 Excerpt on voting and color-coding from the
introduction to The Acts of Jesus
As in the first phase (1985–1991), the Fellows of
the Jesus Seminar continued the practice of voting. Voting is the most efficient way of determining whether a consensus currently exists among the Fellows on a given point. The usual scholarly
procedure is to make up one's mind privately, publish opinions arrived at in some scholarly journal, and then wait to see whether other specialists agree.
The process is glacially slow, painful, and usually indecisive. Voting also makes it possible to make a report that is readily understood by
a broad public; that public, after all, may not be interested in the arcane details and extended arguments that went into those votes. The Seminar
once again employed colored beads for voting purposes. As in the first phase, the four colors—red, pink, gray, and black—represent degrees of
judgment. The Fellows again adopted two optional ways of understanding the four categories: Option 1
red: I would include this narrative information unequivocally in the database for determining who Jesus was.
pink: I would include this narrative information with reservations (or modifications) in the database for determining who Jesus was.
gray: I would not include this narrative information in the primary database, but I might make use of some of the content in determining who Jesus was.
black: I would not include this narrative information in the primary database for determining who Jesus was.
Option 2
red: The historical reliability of this information is virtually certain. It is supported by a preponderance of evidence.
pink: This information is probably reliable. It fits well with other evidence that is verifiable.
gray: This information is possible but unreliable. It lacks supporting evidence. black: This information is improbable. It does not fit
verifiable evidence; it is largely or entirely fictive.
To be sure, the categories are not precise. They allow for some flexibility. Fellows who are uncertain of their judgment often vote gray on something
they consider a "gray area." Pink is the fall-back color for those who are more skeptical of the historical accuracy of stories but who believe a
particular account to be generally reliable. Red is not often chosen, except in instances where the information is regarded as virtually unassailable. And
because the Seminar works with weighted averages, a red consensus is not easy to achieve. The weighting system works like this:
red = 3 pink = 2 gray = 1 black = 0
Each Fellow casts a ballot on each item on the agenda. The numbers of colored beads are multiplied by their corresponding points, the points are
added up and then divided by the number of votes in order to determine the weighted average. We then divide by 3 to convert the scale to
percentages—to yield a scale of 1.00 rather than a scale of 3.00. The result is a scale we divide into four quadrants:
red: .7501 and up pink: .5001 to .7500 gray: .2501 to .5000
black: .0000 to .2500
This system seems superior to one that relies on majorities or pluralities of one type or another. In a system that made the dividing line between pink
and gray a simple majority, nearly half of the Fellows would lose their vote in a close contest. There would be only winners and losers. By using
weighted averages, all votes count. Black votes in particular readily pull an average down, as students know who have one "F" in a course along with
several "A's." Yet this feature seems consonant with the methodological skepticism that was a working principle of the Seminar: when in doubt,
leave it out. The weighted average also gave Fellows good reason to weigh their votes carefully: the end result could be dramatically affected by a single deviant vote. Voting of the Words of Jesus Copyright
© 1998 Polebridge Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the copyright holder.
Top of page |
