| Abstract: | Hal Childs has written a solid, subtle, and courageous evaluation of the state of Jesus scholarship, focusing on a critique of the work of John Dominic Crossan. The impact of the fact that the scholars in this field are functioning within the limitations of Cartesian epistemology and ontology is addressed throughout this work, but in a subtle and respectful manner. More directly addressed is the fact that the  historical Jesus cannot be discovered solely from that perspective; it requires what Childs terms a fundamentally hermeneutic, archetypal and psychological approach (2000, p. 2). The term historical is in quotes because Childs carefully distinguishes the object of the study from what we like to think of as scientific knowledge. |
