Then, in October 2010, I got the opportunity to see and hear him in person at Mayflower United Church of Christ in Oklahoma City along with Joanna Dewey as a part of a Jesus Seminar on the Road program. Their topic was “First-Century Jesus Movements: How Did Christianity Evolve?” It was truly fascinating, and I was blown away by their insight.
Trying to stay on a budget, I limited myself to purchasing only one book, and Re-Imagine the World: An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus
For me it was an easy initial read, but many of the laity in the church I serve (First United Methodist Church of Wichita Falls, Texas) did not find it quite as easy as I did. So, as I read it again in preparation for leading discussions on the book, I could see where some might have trouble with parts of it. It is one thing to read it and understand it; it is another thing to explain what it means to others! Scott does use some “big” or less-used words; however, in general, when a new or relatively unknown topic is mentioned, there are set-apart “Cameo Essays & Texts” that are strategically placed near the introduced topic to help make it more clear. I found these immensely helpful and wish more authors / publishers would do this!
The premise of the book is that through telling parables, Jesus “re-imagines” how the world is, showing that the socially and culturally imposed worldviews of the first century (and even today) are sometimes very wrong. Jesus’ parables thus seek to change:
- How we view the world;
- How we view God and God’s role in the world; and
- How we view ourselves and our role in the world.
For instance, he uses the examples of the beatitudes, which he (and the Scholars Version
Scott’s approach is to consider each parable in it’s first century context at the time of Jesus’ ministry. That means, he often pulls it out of the context of the gospel in which it is found, but he shows at the same time how the gospel writer misused the parable to begin with. Here’s an example.
Matthew’s gospel sets up the parable of the unforgiving slave (Matthew 18:23-34) with Peter asking how many times he should forgive one who has sinned against him. Jesus’ response is essentially infinite (77 times or 70×7 times). Then Matthew puts this parable in which the king, who Matthew thinks is God, will only forgive one time (despite the fact that Matthew 5:48 says we are to be perfect / whole / impartial as God is perfect / whole / impartial). Scott argues persuasively that Jesus does not equate the king with God, which gives a completely different interpretation of the parable. I won’t tell you the rest of Scott’s interpretation outside the context of Matthew, though, as I want you to read the book! ;c)
In addition, where there are parallels between parables in different gospels (including the Gospel of Thomas), Scott notes them and also shows where some of the differences between the different versions probably go back to redaction of the gospel writers – making the parables more inline with their own writing style and focus.
An aspect of Scott’s writing style that I thoroughly enjoyed (but other readers at my church did not) is that he sometimes leaves you hanging at the end of the chapter in which he has interpreted a parable. You’re left wanting more – wanting to know how it fits into the big picture of Jesus’ life and ministry. He does exactly that, though in chapters 12-13. So, if you are finding it difficult to read, you might do as members of the Living the Questions Sunday School class did and read those chapters first and as you go along chapter-by-chapter.
I thoroughly recommend this book to you. Members of a recent study that I led also said that this was one of the best books they have used for study. Thus, I hope you’ll consider reading and sharing your insights below!
You are clear what you took away from the book. What was the point of clarity for the laity who used this as a study? Did the take away from either class meet your expectations? I assume the writer wanted to make a few points. Was the book successful in context of lay classmates?
What is your honest evaluation in who the real audience this book was meant for? You state much regarding the complexity of thought.
I think there are a few reasons the lay class who went through the book on their own had trouble with the book:
1) They did not grasp going into the book that Scott would look at these parables from Jesus’ context, not the context of the Gospel writers. Thus, they approached the book with “the way they’ve always heard the parables interpreted.” Scott could have been more clear about that in the beginning. Some in both classes were not quite ready to look at the parables in that way.
2) Scott’s writing style is to hold off on drawing conclusions about implications until the end of the book. He doesn’t give simple answers at the end of each chapter, nor does he begin to weave the meaning of the chapters together until the end. Once some in that class realized that he did this in Chapter 12, they went back and forth each week between the chapter and chapter 12 to help make sense of it all. Thus, the desires for “immediate gratification” and “easy answers” were not met!
3) Some were taken aback that Scott is a fellow of the Jesus Seminar, so they never gave him any credibility.
Scott says at the beginning that he is writing the book for the laity, which is a departure for him as he usually writes very scholarly books. It does lean more scholarly, but I do believe that lay people familiar with progressive Christian thought and the concept of the historical Jesus should have no problem reading or understanding the book.
That being said, I don’t think Jesus’ message is as easy or simple as pop-Christianity tries to make it; thus, this book is not easy or simple. Only those serious about Bible study (and willing to have their understandings and pre-conceived notions tested) should approach this book.
The group I led through the book was more willing to put in the effort to understand it all, but we do that kind of study all the time. What they took away certainly met my expectations, and I think they met Scott’s expectations. The other class (who used to be willing to put in that effort) had less success, but a few still found it very worthwhile and insightful.