In Adam Gopnik's essay for The New Yorker titled "We're Still Not Done With Jesus," he explores the controversies surrounding the origins of Christianity by presenting two contrasting scholarly views. Gopnik leans toward the perspective that early Christians mythologized events, yet completely sidesteps a critical examination of the Gospels as potential eyewitness accounts, which raises questions about the credibility of his analysis. This omission disappoints readers hoping for a balanced exploration of how the persistence of Christianity might stem not just from its moral narratives but also from its historical claims, which deserve serious consideration.
The absence of any meaningful treatment in Gopnik's essay of the Gospels as credible eyewitness accounts suggests a one-sided approach to the debate around Christian origins.
Readers deserve a fuller answer regarding why we aren't done with Jesus, one that addresses the blend of moral power and historical plausibility of the Gospel narratives.
Collection
[
|
...
]