Rating: 
Summary: Very Enlightening
Review: Mr. Crossan, once again, has fashioned a powerful look at how someone like Jesus could have lived in the Mediterranean world of the first century. Bringing highlights of Jesus's life into focus, Crossan has illuminated the peasant preacher, using symbolism and theory to great effect. A marvelous read.One personal revelation for me comes from the chapter which discusses Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians, 15:3-6. Although Mr. Crossan says little about it, I never realized Paul ever wrote about Jesus appearing to over "five hundred brethren at once" after his death. Paul says this is found in "the scriptures". Re-reading the four Gospels and Acts, I found no reference to the "five hundred brethren". Since the gospels weren't written until the Jewish Revolts (and probably after Paul's time), I wonder what "scriptures" he was referring to. It would be very interesting, for me at least, to know what scriptures (or Gospels) were available to him and others so soon after the Resurrection, and why they are not part of the Christian Canon.
Rating:
Summary: Very Enlightening
Review: Mr. Crossan, once again, has fashioned a powerful look at how someone like Jesus could have lived in the Mediterranean world of the first century. Bringing highlights of Jesus's life into focus, Crossan has illuminated the peasant preacher, using symbolism and theory to great effect. A marvelous read. One personal revelation for me comes from the chapter which discusses Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians, 15:3-6. Although Mr. Crossan says little about it, I never realized Paul ever wrote about Jesus appearing to over "five hundred brethren at once" after his death. Paul says this is found in "the scriptures". Re-reading the four Gospels and Acts, I found no reference to the "five hundred brethren". Since the gospels weren't written until the Jewish Revolts (and probably after Paul's time), I wonder what "scriptures" he was referring to. It would be very interesting, for me at least, to know what scriptures (or Gospels) were available to him and others so soon after the Resurrection, and why they are not part of the Christian Canon.
Rating:
Summary: Not Revolutionary, Merely A Good Story
Review: Ok, so this is a book about religion and we all know that there's no neutral when it comes to religion. But I want to cut through all the hype, bluster and nonsense. I am a single reader and this is my opinion about a book I read; no interest in audiences here since I just want to say what I think. And that is that this book tells a good story, one I find interesting and engaging. Being a distillation of Crossan's academic thesis "The Historical Jesus" from 1991 this leaves out the technical and background stuff and cuts to the chase. This improves the overall presentation and makes for a fast paced book which is sure about what it knows (or thinks it knows). Ok, so you disagree with what Crossan knows. Fine. What? You agree with him? Thats fine too. I want to say that this book reads well as a story about Jesus in which the writer imputes his own non-apocalyptic and egalitarian values and beliefs into the telling of the same. He can't be criticized for that though since its what EVERY writer does (reads the evidence, tells the story their way). Read this book as a story about Jesus, ponder it, and then go on to the next book about the historical Jesus. PoSTmodERnFoOL
Rating: 
Summary: Believe it or not
Review: One who feels he has cornered the market on religious truth will not take kindly to having anyone disagree with his interpretation of the Bible. Such a person is poorly equipped to review a this book. A book about belief has value if the ideas resonate with the reader and provide insight into our place in the world. There's no way anyone can know exactly who Jesus was, what he said and what he did. Everything we have on Jesus has been colored by interpretation. Crossan takes a historical approach, and this will be refreshing to people who are tired of interpretations that simply except every passage as truth but twist the meaning to reflect their wishes. "A fool believes every word, but the reasonable man looks for proof" - Proverbs 14:15. You can't look for proof if you don't read many sources and judge for yourself.
Rating: 
Summary: frustrating and one-dimensional
Review: Simply put, this book will not solve any of the problems it presents. If you want historical proof of Jesus, consult another book. Crosson's job is to explain away the Jesus of faith to make it easier to ignore the central message. A Zen-Jesus who says cute things compels no one to follow him. If you want to believe in Jesus, consult the Gospels. Just don't compromise for Crosson's milque-toasty Jesus who looks more at home in the politically-correct society this book is published for than the 1st century nation he lived in. There is no scholarship behind this study, and no archeology to buttress his opinions. It merely begins with the assumption that the Gospels can't possibly be telling the truth, and continues from that point. Nothing wrong with that, but a little honesty up front would have been refreshing.
Rating:
Summary: Very Interesting, But Easy For Some to Dislike
Review: So, who was Jesus? Crossan tries to answer this age-old question from a secular / academic point of view, and comes up with the answer "radical egalitarian." The approach and conclusion seem to be obstacles too large for some, either for religious reasons or because we in the US tend to be rabidly paranoid about anything whiffing of socialism, which people mistakenly believe to be a modern invention (but I would like to remind readers that St. Benedict, in his "regula" for the oldest order of Christian monks, condemned ownership of private property and forbade it in his monastery - presumably because he thought this was part of Christ's message). Those who here have tried to avenge their beliefs by attacking Crossan's credibility and methodology only prove that they are either too emotionally caught up or just plain ignorant of such things (another biblical writer - Thomas Cahill, a true believer - acknowledges Crossan and his book as "reputable, if on the edge" in his most recent work). Likewise, those who have comforted themselves with tirades about "markets" are also mistaken - after all, the economic issues they claim expertise in did not even exist in the first century. Therefore, homilies on free trade are useless in considering the life and meaning of Jesus. But these folks aside, Crossan's book still lacks the near-poetic style that has made books like "Gifts of the Jews" bestsellers. Also, his approach is more exhaustive than the intended audience is used to, giving many more references to back up each point than is customary in popular books. However, for those who don't mind these traits and who, whether they agree with Crossan or not, want to know what this segment of academia is thinking, this book is fascinating and instructive.
Rating:
Summary: Very Interesting, But Easy For Some to Dislike
Review: So, who was Jesus? Crossan tries to answer this age-old question from a secular / academic point of view, and comes up with the answer "radical egalitarian." The approach and conclusion seem to be obstacles too large for some, either for religious reasons or because we in the US tend to be rabidly paranoid about anything whiffing of socialism, which people mistakenly believe to be a modern invention (but I would like to remind readers that St. Benedict, in his "regula" for the oldest order of Christian monks, condemned ownership of private property and forbade it in his monastery - presumably because he thought this was part of Christ's message). Those who here have tried to avenge their beliefs by attacking Crossan's credibility and methodology only prove that they are either too emotionally caught up or just plain ignorant of such things (another biblical writer - Thomas Cahill, a true believer - acknowledges Crossan and his book as "reputable, if on the edge" in his most recent work). Likewise, those who have comforted themselves with tirades about "markets" are also mistaken - after all, the economic issues they claim expertise in did not even exist in the first century. Therefore, homilies on free trade are useless in considering the life and meaning of Jesus. But these folks aside, Crossan's book still lacks the near-poetic style that has made books like "Gifts of the Jews" bestsellers. Also, his approach is more exhaustive than the intended audience is used to, giving many more references to back up each point than is customary in popular books. However, for those who don't mind these traits and who, whether they agree with Crossan or not, want to know what this segment of academia is thinking, this book is fascinating and instructive.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Way to Begin A Long Process
Review: The best aspect of this work is its readability. For someone interested in the historical context of the gospel, Crossan's short work is a great way to begin. He covers a few topics in depth, a few more topics with a moderate amount of information, some topics are briefly touched upon and many topics are left unmentioned. However, this book definitely planted many ideas for follow-on study, which was what I was seeking.
Rating:
Summary: The Holy Grail of New Testament Scholarship
Review: The historical Jesus seems to have become the Holy Grail of New Testament scholarship. He is sought just as fervently and proves just as elusive. This book is actually Crossan's second quest for the historical Jesus. His first was "The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant." That book was long, meandering, and not terribly interesting. This second book is a distillation of the theories presented in the earlier book, and it has two virtues its predecessor lacked: brevity and lucidity. Crossan brings a prodigious level of scholarship to the task of finding the historical Jesus, and a reading of this book will give the student fresh insight into Jesus' nature, personality, and teachings. It will not, however, give an accurate picture of the historical Jesus. Crossan commits the same error that almost all previous questers after the historical Jesus have fallen into: He finds the Jesus he set out to look for. What, then, is an accurate picture of the historical Jesus? That is a question we must all answer for ourselves. This book, and others like it, can give us pieces of the puzzle, but the proper assembly of those pieces is up to us.
Rating: 
Summary: Bizarro-Jesus
Review: The title of this book is somewhat of a misnomer. It is not so much a "biography" (except for about five pages in the epilogue) as a summary of the author's (mostly misguided) research. The uniqueness of the person of Jesus is pretty much deep-sixed, as what is shown to be typical, according to Crossan's selective research, is used to set the parameters for this woefully inadequate portrait of Jesus. To illustrate: Jesus was a peasant, and practically all the peasants at the time were illiterate, so Jesus must have been illiterate. Therefore, you know that little incident in the synagogue where Jesus read that passage from Isaiah? Didn't happen. And peasants who were crucified in those days were usually left for the vultures to feast upon or buried in a shallow grave and eaten by dogs ("Remember those dogs at the foot of the cross!" the reader is constantly reminded). So why would Jesus be any different? Therefore, there was no Joseph of Arimethea to bury Jesus in a cave, and no stone to be rolled away because, of course, there was no literal resurrection. In fact, the differing resurrection accounts were motivated by ecclesiastical politics, this book concludes.
The concept of "open commensality" is presented as the centerpiece of Jesus' teaching and actions. Open commensality is a radical egalitarianism symbolized by eating together at the table with all no matter what their station in life.This is seen as a microcosm of Jesus' view of society where all are accepted, including the destitute, the outcasts, and sinners of every stripe. I have no problem with this, although it seems conveniently in step with 21st-century "politically correct" thinking. The problem comes where everything that is deemed to conflict with this defining characteristic of Jesus is tossed out. This is the first book I've ever read that regards the Twelve as a pure invention. It's almost as if the author is trying to outdo all that came before him in his extreme skepticism. Of course, that would make the Last Supper an invention, also, institutionalizing and ultimately ruining Jesus' pure concept of open commensality.
At least Jesus is taken seriously as a healer. But wait! That doesn't mean Jesus actually cured illnesses. His healing of diseases is regarded as a sociological phenomenon, where the sick are not physically cured but they are deemed to be no longer outcasts, as the sick were in that era. Well, maybe that works for Jesus rather limited society, but it makes no sense for society at large. This is just a typical liberal theological run-around that illustrates the modernist belief in a closed universe that allows for no possibility of the truly miraculous.
In summation, this book adds up to...not much. The Jesus presented here would be unrecognizable to believers throughout history, including those who walked with him while he was on this earth. In attempting to make Jesus "relevant" to a politically-correct post-modern world, Crossan strips him of all his uniqueness and presents him as a powerless figure unworthy of worship or following in any religious or spiritual sense. This picture of Jesus is like a jigsaw puzzle with 95% of the pieces missing.
|
