Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium

Rating:
Summary: Not Quite Right...
Review: As a Religion Major at an Ivy Leage college, I'm always interested in new and objective ways to look at subjects like those covered in this book. It was assigned to be read previous to one of our seminar discussion classes, and the reaction of the class was almost unanimous. Ehrman is missing something in this book by looking at Jesus the Nazarene from a wholly historical perspective. There is not enough to work with to form a proper image of Jesus in the manner Ehrman. Ehrman bases a lot of his assertions on the synoptic gospels, but the only things that these can accurately be said to demonstrate are the views of the communities that existed twenty to thirty years after the death of Jesus. Example: Ehrman points out that the first words of Jesus in the Marcan gospel include "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Obviously Christ was an apocalyptic prophet? All Ehrman has proven through this, however, is that the community that developed thought they were living in the last days of the world. Not a surprise, as this has been a belief held by many groups throughout history, before and after the time of Jesus.

Aside from a questionable approach, Ehrman's cocky tone pervades the book. It's unfortunate that Ehrman let this interfere with his credibility, but it certainly does detract from his argument: he constantly writes as though organized religion were an unimportant and rather cute relic from the past.

In place of this book, I'd recommend the Cambridge Companion to Jesus. This book is divided in two: the first half looking at the historical Jesus, and trying to discern what can be known about him. The second half focuses on the theology and all that has grown around the idea of a salvific Jesus over the last two millennia.

Rating:
Summary: This is the one
Review: As an amateur scholar who has read/studied over thirty works on the historical Jesus, I would like to take this opportunity to highly recommend Bart Ehrman's Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium. If you read only one popular book on the historical Jesus, this should be the one. If you are waiting impatiently for the third installment of Meier's A Marginal Jew; this should provide a pleasant and useful distraction. If after reading Ehrman's book, you find yourself wanting more of the same, I would like to suggest Dale C. Allison's Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet. Shalom.

Rating:
Summary: A Sensible Portrayal
Review: At first, this one made me nervous. All too often, when I hear that a scholar has written a work about the historical Jesus that is geared for the general public, I brace myself for yet another wild ride on the roller coaster of unfounded assumptions, misapplied historical methods, and everyone's favorite-a selective use of scripture references that proves one's case beyond a shadow of a doubt. The result? A mass embracing of some wild-eyed theories about who Jesus "really" was.

The strength in Ehrman's work is that he will have none of this nonsense. Ehrman is committed to an honest, thorough historical investigation that is consistent in its application of criteria for evaluating ancient texts and personalities. His conclusion (in the tradition of Schweitzer): Jesus was a first-century Jewish apocalypticist who saw his mission as one of preparation for the Kingdom of God, a kingdom that was to come in power in Jesus' (or at least in his disciples') own lifetime.

Such an assertion, while common in academia, is not usually espoused by members of the general public. In fact, I don't agree with Erhman's conclusion. However, the reader will get a glimpse at a fine scholar using the tools of a historical critic to reconstruct a feasible portrait of who Jesus of Nazareth was. Because of his methodological integrity, his conclusion is much more responsible and well-founded than Crossan's cynic or Fiorenza's feminist revolutionary. Especially helpful is his discussion concerning context (see esp. chapters 7 and 11), because Jesus HAS to make sense as one addressing the concerns of someone living in first-century Palestine, a truth that is all too often ignored.

Despite Ehrman's fine accomplishment in this volume, though, more trees are likely to tumble in order to produce the canvasses for the novel ideas of Jesus scholars who are less prudent. One who has read Ehrman's work, however, will not be so easily tossed to and fro on the winds of speculation as those who wish (or even prefer) to stay uninformed about responsible historical investigation.

Rating:
Summary: very readable and useful
Review: Bart Ehrman conveys to us an historian's view of who Jesus was. His conclusion is the same as that of the famous humanitarian doctor and theologian, Albert Schweitzer, in the early years of the 20th century: Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet, who was convinced that Doomsday was about to arrive very soon, even in his own lifetime. The present age was evil, and the imminent coming of the Kingdom of God would change everything. Hence you must prepare yourself. Give away all your possessions to the poor: a rich man has little chance of entering the Kingdom of God. Everything will be turned upside down: the weak and poor will prevail over the rich and mighty. Mend your ways: Love God above everything! Love your neighbour as yourself! Love even your enemy!

Apocalyptic ideas were common in Palestine 2000 years ago. And they turn up, in various forms, throughout Christendom. Ehrman provides illuminating examples from present-day America. However, the apocalyptic interpretation of Jesus is rather out of favour with most contemporary Christian scholars. But Ehrman can rely on solid arguments. The first third of his book is an admirably clear presentation of the way a professional historian goes about constructing his picture of the past. He has to assess the date of his sources, and analyse their relation to each other, their possible bias, and their context. All this should be required reading for people who think they must interpret their Bible literally.

In most of the rest of the book Ehrman uses his critical apparatus for discussing the Jesus figure of the Gospels and Acts. This leads him to a conclusion which is very much in line with that of the majority of modern Christian scholars. Regrettably, Ehrman's main point, Jesus' apocalypticism, tends to recede into the background in this part of the book. However, it is reasserted with some force in the final chapters.

As the product of a clear-sighted and well-informed liberal scholar, this book has much to offer. Ehrman presents current scholarly opinion clearly and fairly, and in a very readable style. In my opinion, however, he could have been more controversial on some basic issues. I am thinking especially of the case for considering the Gospel Jesus as a deliberate and wholly mythical construction of the second-century Christian church, which needed a Jesus figure which was both human and spiritual, in its struggle with the Gnostics of their time. That is the picture presented, with considerable supporting new evidence and fresh arguments, in several recent books by George Wells, Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy, Earl Doherty, and myself. But perhaps it is just as well that Ehrman avoids scaring away readers of a less liberal turn of mind than himself. They will certainly find much food for thought in his book. I should also like to draw attention here to a recent book by Michael Wise, The First Messiah, which provides additional and unexpected grist to Ehrman's apocalyptic mill.

Rating:
Summary: An amazing book on the historical Jesus
Review: Bart Ehrman is one of the best scholars in the field of historical Christianity. This book proves this point without a doubt. Dr. Ehrman's writing style is extremely easy to read and understand and is actually very entertaining. This has to be one of the least dry books I have ever read. The historical Jesus is a mysterious figure that scholars have been trying to figure out for decades. Often Jesus' teachings are misinterpreted and set in contexts that destroy the meaning of his words. Dr. Ehrman tries to correct these points and teaches the reader what the historical Jesus most likely said and did based on the best evidence. The is by NO means an exhaustive study, as the author points out. It is, however, a great place to start your study of the historical Jesus. Even if you have been at it for a while, like me, this book can give you new ideas and presents a pretty different view from other scholars, such as John Crossan, Elaine Pagels, EP Sander, ect. Dr. Ehrman is my favorite scholar in that he is very easy to understand and makes his views clear and to the point. Last, Dr. Ehrman is very good at not being biased to one side. He leaves it to the reader to decided whether they want to believe the Jesus of history or the Jesus of faith.

Overall, this is probably the best book written on the historical Jesus. Dr. Ehrman is an amazing author and makes points that are very hard to argue. But he also points out, on numerous occasions, that we can speculate all we want, but unless there is more evidence discovered, then there is no way to truly know about the historical Jesus.

Rating:
Summary: An amazing book on the historical Jesus
Review: Bart Ehrman is one of the best scholars in the field of historical Christianity. This book proves this point without a doubt. Dr. Ehrman's writing style is extremely easy to read and understand and is actually very entertaining. This has to be one of the least dry books I have ever read. The historical Jesus is a mysterious figure that scholars have been trying to figure out for decades. Often Jesus' teachings are misinterpreted and set in contexts that destroy the meaning of his words. Dr. Ehrman tries to correct these points and teaches the reader what the historical Jesus most likely said and did based on the best evidence. The is by NO means an exhaustive study, as the author points out. It is, however, a great place to start your study of the historical Jesus. Even if you have been at it for a while, like me, this book can give you new ideas and presents a pretty different view from other scholars, such as John Crossan, Elaine Pagels, EP Sander, ect. Dr. Ehrman is my favorite scholar in that he is very easy to understand and makes his views clear and to the point. Last, Dr. Ehrman is very good at not being biased to one side. He leaves it to the reader to decided whether they want to believe the Jesus of history or the Jesus of faith.

Overall, this is probably the best book written on the historical Jesus. Dr. Ehrman is an amazing author and makes points that are very hard to argue. But he also points out, on numerous occasions, that we can speculate all we want, but unless there is more evidence discovered, then there is no way to truly know about the historical Jesus.

Rating:
Summary: Another good book from Ehrman
Review: Bart Ehrman's Jesus and Bruce Chilton's Rabbi Jesus are two recent books that both differ from the bulk of Jesus books, but also differ substantially one from another. They are similar in both being written in an engaging fashion. But whereas Chilton's book reads like a novel, offers daring speculations about Jesus's youth, and says not a word about his methodology, Ehrman focuses on that subject--and manages to be interesting, even entertaining. My main problem with the book is that the last two chapters are very weak.

I would like to focus here on Ehrman's discussion of methodology, but first a few comments on some factual matters: (1) p. 109: Ehrman refers to tithing in Numbers 18; had he referred to the subject in Deuteromony 14:22-29, he would have said that only every third year was the tithe for Levites (read this passage if you haven't!). (2) p. 95: The "born again" story involves a play on a Greek word--because it has Jesus quoting from the Septuagint! (3) p. 96: The virgin birth claim is based on a mistranslation in the Septuagint (my Good News Bible, e.g., has a footnote to this effect). (4) p. 100: Jesus's use of, e.g., the word "hypocrite" indicates that he attended a Hellenistic theater (in nearby Sepphoris, most likely). (5) p. 109: The Pharisees were so obsessed with differentiating themselves from Hellenists that they inadvertently inverted God's Law (see Marcus Borg). (6) p. 98: Was Jesus said to be from Nazareth because he was a Nazirite, and this fact got misunderstood? (7) p. 97: Was Jesus born in the Bethlehem by Jerusalem, or the one near Nazareth (see Chilton)?; (8) p. 93: If Jesus was crucified, why was his body not allowed to rot, as was the usual practice? Two other questions: (1) Why no discussion of the implications, for the historian, of the fact that Jesus addressed different audiences at different times? (2) Why no discussion of the possibility (raised by Jon Sobrino) that Jesus changed the nature of his "ministry" (an anachronistic term) over time?

As to specifically methodological questions:
1. Why no reference to how biographies were written 2000 years ago (something Burton Mack discusses in his book on Q)?
2. Why not discuss the implications, for the historian, of the fact that many passages in the gospels that appear to be describing contemporary events were "lifted" from the Hebrew Bible--and even other sources? (See Randel Helms's Gospel Fictions.)
3. How about the possibility that some stories in the gospels about Jesus were originally parables TOLD by Jesus (e.g., the fig tree)?
4. Why no discussion of the possibility of using inferential reasoning to learn about Jesus? (Chilton obviously did this, but does not discuss his methodology.)

Rating:
Summary: Recommended; but with one suggested correction
Review: Bart Ehrman, in my opinion, is one of the finest New Testament scholars working today, and I commend his research and writing in this and earlier books. But on page 111 we read "I say that they [the Essenes] 'evidently' produced the [Dead Sea] Scrolls because the term 'Essene' never occurs in them. But we know from ancient authors such as Josephus [more precisely, Marcus Agrippa as used by Pliny; Dio; and Solinus] that a community of Essenes was located in this area...." Of course the English word "Essene" is absent in the scrolls, as are the Greek spellings of this name. But the Hebrew original of this self-designation, 'osey hatorah, observers of torah, is indeed in the scrolls, and particularly in those regarded, on other grounds, as sectarian texts of the Essenes.

Rating:
Summary: Predictable / Simplistic
Review: Considering the hype of this book, I was really expecting more. It is mostly a rehash of popular points of discussion (problem with sources, the oral tradition, who/why/how of the Gospels, the cultural milieu, etc) Only towards the end does he finally return to his thesis - that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who expected the end of time momentarily. This tradition has continued to this day among certain Christian groups. Yet the evidence is quite thin - mostly taken from the New Testament which the author considers rightly suspect due to its theological and literary evolution. This is probably the reason that the very late discussion of it seems almost like an afterthought. My main objection is that the work is spread too thin and this creates an air of shallowness. I was looking for a more scholarly work on the order of "The Unauthorized Version" by Robin Lane Fox. In fact, if the book were only about the historical Jesus and his times it might be acceptable.

Rating:
Summary: Best book on the historical Jesus
Review: Don't believe the Jesus Seminar's wacky notions? Found several faults with John Dominic Crossnan's left-wing theories? Think John Marco Allegro was way off and Jesus was in fact NOT really a mushroom? Then Bart Ehrman's first-class Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium is the book for you.

Ehrman writes with an amazing combination of historical acumen, detail, and whit. That last is the most important. After untold dry, boring tomes about the historical Jesus, it's refreshing to read something from a learned scholar who knows the importance of a well-timed joke or two. The opening of the book is a perfect case of this, in which Ehrman gives a humorous run-down of the many people over the past 2,000 years who've declared that the world would end, but ended up just embarrassing themselves.

The meat of the book is comprised of a thorough (yet accessible) synopsis of the historical pursuit of Jesus. Ehrman gives all the facts, from what documents exist to who presumably wrote them, which of course will be a lot of common knowledge to those familiar with these books, but will be fascinating for those who have never read a book about the historical Jesus.

Ehrman is a follower of Albert Schweitzer's theory: namely, that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who believed Jehovah would return within his own lifetime. However, Ehrman doesn't completely follow Schweitzer's nihilistic theory, that Jesus put himself on the cross under the mistaken belief that his death would hasten Jehovah's arrival. Ehrman convincingly promotes this "apocalyptic preacher" theory. Along the way he also takes time to look at the views of others, namely John Dominic Crossnan. And though Ehrman is professionally polite when inspecting Crossnan's (and the Jesus Seminar's) notions, you can read the acid between the lines.

One thing that bothers me is that Ehrman tries so hard not to step on any toes. Several times he reassures the reader that it's not his intention to put-down one's religious views; he's only looking at things from a purely historical view. After the in your face, love it or leave it approach of Crossnan and his ilk, this is admittedly a preferable tone, but still, Ehrman almost seems to pussy-foot around certain issues.

What makes this my favorite historical Jesus book is the freshness Ehrman breathes into these well-told tales. It also serves as a great refresher course. With only a few sentences and paragraphs, Ehrman conveys what other, less-skilled scholars might take several volumes to get across. Ehrman also has me believing his thesis, that Jesus believed the end was coming, if not within his own lifetime, then within the lifetime of his followers - and, after he and his followers were gone but the Earth still remained, Christian copyists inserted words into his mouth, lessening the apocalypsis of his preachings.