Perspective
004
Jesus: Darling of the Media
Jesus made the cover of Time, Newsweek and U.S. News this past Easter. Also the Washington Post religion page and doubtless hundreds of other papers throughout the country.
Clearly Time won the contest for the best cover. Newsweek and U.S. News each chose details from Italian Renaissance paintings that ended up looking a little silly (Newsweek: a floating Jesus with eyes as if in a trance) or stupid (U.S. News: a blessing Jesus with a weak chin, unfocused eyes and slightly twisted lips, as if he’s trying to say something but can’t quite get it out).
Time, both inside and out, commissioned pictures that aptly illustrated the text. On the cover was a moving portrait of a traditional Jesus, with shoulder-length hair, powerful, contemplative eyes; and strong nose and nostrils. The portrait was split vertically, however. On the left side, it too looked like a Renaissance portrait, with brush marks clearly visible in the hair, a halo, the entire image cracked with age. On the right side, the same portrait was replaced with a real photograph, with real skin, pores and all. The head was backlit; the halo was gone.
The Time cover effectively contrasted the two kinds of portraits: The Christ of faith and the Jesus of history; the divine and the human.
Yet even this could not capture Christian theology in all its fullness. For Christ was both at the same time—fully human and fully divine.
What made Jesus the cover story in all three magazines was the renewed scholarly search for the historical Jesus and the accompanying questioning of history as portrayed in the Gospels.
U.S. News focused on the scholars leading the renewed search, with the idea that who they are determined what kind of Jesus they have found. All five featured scholars have appeared in BR. Marcus Borg (U.S. News calls him “the Mystic”) has been a columnist for us as well as a writer of feature stories. Major articles by John Dominic Crossan (called “the Ground Shaker”), Luke Timothy Johnson (“the Traditionalist”) and John Meier (“the Dogged Digger”) have also graced our pages. The work of Robert Funk’s Jesus Seminar is frequently discussed in BR. We were clearly ahead of the curve and remain the only print medium where a continuing, high-level discussion of these issues can be found.
What makes Jesus news for the mass media, however, is that much modern scholarship calls into question such things as Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem, the virginity of Mary, the sayings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels—and even the Resurrection. Indeed, the cover blurb on Newsweek fairly shouts: “Rethinking the Resurrection.”
All three magazines try to report the differing views of various scholars. But for this reader the differences fall through the fingers like sand. I came away not knowing what I read. I could not really identify any of the different portraits painted by the differing scholars.
Worse, there was little attempt to explain the big news (news at least to laypeople)—that scholars doubted much of the history described in the Gospels. Why were these scholars so skeptical? Time gives some general principles, but that’s about it. The reader is left with skeptical scholarly assertions but with no basis for making a decision of one’s own. (For that, you’ve got to go to BR.)
But there was another fundamental failure in these stories. All three magazines—especially Newsweek—failed to understand the difference between historical facts that are subject to verification, on the one hand, and miracles, on the other. Nor do they perceive the relationship between the two. Whether or not Jesus was born in Bethlehem is a historical fact that we can argue about, using our reason and based on whatever evidence we can muster. Whether Jesus was divine is not something that is subject to scientific verification—or disproof.
Similarly with the Resurrection. Science does not know of people who rise from the dead. That Jesus rose from the dead after three days is not subject to scientific proof or disproof. That is ultimately a matter of faith. The nature of his post-Resurrection appearances as described in the Gospels is of limited help in deciding whether or not Jesus rose from the dead.
There is much to be learned from an effort to understand the historical Jesus. It makes his life on earth more real and even more reliably known. It introduces to new possibilities and new dimensions of understanding. It brings a new richness to this unique life. But in the end, it cannot prove or disprove his birth, his Resurrection or his divinity. It is important to keep these distinctions in mind.
Jesus: Darling of the Media Jesus made the cover of Time, Newsweek and U.S. News this past Easter. Also the Washington Post religion page and doubtless hundreds of other papers throughout the country. Clearly Time won the contest for the best cover. Newsweek and U.S. News each chose details from Italian Renaissance paintings that ended up looking a little silly (Newsweek: a floating Jesus with eyes as if in a trance) or stupid (U.S. News: a blessing Jesus with a weak chin, unfocused eyes and slightly twisted lips, as if he’s trying to say something but can’t quite get […]
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.