Re: Tom Wright tapes
Thanks for your informative summary!
At 08:44 PM 8/2/98 -0700, Peter Thomas Chattaway wrote:
>> From: Bob Schacht <Robert.Schacht@...>"Is it not extraordinary to the point of being a miracle, that so loose
>> Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 09:19:58 -0700
>> Subject: Tom Wright
>> Want to check out Tom Wright's approach to the historical Jesus, but
>> don't have the time to read his books? Help is at hand! You can now buy
>> his 6 part video, Jesus: The New Way! for $60 from Christian Book
>> Distributors, at http://www.christianbook.com
>[ snip ]
>> Has anyone seen this? How helpful do you think it would be for
>> introducing a bunch of pew sitters to HJ research?
>I think it provides a viable alternative to the sort of homogenized
>presentation that we saw with the PBS special _From Jesus to Christ_,
>depending on what you make of Wright's own hypotheses.
>He glosses over some problems, though. For example, he asserts that we
>can't squeeze Jesus into a top-down theology but must, rather, begin with
>Jesus and build our theology up from there. Fair enough, but --
>considering his video targets a church-based audience for the most part --
>how do you get people with strong theological presuppositions to put those
>aside and do their history? *Should* you ask them to put those
>presuppositions aside? What about the fact that Wright's reconstruction
>of the historical Jesus is based largely on the synoptics -- a theology
>built up from the Jesus in those gospels would be quite different from a
>theology built up from the gospel of John, would it not?
>In one respect, then, Wright's video series is as flawed as the PBS
>special: it presents a more-or-less homogenized set of conclusions (more
>forgiveable in Wright's case than in the PBS case because Wright speaks
>only for himself, whereas the PBS ostensibly spoke for a plurality of
>scholars) without ever really getting into the *methods* by which those
>conclusions are reached.
>It is even *more* flawed than the PBS special on an aesthetic level, I
>would argue. It uses footage from The New Media Bible (the four-hour
>adaptations of Genesis and Luke, the latter of which was re-edited and
>partially re-shot to become the two-hour _Jesus_ film distributed by
>Campus Crusade), _The Revolutionary_ (a Trinity Broadcasting Network
>"virtual reality" production, whatever they mean by that) and at least one
>other stage performer's adaptation of Luke, and these clips aren't exactly
>woven into the video series all that seamlessly. Plus the music is really
>annoyingly churchy, perhaps pietistic in a suburban-synthesizer sort of
>way, and it sometimes threatens to drown out Wright's narration -- the
>combination of film clips, the narration, and brand-new music threatens to
>go into sensory overload, there's too much for the viewer to sort through.
>If you've ever seen Wright deliver one of his lectures, you'll recognize
>both the tone and the content of his narration (it really, really doesn't
>need the musical accompaniment -- sorry, but the music really bugs me).
>And, whatever misgivings I have about the series, it's as good a means as
>any to introduce people (who would never read Wright's books or happen to
>be around when he flies in to do one of his lectures) to Wright's stuff.
>Peter T. Chattaway | "All you touch and all you see is all your life
>16397 Glenmoor Ct. | will ever be." -- Pink Floyd
>Surrey, BC V4N 1V2 | "All is touch and vision in a passionate kiss, and
>petert@... | life's a drab curtain ready to be raised." -- Da
and ill-constructed a narrative in an antique translation of a dubious
text should after so many centuries still have power to quell and
dominate a restless, opinionated, overexercised and undernourished,
Malcolm Muggeridge _Jesus Rediscovered_ (1969), writing about
the KJV New Testament -