Partial and somewhat misleading account - Rated 
I read Jesus The Jew when it first appeared. The subtitle itself (A historian's view) struck me as suspect then, (other views are not historical?), and on rereading it I felt parts of it hadn't aged very well. The first thing the reader should be aware of is that Dr. Vermes has a theory to prove, which to his credit he makes no attempt to hide. This theory is the traditional viewpoint of Judaism; that Yeshua of Nazareth may well have been a real figure from History, and Dr. Vermes' labours are directed towards both proving that he was and accomodating him to orthodox Judaism, but that the Christ of tradition was a Pauline construct. The second point is that the reader often has the impression that the evidence is stretched in Procrustean fashion to breaking point. For example, Jesus is presented as a Holy Man who had no wish to claim Godhead ( much time and effort is given over to elucidating the expressions Son of Man, Son of God) and his death is described as a purely political decision on the part of the "notoriously cruel" Roman procurator Pontius Pilatos. Leaving aside the several passages in Mark (the main object of study of Dr. Vermes) in which Jesus is reported as clashing with the Jewish authorities, particularly the Pharisees, (3,6; 3,22; 8, 15; 11, 18; 12, 38;14, 1;14, 55;14, 63;15, 31), one is left wondering what the fuss was all about. Why bother crucifying a Holy Man, whom it's clear from the Gospels Pilate had never heard of? Dr. Vermes also claims that Jesus definitely did not belong to Pharisaic circles. Recent and not so recent work on the Gospels (Professor Cross and others) affirms the contrary, which again undermines Dr. Vermes' hypothesis. On the other hand, recent developments in the dating of the Gospels, especially of Mark (Fr. José O'Callaghan's thesis on the dating of Mark, based on the finds in Qumran 7 (7Q5), and supported by Golb and Thiede) are evidently not reflected in the data provided by Dr. Vermes, although this would not seriously alter his argument. Having said that, Jesus The Jew possesses two great merits: The first of these is the historical approach. In the aftermath of the heady days of Higher Criticism, itself an offshoot of German Historicism, not only the Gospels but indeed the whole Bible was in danger of disappearing as a documentary text without any claim to historical veracity at all. It was dissatisfaction with this sort of historicist approach that brought distinguished figures such as Riesenfeld away from the demythologization of a Bultmann back to more historical methods. The second is that, within the parameters established by the author, the thesis is clearly and coherently expounded, a merit to which not all theoreticians can lay claim. On the whole, this book can be recommended, always taking into account the caveats and provisos mentioned above.
Excellent exposition of the historical figure of Jesus - Rated 
Geza Vermes's book 'Jesus the Jew' promotes an open-minded look at the figure of Jesus in a historical context. The author makes use of extensive sources from the gospels and from both Hellenistic and Jewish sources at the time. The gospels are given no particular authority over the other sources and Vermes starts from square one by building up a historical profile of the figure of Jesus based on the evidence provided in the gospels and in other sources and then goes on to place this figure in a social context in relation to other prophets and miracle workers of the day. The book is excellently researched and the assertions of Vermes are consistantly enforced by establishing the source of his ideas. The book is written in such a way as to make it useful to scholars who study the history and theology of Jesus and also to any interested party who does not desire the difficult tracts found in many other books of its kind. This book is not one that should be approached by someone who has preconceived ideas of the figure of Jesus or of the importance of the gospels which they refuse to alter under any circumstances. taken in the right sense as an open-minded investigation into the historicity of the figure of Jesus this book is invaluable.
|
