary view, Dunn's focus on memory and oral tradition and Bock's "evangelical" view. Very helpful book, despite being over 15 years old.
March 3, 2023
2.5, Felt at times overly focused on the mechanisms to research historical Jesus rather than a presentation of those results. And some the arguments felt like a cop out - Jesus wasn't a historical figure, Jesus can be best found in the Bible instead of corroborating historical sources - not sure I needed 300 pages for that. Quite readable though
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 20, 2021
Great resource for people who already have an intro in historical Jesus literature
I love this format and everyone (besides Robert Funk) is a respected scholar in the field. The other scholars absolutely mocking and dunking on Funk was probably the highlight.
I love this format and everyone (besides Robert Funk) is a respected scholar in the field. The other scholars absolutely mocking and dunking on Funk was probably the highlight.
August 6, 2019
Probably the best overview of the Historical Jesus research. Nice coverage, Dunn's summary is excellent and a good intro to his larger works.
January 1, 2025
The articles by Dunn are worth the price of the book.
September 30, 2015
The Historical Jesus: Five Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul R. Eddy, brings together a wide spectrum of opinions from today's leading voices in the quest for the historical Jesus. Beilby is the professor of systematic and philosophical theology, and Eddy is the professor of biblical and theological studies at Bethel University. Together they have written and/or edited numerous books, including, Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views and The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views. Beilby and Eddy bring both expertise and direction to the conversation as they continue to exhibit a growing track record of healthy discussion across various theological spectrums. It is largely the work of these two men that brings together an otherwise disconnected array of scholarship. Consequently, The Historical Jesus: Five Views exhibits a breath of fresh air amid a rapidly growing and diverse conversation that is certain to engage and enlighten readers of all backgrounds.
The book begins with a healthy introduction to the historical landscape surrounding the quest for the historical Jesus. The reader already familiar with the ongoing discussion concerning the issues of the book will find this opening chapter to be a solid refresher to an increasingly complex conversation. The reader largely unfamiliar with the conversation will appreciate the breadth of detail overflowing from these 45 pages, and should be able to confidently place the coming chapter within the broader discussion. Because the aim of the book is to highlight and examine the various methods used to unearth the historical Jesus, the methodological survey in the introduction is invaluable. Personally, I found the introduction among the most helpful chapters in the entire book and anticipate most readers will as well—especially considering the wide spectrum of opinions that follow.
The layout seems to move from left to right across the evangelical spectrum, with ample room for interaction following each contributing article. First, the reader will encounter a self-attested “controversial essay” by Robert M. Price. Price is among the few scholars today who still maintains the notion that Jesus “probably” didn’t exist. I found myself disagreeing with Price on almost every page, but I appreciated his contribution and anticipated his interaction with the other contributors more than any of the other contributors. Second, the reader will encounter an important essay by John Dominic Crossan. Crossan has been a voice within the conversation for some time now and his interaction is valuable, but the interaction against Crossan from the other contributors was even more valuable—especially from Dunn and Bock. Third, the reader will meet a stimulating article by Luke Timothy Johnson. The reader will appreciate the brevity of Johnson’s methodological approach. However, despite my agreement with many of his points, I found his contribution mediocre at best. Fourth, the reader will encounter the contribution of James D. G. Dunn. Dunn largely summarizes and synthesizes his more detailed work on the subject. This is helpful for those unfamiliar with Dunn, or those who simply don’t have the time to read his fuller work. Finally, the reader will encounter the contribution of Darrel L. Bock. Similar to Price, Bock’s contribution will be controversial for many. Not because he is a sceptic but because he is a conservative evangelical.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views is has brought together the most prominent contemporary voices in the current quest for the historical Jesus. As stated above, and, as is the case with all the books within the Spectrum: Multiview Books series published by IVP Academic, the present volume is a goldmine for familiarizing oneself with the broader conversational voices. Still, The Historical Jesus: Five Views is among the most helpful of this type of resource and comes highly recommended to anyone interested in embarking on the quest for the historical Jesus.
The book begins with a healthy introduction to the historical landscape surrounding the quest for the historical Jesus. The reader already familiar with the ongoing discussion concerning the issues of the book will find this opening chapter to be a solid refresher to an increasingly complex conversation. The reader largely unfamiliar with the conversation will appreciate the breadth of detail overflowing from these 45 pages, and should be able to confidently place the coming chapter within the broader discussion. Because the aim of the book is to highlight and examine the various methods used to unearth the historical Jesus, the methodological survey in the introduction is invaluable. Personally, I found the introduction among the most helpful chapters in the entire book and anticipate most readers will as well—especially considering the wide spectrum of opinions that follow.
The layout seems to move from left to right across the evangelical spectrum, with ample room for interaction following each contributing article. First, the reader will encounter a self-attested “controversial essay” by Robert M. Price. Price is among the few scholars today who still maintains the notion that Jesus “probably” didn’t exist. I found myself disagreeing with Price on almost every page, but I appreciated his contribution and anticipated his interaction with the other contributors more than any of the other contributors. Second, the reader will encounter an important essay by John Dominic Crossan. Crossan has been a voice within the conversation for some time now and his interaction is valuable, but the interaction against Crossan from the other contributors was even more valuable—especially from Dunn and Bock. Third, the reader will meet a stimulating article by Luke Timothy Johnson. The reader will appreciate the brevity of Johnson’s methodological approach. However, despite my agreement with many of his points, I found his contribution mediocre at best. Fourth, the reader will encounter the contribution of James D. G. Dunn. Dunn largely summarizes and synthesizes his more detailed work on the subject. This is helpful for those unfamiliar with Dunn, or those who simply don’t have the time to read his fuller work. Finally, the reader will encounter the contribution of Darrel L. Bock. Similar to Price, Bock’s contribution will be controversial for many. Not because he is a sceptic but because he is a conservative evangelical.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views is has brought together the most prominent contemporary voices in the current quest for the historical Jesus. As stated above, and, as is the case with all the books within the Spectrum: Multiview Books series published by IVP Academic, the present volume is a goldmine for familiarizing oneself with the broader conversational voices. Still, The Historical Jesus: Five Views is among the most helpful of this type of resource and comes highly recommended to anyone interested in embarking on the quest for the historical Jesus.
November 15, 2014
This was an interesting read because it offered essays on this controversial subject (the historicity of Jesus and of what he said and did) from the perspectives of 5 established New Testament scholars having various views, right from believing that Jesus did not exist at all (Price) to an evangelical (albeit a responsible one) view (Bock), with the other 3 in between. The manner of presentation was helpful, because each contributor had the chance to respond to the others' essays, so that each essay was followed by 4 lively responses from the others. That made it interesting! The book thus gives the reader a good sense of the range of scholarly opinion on the issues. What I found disappointing, however, is that none of the essays was that satisfying because all of them were ultimately unscholarly in some respects, each revealing the preexisting and long-existing biases of each author which the scholarly aspects only selectively serviced. (Interestingly, each accuses the others of bad scholarship at some point.) So in the end I was not fully satisfied, which why it did not get 5 stars. Still, it was a very stimulating read and I recommend it.
September 27, 2016
We need more books like this. Scholars-experts-in the same field, but from divergent perspectives, summarizing their views and responding to each other's in reasoned, respectful, scholarly debate. What a fantastic way to get a good overview of a field. What a fantastic way to get a good corrective to merely agreeing or disagreeing with the first book in an unfamiliar field one might read. And above all, what a tremendous demonstration of reasoned, scholarly critique. Too many authors, bloggers, and pundits tout the benefits of critical thinking and hearing multiple viewpoints without really showing us what that looks like or how to do it. This book (and presumably the others in the "multiple views" series) demonstrates what that looks like in very positive ways.
Definitely for an upper-level undergraduate theology major and above audience. A well-read and motivated lay reader could benefit, but this seems not so much intended for that audience. Bringing this style of scholarly engagement with one another to that level of readership would change my rating to 6 stars :-)
Definitely for an upper-level undergraduate theology major and above audience. A well-read and motivated lay reader could benefit, but this seems not so much intended for that audience. Bringing this style of scholarly engagement with one another to that level of readership would change my rating to 6 stars :-)
December 3, 2014
Very good introduction to the history of the quest for the "Historical Jesus", and a presentation of and responses to 5 views. In my opinion, James Dunn presents the most fruitful and reasonable perspective. In a book like this, no contributor has the space to write an exhaustive methodology, but James Dunn manages to argue for his historical methods like none of the other contributors does. Luke Timothy Johnson also presents a quite reasonable perspective and spends some time on methodology, but I'm not convinced his perspective is as fruitful as Dunn's.
February 21, 2020
Great introduction to some of the modern approaches to the Historical Jesus.
Cossan and Luke Timothy Johnson particularly contribute two essays offering compelling orthodox approaches. Both approaches are historically rigorous and personally edifying, and still manage to avoid the oftentimes arid evidentialist methods which are not usually, in my experience, very helpful from an apologetic standpoint.
Cossan and Luke Timothy Johnson particularly contribute two essays offering compelling orthodox approaches. Both approaches are historically rigorous and personally edifying, and still manage to avoid the oftentimes arid evidentialist methods which are not usually, in my experience, very helpful from an apologetic standpoint.
August 17, 2012
Did not think much of Price - his comments where a waste of space. I enjoyed all the other views, especially the contribution put forward by James Dunn. I also liked the contributions by Luke Timothy Johnson and John Crossan. Crossan's emphasis upon eschatology is very interesting - I enjoyed his insight and his historical/critical perspective.
May 10, 2014
"The Historical Jesus: Five Views" is an excellent overview of the range of opinions in the field today – from the Jesus-myth theory to the Jesus-God theory and everything in between.
Read the rest of my review at http://www.justinnatalie.com/reviews/historical-jesus-views/
Read the rest of my review at http://www.justinnatalie.com/reviews/historical-jesus-views/
March 24, 2015
This book consists of five essays by leading scholars on the historical Jesus. After each essay, the other four scholars have a brief chance to respond. I enjoyed the essays (some more than others) and appreciated that a variety of view points were represented. Recommended to anyone who has some knowledge of textual criticism and an interest in the subject.
August 2, 2014
Overall, very good introduction to the subject. Really enjoyed James Dunn's chapter.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews