Rating: 
Summary: Two Views on Jesus: What Kind of Christ is He?
Review: N.T. Wright, formerly of Oxford University and Marcus Borg of Oregon University enter into a very thoughtful discussion on Jesus Christ. This book is special for several reasons. One of the most important is that, unlike other religious topical books where one author takes another shot at the other author; both men stay above-board, focusing their thoughts on the discussion at hand. It is an academic work written for the layman without sacraficing academic intergrity.Secondly, both men approach the subject with reverance. Areas of discussion in this book range from a historical, sociological, and theological lens. Both men discuss Jesus divinty, his resurrection, and the nature of what it means to be a Christian. I have rarely ever agreed with Borg, but have always admired his approach to the dialogue. Unlike other liberal Jesus Seminar individuals, he takes great care to outline his views without being condensending. N.T. Wright presents a more traditional Christianity, and in the end- history, source documents, and logical arguments work in his favor. This book, however, is not so much a debate, but a discussion. This adds to the books flavor. When people are not trying to "score points" but instead deal with the topic, more depth into the discussion is gained. An outstanding work.
Rating:
Summary: An Articulate and Respectful Theological Debate
Review: Seven of ten Americans today would likely describe themselves as Christians, although they would disagree widely on just what that statement means, historically, today, and after death. Current Christian theologians are much closer to consensus at a very general level, (and that consensus would hold some surprises for many of the laity), but differ sharply on their answers to deeper, more precisely framed questions that are at the core of the faith. This book presents a very respectful and articulate debate between two of the most accessible theologians writing today. Each pair of chapters contains their answers, and reasons behind them, to an explicit and clearly stated question. In short, we have two careful scholars -- both intelligent, well educated, strongly Christian, and completely devoted to their subject - who have agreed to disagree. Reading their arguments will show you what current Christian theologians consider to be important unresolved issues of their faith and come to your own conclusion as to which answer you believe. I am not a theologian, competent to judge the match, but I confess to giving the victory to Borg - either because I instinctively find his answers more satisfying, or because he seems the more pursuasive writer. But who "won" the debate is not really important. What counts is that the reader is treated to a rare view of two sides of the theological topics of current interest, presented in exceptionally clear, down-to-earth language that uses the highly specialized vocabulary of theology only when absolutely necessary. Whether you consider yourself a Christian or not, reading the book would give you a richer appreciation of the faith.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting introduction to the historical Jesus debate
Review: THE MEANING OF JESUS is an excellent introduction to the historical Jesus debate written by two respected Christian New Testament scholars. The conservative position is defended by N.T. Wright while the liberal position by Marcus Borg. The book itself consists of a series mini-debates on specific historical topics like historical methodology, the sayings of Jesus, the crucifixion, the resurrection, the incarnation, the virgin birth, the second coming, etc. Unfortunately, because the format of the book only allowed each scholar to write one statement (chapter) on each topic, there was no opportunity for each scholar to respond to the other's arguments. Still, I thought this book was an excellent introduction to the disagreements in NT scholarship between conservatives and liberals. One other comment: as someone interested in the historicity of the resurrection, I found N.T. Wright's chapter on the resurrection very helpful. Although other conservatives have often argued that no first-century Jew could have believed that Jesus was risen from the dead and yet suppose that his corpse rotted in the grave, no other writer has explained that argument as clearly as N.T. Wright. I'm not sure if I agree with Wright's conclusion, but I appreciated the clarity Wright brought to the discussion.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent and thought provoking
Review: The Meaning of Jesus is co-written by N T Wright and Marcus Borg and is presented as a dialogue of sorts between a liberal and traditionalist reading of Jesus and his portrayal in the biblical material. From both perspectives and in dialogue with each other many of the key issues of Jesus debate are covered such as the idea of the Virgin birth, the incarnation, resurrection and parousia. Both viewpoints are clearly argued in serious but still easily digestible essays. In spite of the differences (which are in no way minimised) the communion and respect each author gives to the other's work shines through which is really encouraging.
I found this book engaging and it reminded me all over again how revolutionary and worthy of attention is the person who is the focus of the book. Most illuminating was Borg's distinction between the pre-Christian and Post-Easter Jesus (which is not strictly synonymous with the more common Christ of Faith and Jesus of history approach) as it shows how liberals can have a vital faith that is rooted in tradition rather than the mere appropriation of enlightenment rationality. Perhaps the most abiding influence of this book is that it has inspired me to read again the narratives and consequently is the first time in a while that I can honestly say I was excited to read the bible. Definitely recommended!
Rating:
Summary: A Paradigm for Christian Scholarship
Review: The Meaning of Jesus offers not only excellent scholarship, but a refreshing spirit of unity on a decisive issue. Rather than merely one author, the book is written by Marcus Borg and N.T. Wright, two leading scholars in the the study of Jesus. Although both authors use respected techniquest they come to different, often drastically so, conclusions. Both Borg and Wright hold a high view of Christianity and history. They both present clear, well reasoned arguments on key issues regarding the historical figure of Jesus and the faith of Christianity (The divinity of Jesus, the virgin birth, meaning of the crucifixion, truth of the resurrection etc.). The book is well written and fast paced (compared to more in-depth works) and offers a good example on how to politely discuss religious matters.
Rating:
Summary: A Paradigm for Christian Scholarship
Review: The Meaning of Jesus offers not only excellent scholarship, but a refreshing spirit of unity on a decisive issue. Rather than merely one author, the book is written by Marcus Borg and N.T. Wright, two leading scholars in the the study of Jesus. Although both authors use respected techniquest they come to different, often drastically so, conclusions. Both Borg and Wright hold a high view of Christianity and history. They both present clear, well reasoned arguments on key issues regarding the historical figure of Jesus and the faith of Christianity (The divinity of Jesus, the virgin birth, meaning of the crucifixion, truth of the resurrection etc.). The book is well written and fast paced (compared to more in-depth works) and offers a good example on how to politely discuss religious matters.
Rating: 
Summary: A Study By Pseudo-Intellectuals
Review: The two authors, who are recognized biblical scholars, discuss the Bible, whether or not Jesus knew he was the Messiah, and if, in fact, he was the Messiah. In alternate chapters, they discuss stories from the bible and speculate whether they are true events or simply metaphors used to make a point. For example, Borg contends that the marriage feast of Canaan was simply a metaphor to dramatize Jesus' transition to His role as the Messiah. Possibly. But what I found annoying about the book was the back and forth debate about whether Jesus actually said and did the things attributed to him, as if it were a scientific examination. They question whether he delivered the Sermon On the Mount, His place of birth (Borg thinks He was actually born in Nazareth), the virgin birth, Jesus' comments at His trial, and (Borg contends that since there were no spectators at the trial there is no way we can know what was said) and on and on. But they offer no convincing evidence to support their views. They scrutinize the Gospels as if Philadelphia lawyers wrote them. "I, and most mainline scholars, do not think he said these things. He did not speak like this." How, pray tell, do we know how He spoke except for what is written? Another precious quote from Borg: "If you think you are the Messiah, you're not." There is a lengthy debate about the virgin birth, which can be resolved easily: If you believe in God and miracles, the virgin birth was no challenge and is readily accepted. If you don't believe in God; you don't believe in the virgin birth. The authors go on and on as if they were scientists seeking the truth; in fact, they are pseudo-intellectuals trying desperately to sound like scientists. Borg writes: "Very early on, we metaphorized our history, and since then we have often historzed our metaphors. When we literalize metaphors, we get nonsense." Nonsense, indeed. This example of Borg's writing can serve as a definition of nonsense. I lament the sacrifice of trees necessary to produce the book as well as the waste of ink and glue. Nicholas Calvano
Rating:
Summary: The way Jesus studies should be done
Review: This book brought a lump to my throat. What rare respect. I have read many "Jesus books" and I am tired of all the biting criticism of opposing vews. Here we have a book that presents two very different views without rancor. It is so handy to have these views presented in a single volume. I am surprised and extremely pleased to see that two Christians with such different views of Jesus are good friends and respect the other's views. Borg and Wright have had many personal discussions with one another, so each is very familiar with the other's arguments. Bravo to both of them. I especially liked the following two quotations: By Wright: "And the way to solve all such questions, whether to do with Jesus or to do with the sources, is once more the scientific method of hypothesis and verification." By Borg: "My point is not to deny an afterlife. But it wasn't central to Jesus' teaching. The vision of the Christian life that flows out of taking him seriously is about a relationship with the Spirit of God that transforms our lives in the present, not about a reward that only comes later." THIS IS THE IDEAL WAY TO DEBATE SUCH ISSUES. Why can't other scholars show similar respect for opposing views?
Rating: 
Summary: An adequate introduction to the historical Jesus debate
Review: This book is not geared toward those who are already familiar with the issues involved in the debate over who Jesus of Nazareth really was. Instead, it was written to introduce people to the discussion and give a general representation of the two opposing perspectives. N.T. Wright presents the conservative view, which means that he believes the gospels give us generally reliable history, that Jesus made outrageous claims to divinity, performed miracles, rose from the dead, and is indeed divine as taught by traditional Christianity. Marcus Borg gives the liberal side. He believes the gospels contain far more myth than history, that Jesus did not claim anything out of the ordinary in regards to a unique relationship to God, and that he did not physically rise from the dead. Neither writer is really able to give detailed arguments for their views because of the large amount of ground they attempt to cover in this book. I did like the book's format. Each section addressed a specific topic (reliability of gospels, divinity claims, etc.) with each writer devoting a chapter to the topic. They then rotated which writer was first for each topic. This prevented one person from always getting the last word. If you're already familiar with the historical Jesus debate, then I'd give it two stars (and recommend passing on this one). However, if you're new to the issue I'd say its worthy of four stars and suggest it as a good introduction to a fascinating debate.
Rating:
Summary: Jesus never existed
Review: This book might be an interesting read for sci-fi fans, but it's fatally flawed as history because Jesus never existed. As historians are making clear, there's no evidence for the historical Jesus outside the gospels, which are unreliable documents meant to convert people, not teach history. There's the further problem that there is no God, any more than there is an Easter bunny or Santa Claus, so there can't really be a son of God, can there? Christianity is a primitive and silly belief system, and it's really not worth reading about.
| 
