Loren Rosson has a helpful review of Robert Webb and Kathleen Corley (eds.), Jesus and Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ on Amazon and reproduced on the Xtalk e-list:
Jesus and Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ (Amazon)
Jesus and Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ (Xtalk)
In my view, he's perhaps a little too harsh on Crossan, a little too generous to me and about right about the rest, but it's a thoughtful and well-written review. I really must get my own thoughts out about this book; hope to get a chance soon.
Update (Thursday, 01.36): this has developed into a very interesting thread and I've not been able to resist sending in contributioins myself -- click on the link above to read the archive.
2 comments:
The notion that there was a real pilate in history who should have behaved differently to his representation by the gospel writers is extremely problematic. Such a view completely omits from the critical analysis of the Jesus/Pilate encounter the narrative logic of the event and the narrative content that preceded it,especially the various representations of the power and charismatic personality of Jesus. The Jesus of the gospel narratives is a transformative personality whose power to disturb, challenge or change individuals and crowds alike is the foundation of his mission. Any appeal to a "historical Pilate" without reference to the logic of the gospel narrative is supremely irrelevant to the elucidation of the gospels. The Gospel account of the encounter of Jesus and Pilate is the only one we will ever have ; no other exists outside the imaginings of biblical scholars. And somehow theres is supposed to have some kind of superior historical status! Why biblical scholars persist in this fallacious mode of commentary is beyond my comprehension. Is it an appetite for contented insularity and arrogant irrelevance that drives it?
The notion that there was a real pilate in history who should have behaved differently to his representation by the gospel writers is extremely problematic. Such a view completely omits from the critical analysis of the Jesus/Pilate encounter the narrative logic of the event and the narrative content that preceded it,especially the various representations of the power and charismatic personality of Jesus. The Jesus of the gospel narratives is a transformative personality whose power to disturb, challenge or change individuals and crowds alike is the foundation of his mission. Any appeal to a "historical Pilate" without reference to the logic of the gospel narrative is supremely irrelevant to the elucidation of the gospels. The Gospel account of the encounter of Jesus and Pilate is the only one we will ever have ; no other exists outside the imaginings of biblical scholars. And somehow theres is supposed to have some kind of superior historical status! Why biblical scholars persist in this fallacious mode of commentary is beyond my comprehension. Is it an appetite for contented insularity and arrogant irrelevance that drives it?
Post a Comment