Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

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.

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.