The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ by Philip PullmanMy rating: 3 of 5 stars
In my brief search through the downtown EBR library to find a New Release or Current Bestseller, I ran across Philip Pullman's new book. Since I loved the HIS DARK MATERIALS TRILOGY, I was excited to stumble across Pullman's latest, an examination/critique/alternative to the New Testament Gospels. Although THE GOOD MAN JESUS AND THE SCOUNDREL CHRIST (2010) was a somewhat interesting read, I didn't walk away too impressed or enlightened. If you plan to read this book, you should be advised that SPOILERS are ahead.
The Basics: Pullman attempts to explain how the stories of Christ became popular and widely believed in the 1st century, so he retells the Gospels as experienced by Jesus' twin brother Christ. Christ, who's actually not the scoundrel, is visited by a stranger (never clearly identified ... Christ thinks he's an angel) who advises him to write down the events of his brother Jesus' life. The stranger makes a distinction between HISTORY (which belongs to TIME and describes WHAT WAS) and TRUTH (which is BEYOND TIME and describes WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN)(pg. 99). The stranger tells Christ that he must focus on the latter in order to bring about the Kingdom of God (i.e. the Church Age, or Christianity as it has existed for these two-thousand years). Christ then writes down his observations of his brother's ministry and the observations of one of Jesus' disciples (Christ's informant). So this Christ basically shapes his account according to what he thinks SHOULD HAVE BEEN instead of how these events actually WERE.
The Pleasure Aspect: The debate between Jesus and Christ in the Wilderness about their differing ideas concerning the Kingdom of God was very interesting. Christ, in Pullman's HISTORY, plays the tempter. In addition, Christ fulfills Judas' role later in the book. Two roles that the NT Gospels assign to Satan. Since I know the Gospels relatively well, I enjoyed reading Pullman's ideas of WHAT WAS and the motivations that lead Christ to change the HISTORY in order to go BEYOND TIME.
The Argument: Pullman describes his book as "a story about how stories become stories" (back cover). Granted, the NT Gospels differ in some regards from one another, which qualifies them more within the genre of myth or legend as opposed to historical narrative. I like to think of the Gospels as a myth that I believe by faith. Pullman's attempt to explain these differences between the four Gospel accounts is just simply that--an attempt, and a very speculative attempt at that. It's just that Pullman's ideas have about as much impact as a 2nd grade girl's most powerful uppercut. Okay, so the body of Jesus was stolen and discarded by a good-intentioned mysterious stranger who wanted to bring hope to millions of people in the future, and in order to convince Jesus' 1st century contemporaries that Jesus had resurrected from the dead, he tells his twin brother Christ to pretend to be the resurrected Jesus. All I can really say is "I guess that's a legitimate conspiracy theory?" And then I might add my own speculative theories: "Or maybe someone else put on some makeup and a Jesus beard? Or maybe the disciples got together and agreed on a few lies? Or what about this: the resurrected Jesus was a well-crafted puppet controlled by the disciples from various roofs, using a complicated manipulation of strings and voice-throwing? Or better yet, maybe God thought it would be a good idea to send His own Son to Israel in order to teach the people what it means to love others? And maybe God thought it would be kind of cool if His Son would take the sins of the world and change people's hearts in order to fulfill good on the earth?"
Should you read it? I don't know. I don't think Pullman's book will make any sort of dent within Christendom. From what I understand, his theories are not groundbreaking in their originality in any sense. However, I do think Pullman's choice of medium to communicate these theories is original and creative.
View all my reviews
I was confused when I read about this book when I heard about it coming out and I am still confused after reading your review.
ReplyDeleteIs this a fictional book told to make a religious argument like, His Dark Material. Or is this simply just a bat shit crazy conspiracy theory book?
It's a fictional book told to make a religious argument (like HDM), but Pullman didn't write GOOD MAN in the same style as HDM. He wrote GOOD MAN in the same style as the NT Gospels (i.e. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John)-- short chapters, simple diction, and even simpler syntax.
ReplyDeleteIs it "bat shit crazy"? Not really. It's just speculative. Pullman's just trying to figure out how Christianity became such a widely believed religion. His arguments are similar to the argument that Mary appealed to a virgin birth to avoid the consequences of cheating on the man to whom she was betrothed. Basically, his theory is as good as anyone else's, right ... unless Pullman rooted GOOD MAN in accepted NT scholarship.
I'm not sure about how much of Pullman's material is based on scholarship. But I know if he consulted anyone, he would have had to have read John Dominic Crossan. Crossan is one of the most popular liberal NT scholars (esp. Christology). Many of N.T. Wright's arguments are direct responses to Crossan's research.