Robert W. Funk (1926–2005)

An interesting study of the historical reliability of scripture. The often quoted, "only 18% of what it says Jesus said was actually said by the man himself," often provokes a visceral negative reaction in some readers. Many people fixate upon the figure of Jesus (and equate that historical person to Christ, the theological figure) that they forget that the earliest Gospel (Mark's) was completed around the 60's CE, this was before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE. This afforded Christians show more plenty of time to develop their thought after the death of their prophet and include those insights in their writings--just as would be the case with the other Gospels. To say, "Jesus didn't really say that," does not mean the statement is without value, nor that it was not said by a student of Jesus who, one might argue, was a co-founder of the Christian faith. Remember that Jesus lived and died as a Jew, it was his followers who formed a cult around his teachings. If you have a high Christology and insist that the incarnation is utterly required for the Christian life, this might be a problem. With somewhat more historical perspective, however, it does not detract at all from the importance of the Gospels, nor from Jesus' teachings, it simply provides additional depth to our understanding of the development of the faith and much-needed contextualization for the Gospels.

Much is made of the voting procedures applied by the Seminar. However, people forget that a very similar method was used to compose the Nicene Creed, as well as actually form the Bible canon itself. That is, a vote was held and it was assumed that God's guidance would penetrate that voting procedure.

This is a must for anyone interested in serious Bible study. I might even go so far as to suggest it be required reading for all Christians. However, many Christians view their faith as such a fragile thing that books such as this one are considered dangerous to consider, lest one's faith be broken by too much thought and questions. show less

Usually enjoy anything from the Jesus Seminar or the Westar Institute. This book attempts to talk to a number of different audiences. One is the walking wounded bitter disillusioned ex church members who found their church spared love but not condemnation. Another is the reliable but ambient hungry member who attends but drives on a empty tank. A third is those who have never really studied Christianity or Judaism to know if they reject them. He talks about others but the purpose of the book show more is to engage you to be honest to Jesus so find out what that means.

You will be surprise what you don't have to accept!

My position is that I am a seeker on a journey but I am born within Judaic-Christian culture so their spiritual treasures will resonant with me in different ways then the treasures of other expressions of spirituality. show less

The premise is flawed: representatives of the major Christian denominations vote on *unique* sayings that are both unprecedented and likely to be truly the words of Jesus. The "unprecedented"/unique suggests that if a parable, etc., could be documented as being before Jesus therefore it could not be authentic Jesus, hence the high score for the Gospel of Thomas, which is portrayed as the nearest we have to the legendary "Q" document. Clearly it makes sense that Jesus would use preexisting show more anecdotes to make his point. The more interesting premise is that interpolations of clearly Gnostic or other post-Jesus thoughts should be viewed with some skepticism, hence the low score for the Gospel of John. Overall it is an interesting tool, but one that surely must be used in conjunction with many other sources. show less

A bunch of Berkeley professors etc. trying to find God intellectually - a not very useful approach. Interesting mostly because it includes the gospel of Thomas quotations which were accepted by several of the early Bishops as scripture. I scanned the book over and put it back on the shelf.