Paula Fredriksen

https://fromtheheartofeurope.eu/when-christians-were-jews-the-first-generation-b...

An interesting book on the very early history of Christianity, between the time of Jesus and the fall of Jerusalem, looking at what are effectively trace fossils in the records to get a sense of what the followers of Christ believed and did. The only real contemporary witness is St Paul in his letters, though Fredriksen also gives a lot of weight to Flavius Josephus.

The crucial point is that the early Christians expected the apocalypse at any moment, and structures therefore didn’t need to be established for the long term; but they gradually evolved from being dissident groups within local synagogues to becoming free-standing communities, a process partly driven by their acceptance of non-Jews among the ranks. (Fredriksen observes that Jesus himself was a bit hesitant about non-Jews.)

The destruction of the temple – and indeed Caligula’s earlier threat to desecrate it – convulsed the Jewish world and shook the Christians definitively into a separate channel. That’s a different story, but the decades leading up to that are well depicted in this book.… (mais)

Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews by Paula Fredriksen is an excellent well-researched book attempting to account for the mission and death of Jesus. It is very well argued but is written compactly, entrusting the reader to pay close attention at times to threads of argument and counter-argument, a dialectic necessary for disentangling such historical confusion on the subject. No words are wasted.

The blurb (above) is rather misleading by suggesting the the author begins with the crucifixion, because it is towards that decisive incident primarily that the text leads. The event is not reliably explained without an understanding of Jesus' society, its religious beliefs, practices and history, and the existing power structures in the region. The author examines the Biblical text itself, non-biblical accounts such as those of Josephus, and addresses the major theories of historians and clerics, some of whom have failed to take fully into account the situation on the ground during Jesus' time but rather assumed an unsound modern perspective. Here, briefly, is the author's persuasive claim:

By careful comparisons of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) among themselves, with the book of John, the existing letters of Paul (written before the Gospels), and other contemporary written accounts, and by knowing their historical and social context, it is possible to discern why the accounts differ considerably; that is, to identify the motives of the writers and also to recognize their possible sources and dependencies on one another. The motives themselves are informative, and properly assessing motivic portions of text as unhistorical enables a finer focus on what is historically reliable. This is the usual method of analysis (exegesis).

Based on Old Testament prophesies, many in the Jewish community in which Jesus lived were expecting (and their forebears had been expecting for centuries) a day of judgement (the apocalypse), and a messiah. They had suffered savage depopulation of the north by the Assyrians in the 8th century BC, depopulation and captivity by the Babylonians in the 6th century, other rebellions and outrages through the years, and were now chafing under the rule of Rome and her puppet rulers. There were other men before (and after) Jesus who were acclaimed here or there as a messiah, but no judgement day had yet transpired.

Jesus was the foremost teacher, healer and leader among several, and they and most other able Jews journeyed annually to Jerusalem for Passover. It was always the largest Jewish gathering of the year, and Roman soldiers always were brought in so as to keep a rebellion from breaking out, as indeed one did break out in 69 AD whereafter the Romans famously demolished the temple. But the soldiers always were vastly outnumbered and so acted proactively when possible. In Jesus' last year, the expectation emerged throughout the Passover throng that Jesus was the messiah and that the end was near. It is likely that, although Jesus' teaching foretold a future messianic apocalypse, he did not make any such claim for himself or declare that the end was imminent. But the situation developed beyond his control.

The Romans and the high priests long knew of Jesus and had found no reason for apprehension, but this turn was new and alarming for both parties, because Roman policy was to hold the high priests accountable for any Jewish attempt at insurrection, and insurrection now appeared possible. There was just one workable solution. Most safe and effective would have been for soldiers quietly to remove Jesus in the evening and crucify him out of sight of the temple complex, to be sought and found dead on the cross the next morning, a clear warning in classic Roman style. It is significant that none of Jesus' disciples were executed: when the Romans recognized a seditious plot, they routinely crucified every suspected conspirator.

Worshipers were astonished to awaken to Jesus on a cross, and soon began the various attempts to make sense of, and to find or create, meaning in his death. Some still believed that Jesus was the messiah, but this ending was unacceptable; it was later said to be better accomplished after Jesus returned three days later in either Galilee (Matthew and Mark), on the road to Emmaus (Luke) or in Jerusalem (John) and then rose to heaven. By the way, the earliest writer who addressed Jesus' return was Paul, who knew several of the 12 original apostles. He explicitly stated that Jesus had returned to earth in spirit but not in flesh and blood.

Endeavors by Paul and (the anonymous writers of circulating manuscripts called) Mark around 50-65 AD, Matthew and Luke around 85-90 AD, and John around 90-110 AD, and by subsequent commentators, to find meaning in Jesus' life and death, leaned heavily on old testament prophesies, attaching them to Jesus. Likewise, some compositions recorded after the destruction of the temple ascribe a prophesy of its destruction to him. "Prophesying" an event that had already happened was not uncommon in Old Testament writings intentionally imputed as composed before its occurrence.

Throughout the ensuing ages, some Christians continued to preach and to expect the impending arrival of the last judgement, including not a few at the end of 1999. Another such prediction was for October 22, 1844, thereafter called the "Great Disappointment" and figuring large in the founding of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

The book is well-written and annotated but would have read more easily with a few more subdivisions, each with a setup sentence to guide the reader between argument and counter-argument. This is a quibble. Anyone seriously interested in the historical Jesus will want to read this.… (mais)