Charissa DeLuca- Final thoughts on Fisk

     My overall feelings about this book were good; I enjoyed the book because it gave me some insight about Jesus as a human rather than a spiritual messiah without making my conclusions for me. I feel that I learned a lot about the intertextuality of the Gospels and also about Old Testament writings. After class discussion today I was left with many thoughts and questions that Fisk did not mention in his writings. One thing I wondered about was why he only emphasized the Gospels. There are many other important books in the New Testament that were not mentioned. Can we learn anything about the historical Jesus through these unmentioned books? Another major idea that came to my mind was how and when Jesus began to be thought of in a more spiritual sense. I understand that some saw him as a new world messiah that was “sent” to fulfill a prophecy from the Old Testament, but beside the fact that he may or may not be the fulfillment of a prophecy, why is he studied spiritually rather than historically? If what some stories and traditions say about him is true: that he is just a man that did some radical things, why is he not studied in that way? There are many historical figures throughout history that compelled people to believe their teachings such as, Martin Luther King or Benjamin Franklin. So why is Jesus not seen in the same light as these figures in history? There is no way to prove that Jesus performed miracles or that God spoke to him through the clouds or that he was resurrected from the tomb, so why not look at him from the angle of the things that can be proven. Can’t Jesus just be a man that moved nations to faith in God and aided people in their (possibly psychological) recovery from illness? I would say that is still pretty remarkable even without all the stories of miracles and metaphysical possibilities.