Philip Pullman and Jesus

Thanks to Rev'd Richard Perkins for mentioning that Philip Pullman, of His Dark Materials fame, has a new book due out in two days time called The Good Man Jesus and The Scoundrel Christ (Canongate Books).

Here is the Amazon UK blurb:

This is a story. In this ingenious and spell-binding retelling of the life of Jesus, Philip Pullman revisits the most influential story ever told. Charged with mystery, compassion and enormous power, The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ throws fresh light on who Jesus was and asks the reader questions that will continue to resonate long after the final page is turned. For, above all, this book is about how stories become stories.

It sounds as if Paul might be cast as the real baddie of the piece. Pullman says:

By the time the gospels were being written, Paul had already begun to transform the story of Jesus into something altogether new and extraordinary, and some of his version influenced what the gospel writers put in theirs...

Paul was a literary and imaginative genius of the first order who has probably had more influence on the history of the world than any other human being, Jesus certainly included. I believe this is a pity

The idea that Paul distorted the message of Jesus is neither original nor sound.

As Perks points out, New Testament scholar, Revd Dr David Wenham, has written a definitive study of the relationship between Jesus and Paul Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity. You can hear Wenham speak in Balham on 9th May.

Narrow, nasty and negative

The same kind of charges could no doubt have been made (quite wrongly!) against the Apostle Paul. Galatians 1:6-9.

The New Perspective on Paul

Some of the comments I made below regarding the so-called Federal Vision (FV) could equally be made about the so-called New Perspective on Paul (NPP) with which FV has sometimes been associated.

We must distinguish between E. P. Sanders, Jimmy Dunn, Tom Wright and others, and them and FVers.

I hold firmly to, preach and regularly defend the Reformation and post-Reformation "sola"s of salvation in Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone, to the glory of God alone and to sola Scriptura, but I think there are things to learn from NPP, not least a more corporate understanding of salvation.

Go for the corporate and you get the individual thrown in. Stick with the individual and you may never get the corporate.

We may also distinguish:

(1) What Paul meant

(2) What Luther said

And debate whether or not (2) necessarily follows from (1). I think it does! But Luther was not Paul.

There is some value in trying the read Paul as a Jew against the background of Second Temple Judaism with reference to Inter-testamental and 1st Century literarture. But in so doing, no one need sell out on the Reformation, go over to Rome or give up on the gospel.

as Saint Paul saith in the twelfth chapter of Hebrews

I was surprised to read the above in the BCP service for the visitation of the sick (p314).

Why were so many people so convinced throughout church history that the Apostle Paul wrote Hebrews?

Now we seem to be sure only that someone other than Paul wrote it! Anyone! Barnabas, Apollos, anyone but Paul!

It would be an interesting blind reading test, wouldn't it, to take some modern authors works and see if we could tell who wrote what? Maybe we just don't allow Paul enough range?

PS. the word "bastards" comes on the next page, he he! I wonder if those who love the language of the Prayer Book and want to hear more of it in church could stomach that?

PPS. There's a jolly strong absolution on page 317 too:

Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences: And by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

We should have read this at Vicar factory before we pledged ourselves to the Prayer Book!