Well I think it was worth reading. It was pretty interesting to get a secular, philosophical perspective on not just Jesus but the scriptures in general. Often the saying of Paul came to my mind, “Jesus Christ, foolish to the world but the wisdom of God.” Eagleton time and time again would make points that common sense would say are absurd but the beauty and wisdom of God say are true!
Eagleton also made a large quantity of statement that I didn’t agree with concerning the validity of the scriptures. Now I am not one to fight for words like infallible and inherent but I do believe all scripture is, in one way or the other given to us by God for our good, for our benefit and guidance. It’s my position that you can’t really rip out a page of the text and say, “that probably wasn’t there originally” or “that’s not what they really meant to say”. Now that’s not easy, honestly I’m not sure what to do with the last bit of the gospel of Mark and other obscure passages but I feel like I need to deal with them because they are there, in our sacred book, our scripture.
At the end of his introduction to the Gospels Eagleton answers the question, “was Jesus a revolutionary? his answer for the most part is no. He doesn’t believe in the traditional sense that Jesus was or is a revolutionary. He’s probably right. But he concede that Jesus, in a very different way was probably more of a revolutionary then Lenin and Trotsky could have ever have been.
Eagleton asks, “Was Jesus a revolutionary?” His answers, “Perhaps the answer, then, is not that Jesus was more or less a revolutionary, but that he was both more and less.”
To that I agree!
Peace — by way of foolishness