God and Empire: Jesus Against Rome, Then and Now

by John Dominic Crossan

The bestselling author and prominent New Testament scholar draws parallels between 1st–century Roman Empire and 21st–century United States, showing how the radical messages of Jesus and Paul can lead us to peace today Using the tools of expert biblical scholarship and a keen eye for current events, bestselling author John Dominic Crossan deftly presents the tensions exhibited in the Bible between political power and God’s justice. Through the revolutionary messages of Jesus and Paul, Crossan reveals what the Bible has to say about land and economy, violence and retribution, justice and peace, and ultimately, redemption. He examines the meaning of “kingdom of God” prophesized by Jesus, and the equality recommended to Paul by his churches, contrasting these messages of peace against the misinterpreted apocalyptic vision from the book of Revelations, that has been co-opted by modern right-wing theologians and televangelists to justify the United State’s military actions in the Middle East.

Genres: Religion, History, Theology, Christianity, Politics, Nonfiction, Christian

257 pages, Hardcover

First published March 13, 2007

About the author

John Dominic Crossan is generally regarded as the leading historical Jesus scholar in the world. He is the author of several bestselling books, including The Historical Jesus, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, The Birth of Christianity, and Who Killed Jesus? He lives in Clermont, Florida.

John Dominic Crossan was born in Nenagh, County Tipperary, Ireland in 1934. He was educated in Ireland and the United States, received a Doctorate of Divinity from Maynooth College in Ireland in 1959, and did post-doctoral research at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome from 1959 to 1961 and at the École Biblique in Jerusalem from 1965 to 1967. He was a member of a thirteenth-century Roman Catholic religious order, the Servites (Ordo Servorum Mariae), from 1950 to 1969 and was an ordained priest in 1957. He joined DePaul University in Chicago in 1969 and remained there until 1995. He is now a Professor Emeritus in its Department of Religious Studies.

Reviews

[Brian Griffith · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this book, Crossan broadens his focus beyond Jesus to the whole surrounding Roman world, and to the whole Bible from Genesis to Revelation. And in comparing all this, he exposes a vast gulf between totally different visions for the world, which now compete to decide our future.

On one hand he explores the vision of peace through victory over all enemies, which was the Roman imperial dream, and the dream of all empires including that of America. But as Crossan shows, this dream of ultimate victory is also repeatedly expressed in the Bible.

Against this we have a vision of peace through converting people to mercy, which was the dream of Jesus and many other prophets or apostles in the Bible.

And last we have a vision of peace through death and destruction, in which both sinners and the sinful world are destroyed in a paroxysm of divine vengeance. And even this dream is expressed in the Bible, both in the flood of Noah and the Apocalypse of Revelation. Or, as Crossan quotes Charles Jones, "Some day we may blow ourselves up with all the bombs .... But I still believe God's going to be in control. ... If he chooses to use nuclear war, then who am I to argue with that?"

Crossan deals with questions that have grown urgent for the world's survival. These visions of a final solution -- of either exterminating evil or converting sinners to justice, "... are never reconciled anywhere in the biblical tradition. They are together from one end of the book to the other. Indeed, they often coexist in the same book or even the same chapter. So again, are we to accept them both, and worship a God of both violence and nonviolence, or must we choose between them ...?"

[marcus miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crossan presents an interpretation of history, civilization, and scripture which I found to be thought provoking. Crossan analyzes the nature of civilization and empire and asks if empire is the natural outgrowth of civilization. Crossan argues that we have come to accept as normal "civilization's program of religion, war, victory, peace..." or as he adds, "peace through victory."

Empires come and go. Crossan examines the Roman Empire and isn't afraid to draw parallels to the United States. Using his knowledge of Rome, Crossan examines the life of Jesus and Paul within the matrix (not context) of the Roman Empire. I found these parts of the book to be fascinating as it added new depths to my understanding of Jesus and scripture. Crossan also argues that the Bible "presents the radicality of a just and nonviolent God repeatedly and relentlessly confronting the normalcy and of an unjust and violent civilization." (p 95)

When I told a friend I was reading this book he responded, saying "Crossan's a heretic." Crossan does offer what might be considered some alternative approaches to scripture, yet I found them to be thought provoking and at times refreshing. It certainly made me refer to the scriptures he was analyzing.

I would encourage people who wonder about the relevance of Christianity to read this book. Crossan makes the Christian message relevant to Rome and by extension to the United States.

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of Crossan's finest works. The basic premise is that the Kingdom of God as understood by Jesus and the lordship of Christ as taught by Paul are anti-imperial - not just anti-Rome, which of course they are, but opposed to what Crossan aptly calls "the normalcy of Civilization.

Crossan argues, quite compellingly, that the normalcy of civilization is both a hierarchy which privileges some and oppresses and exploits others, and also committed to violence - the claim that peace can only be achieved by violent conquest of one's enemies and violent punishment of those who upset the established order. Anyone who knows anything about human history will see that Crossan is clearly correct that this is indeed the normal way human civilization operates.

The alternative vision of Jesus and Paul negates the normal ways of civilization. Jesus and Paul preach an egalitarian vision in which all stand equal before God and are called to hare equally in each other's resources. Equally importantly, Jesus and Paul eschew violence in favor of non-violent approach to living and being. (Simply read Matthew 5-7, Acts 4: 32-35, and Galatians 3: 28 and you will quickly see that Crossan has solid textual support his position)

Near the end of the book Crossan contrasts the non-violent Jesus of who walked the earth and the fantasy of violent retribution of the Jesus of Revelation and much current theology. We cannot have both, we must choose either a violent or non-violent Jesus. The former is the Jesus of apocalyptic vengeance, the later the Jesus of history.

The choice is important, Crossan argues, not only because only non-violence and egalitarianism can save the human race, but also because the choice determines how we see God. Is God a patriarchal and violent deity? Or a non-violent and egalitarian deity?

A fine read and a must read for anyone who, as we all should be, is worried about the rise of "violent religion" in much of the world today.

[Joel Foster · Rating 5 out of 5]

Highly recommend this read for those who find themselves in the imperial power of the American empire and in the space of the Christian faith. This is a wise and powerful critique of the machine of the world from the perspective of Jesus, Paul, and John in revelation. We have a choice in which god we follow. One of violence or one of peace.

[Russell Holland · Rating 1 out of 5]

God and Empire: Jesus Against Rome, Then and Now is a book written to challenge Christians to choose between a God and Christianity of escalatory violence or a Jesus and Christianity of nonviolent resistance to the violent powers of empirical civilization. John Dominic Crossan leverages his scholarship and writing talents to achieve this purpose. The book is very well written, an easy read considering its scholarly content, and the aim is clear. Crossan wanted to draw a sharp line between human violence and divine nonviolence. (pg. 4) He succeeded if one accepts his premises, which this author does not. The entire book is based on one or more faulty premises, with buckets of false conclusions. These conclusions are used throughout the book to construct additional faulty arguments. Ironically, there is a copyright page near the end of the book that states, “This book is a work of fiction. The characters, incidents, and dialogue are drawn from the author’s imagination and are not to be construed as real.” (pg. 258) Although it may be a simple publisher’s mistake, it is a good summary of another of the chief problems of the book; so much of the content is simply made up.

Crossan’s arguments are based upon two essential presuppositions that should be understood before moving through the book. First, according to Crossan, humankind is on a devastating path of ever-increasing violence. The ultimate form of that violence can be found in what he called “civilization” or empire. In Crossan’s view, every civilization is founded and built upon the violent subjugation and control of others. (pg. 29) That is key to understanding his view of Rome at the time of Christ and America in the modern day. The second premise required to understand Crossan’s point is his belief that the Christian Bible presents two opposing visions of God. There is the violent God of judgment and retribution best seen in the Old Testament and the nonviolent, gentle, sweet, and lowly God best represented in Jesus of the New Testament. Where the New Testament seems to agree with the Old Testament, Crossan used higher criticism to dismiss and disparage the witness of Scripture. Beneath these two premises are much deeper presuppositions of philosophy and theology, some of which reveal themselves throughout the book's pages and some that remain hidden and unstated. There are other logical problems throughout the book, but they are grounded in these critical premises.

God and Empire is a tough read for anyone who takes Biblical study, Biblical truth, and sound reasoning seriously. Crossan has elevated unbelieving scholarship over foundational truths of the world and faith. Although he called himself a Christian, his understanding of what it means to be a Christian has very little to do with the Bible itself. Crossan does not believe in the deity of Christ or the atonement. He does not believe in the inspiration or inerrancy of Scripture. He rejects the miraculous works of Jesus and selectively excises what he likes from the pages of the Bible. The inference of his writing is a social gospel, with toothless hope for a peaceful and nonviolent future but no answer for the question of man’s sin and broken relationship with the God of heaven. The following quote as an example demonstrates that Crossan does not believe that Jesus was God incarnate. “Other human beings who had greatly benefited their fellows were divinized only after their death, but Caesar Augustus was unique in having achieved divine status while still alive.” (pg. 19) To make that statement, one must dismiss the New Testament claims to Jesus’ deity as mystical or parabolic or assign some other philosophical or arbitrary meaning. Some of the former assertions are not specifically evident in God and Empire, but they are essential parts of Crossan’s body of work, and consultation of even a single debate reveals that. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIX7e...) The logical problems discussed later in this review are superficial compared to these presuppositions, so these presuppositions must be held in the back of the reader’s mind to grasp the depth of the error Crossan put forward.

Crossan’s God and Empire was written to challenge Christians to choose between two visions of God. The violent God of the Old Testament and traditional Christianity who hates and punishes sin, or the nonviolent God of love and peace from the world beyond this one. The challenge is faulty, for it is a false dilemma, excluding the possibility of the Biblical God that is perfect in holiness, glory, and majesty. Crossan asks which God the Christian will choose, but the wise Christian must reject the false choice and the false unidimensional gods that Crossan has offered. Too much of this book is faulty. Too much of it is built on shaky ground. Too much is fiction.

Read the full academic review here: https://www.academia.edu/124631069/A_...

[Ryan Ward · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really incredible but too short and written for a popular audience so no referencing. Would love for him to develop these ideas at greater length.

That said, what Crossan loses in depth he more than makes up for with his encyclopedic knowledge of scripture (Christian canon and apocrypha as well as other religious traditions), history, culture, and theology along with his own personal experiences. He weaves it all into a spellbinding rallying cry for nonviolent resistance against Empire. In a way, the brief treatment works well because he just repeatedly drops provocative and radical statements and moves on, letting you sit with them. It’s a very effective method.

[Dustin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Orthodox readers may be familiar with Fr. Paul Tarazi’s book, The Rise of Scripture, in which he proposes that the Old Testament was written in opposition to the Macedonian conquest of the Middle East by Alexander the Great. In other words, the Old Testament is a nonviolent literary assault against the Hellenist kingdom(s). God and Empire by John Dominic Crossan is a perfect compliment to Tarazi’s book.

Crossan begins by showing that Rome created an empire of peace (Pax Romana) through violent military victory. Herod the Great, and then Herod Antipas, built their empires by taking a page out of the Roman playbook: romanization through urbanization for commercialization. In other words, they violently oppressed the Galileans and Judeans at the time of Jesus to build up their own little empires.

If the Old Testament was a nonviolent resistance against a Hellenistic “empire,” then the New Testament is a nonviolent resistance against the Roman empire. Crossan’s thesis is that Jesus did precisely this by opposing Rome through a proclamation of peace through (nonviolent) justice—God’s justice, which is a fair and equal redistribution of resources/wealth that creates equality between all peoples. Notice, God's justice is a nonviolent redistribution rather than a violent retribution as many contemporary Christians think.

Crossan brilliantly draws on the archaeological descriptions found in his previous books—Excavating Jesus and In Search of Paul—to give a context for Jesus’s world. He successfully contrasts the violence of Rome with the nonviolence of the Kingdom of God to show how Jesus started a “franchise” that brought God’s vision for a new world into the present.

I can’t emphasize enough how successful Crossan is in putting Jesus in his proper historical context so that we can understand the original meaning of the New Testament texts (including what was meant by words such as justice/righteousness and sacrifice).

Like his previous works, Crossan spends a bit of time trying to construct a “historical Jesus,” and discussing the dependence of some Gospels on others. I think this search is misleading. There is no Jesus outside of the biblical texts. I’m much more interested in what each New Testament author is saying and why. But, despite the concern for the “historical Jesus,” this book is still invaluable in understanding the context and, by extension, the meaning of the New Testament.

I highly recommend this book and encourage everyone to be challenged by it.

[Emma Maskell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Intrigued by Crossan’s lectures, (which I discovered on You Tube) I decided to give this book a whirl. He references his previous works in his introduction and, to begin with, I felt I may have jumped into the deep end. However, as I proceeded I found it a compelling read. I often paused for thought finding myself inspired with ideas or new questions to explore. For example I want to know more about the process of creating a conservative Paul and I will look further into the archaeological findings described.

One does not have to agree with all of Crossan’s arguments in order to appreciate the overall message, indeed I found it crystal in its clarification of the Jesus message. It is simply enlightening.

I finished reading this book on the eve of the Scottish Independence vote; which seemed somehow to fit the through-line of the book’s unfolding narrative of civilization. The perspective of ‘nonviolent resistance’ to empire turned around in my mind: ‘is it resistance?’ I pondered, ‘or something even greater?’ Is it, more positively, nonviolent insistence upon peace? Even more positively, peaceful insistence upon peace? It occurred to me, on that evening, that the entire notion of standing against something may be a product of Eden’s ‘forbidden fruit.’ That as humanity resists, it persists in a negative struggle that invites yet more negativity from the forces it opposes. Perhaps instead we embrace what it is we do stand for without feeling the need to impose it upon others, but by that example others may also embrace the longed for way of peace. Yes, it’s been said before, but not until I read this book did I see it so clearly.

I would recommend this book to anyone who has ever struggled with the Bible’s seeming contradictions, anyone interested in the unfolding patterns of human history, anyone really. A mentally nourishing and stimulating read. Truly radical.

[Ross West · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is largely an interpretation of Scripture in relation to history that attempts to contrast the vision of God in Scripture and the "normalcy," as Crossan calls it, of the violence of civilization. In the preface, Crossan states that he is raising "three questions in this book for American Christians – or better, for Christian Americans." First, "since the old Roman empire crucified our Lord Jesus Christ, how can we be his faithful followers in America as the new Roman Empire?" Second, "is our Christian Bible violent or nonviolent?" Third, "Is Bible-fed Christian violence supporting or even instigating instigating our imperial violence as the new Roman empire?" I think the book might have needed to have been much longer to accomplish such ambitious goals. In addition, the book deals much more with biblical times than with more recent times. However, I did find it to be a creative, thought-provoking interpretation of Scripture, especially the over-arching thrust of Scripture as Crossan understands it. I resonated especially with chapter three, "Jesus and the Kingdom of God," and chapter four, "Paul and the Justice of Equality." In each case, Crossan's emphasis on the historical context of these portions of Scripture is insightful.

[Andrew Ward · Rating 5 out of 5]

John Dominic Crossan is one of my favorite religious scholars and writers. I enjoy his many YouTube videos that support my understanding of his concepts and concerns. This book includes many of his previous assumptions, beliefs and conclusions so I have heard many of these in his other books. But, they have not lost their poignancy or impact to me and hopefully the rest of the world. This work shares what I believe was and is at the heart of the Torah and Jesus's radical teachings on Justice and our part of bringing God's Kingdom to be realized here and now.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

I normally have an ambivalent relationship with Crossan's work, but I like the direction he is going with this book. Treating Roman imperial rhetoric as theological statements, Crossan presents early Christianity as a non-violent counter-theology in direct confrontation with Roman "peace through victory". Good stuff.

[JC]

I won't rate this book, but will just make a few brief remarks.

I think I recall purchasing this book at a used bookstore in St Catherines or something. I recall spending that day wandering around a graveyard where an abolitionist and slave runaway Thoreau mentioned is buried (Baptist preacher Anthony Burns), watching large shipping vessels climbing up lift locks, wandering around some small museum, eating a seitan sandwich, and perusing a used bookstore. It seems like a lot for one day; it’s possible I’m conflating two separate occasions into one day.

Anway, Crossan was influential during a brief period in my life, when I was really into the Chautauqua crowd and the Jesus Seminar. I see things quite differently from them now.

I think these liberal Christians accuse evangelicals of starting off with particular ideological premises and interpreting historical artefacts or biblical passages according to those a priori convictions. I think people like Crossan actually do a similar thing, the only thing is that they are liberals.

Crossan distinguishes the Pauline corpus according to the early radical Paul, the 'liberal' middle-Paul (of questionable Pauline authorship), and the reactionary late Paul (the deutero-Pauline pastoral epistles). I really think Crossan is wrong on this. There are reactionary things in the authentic Pauline epistles and Paul's legacy is a very mixed one. I do agree there are very radical things in Paul's corpus but they do not conform to Crossan's liberal convictions of non-violent revolution. Also Lenin famously asserted "He who does not work shall not eat" was a socialist principle, which comes directly from 2 Thessalonians (3:10), one of those disputed epistles, but one could say that says more about Lenin than this contested epistle.

Crossan continues to make a false dichotomy between reactionary violent theology and radical non-violent theology that runs throughout both testaments of the Christian canon. I also disagree with Crossan here. I think there are also radical theological strands that do exhibit a certain degree of violence. There are insurrectionary currents of the poor rising up and Crossan, the good comfortable liberal does not like it. But Third World revolutionaries have gravitated towards this anti-imperialist impulse in the bible and I think Crossan does a disservice to explain them away as reactionary. The criticism of American imperialism and global militarization was appreciated however.

I did also appreciate his readings of 'redistributive' justice, but I do think he's very reformist on that issue. The best thing about this book was the opening quote by Walter Benjamin at the start of Chapter One and the brief excursion Crossan makes in mentioning Benjamin's "On the Concept of History".

I think the 'Jesus is Lord, Caesar is not' cliche that Crossan always emphasizes is neat in a certain sense, but is way overblown (after reading Boyarin's comments on Jewish notions of incarnation and watching the Great Courses lectures on the New Testament, I'm convinced Crossan makes too much of the overlapping language between early Jewish/Christian Messianic revolutionaries and Roman imperial propaganda) not to mention is now weaponized by reactionary Christians during COVID, and I'm sure has been used to resist racial integration mandates and things like that. Also a bunch of fascists chanted Christ is King before the so-called Capitol Hill insurrection, which is gross and embarrassing.

Anyway, not my favourite book, but I certainly must acknowledge that Crossan did have a place a number of years ago in helping bring me out of conservative evangelicalism, and if this is the sort of stuff that it takes than so be it.

[Kitap · Rating 4 out of 5]

Timely and important thoughts from Crossan about living in the heart of global empire while attempting to live from the heart and be a disciple of Jesus.

The monastery presents an alternative lifestyle that implicitly criticizes the greed, injustice, and oppression of our everyday world. It is a mode of semicommunal or fully communal life witnessing that violence is not the inevitability of human nature but only the normalcy of human civilization... Monsteries... are witnesses that the escalatory violence of civilization is not the inevitable destiny of humankind, even though the brutal normalcy of civilization will seek to co-opt and corrupt that monastic witness. (pp. 46-7)

[T]he two final divine solutions for the problem of Gentile empires, the Noachic solution of extermination by force and violence and the Abrahamic solution of conversion to justice and peace, are never reconciled anywhere in the biblical tradition. They are there together from one end of it to the other. Indeed, they often coexist in the same book or even in the same chapter. So once again, are we to take them both and worship a God of both violence and nonviolence, or must we choose between them and recognize, as I am arguing, that the Bible proposes the radicality of a nonviolent God struggling with the normalcy of a violent civilization? Is that its dignity, its integrity, its authority—for any Christian—and its value for any human being? (p.88)

The ambiguity of divine power suffuses the Christian Bible in both its Testaments and therefore presses this question for us as Christians: how do we reconcile the ambiguity of our Bible's violent and/or nonviolent God? My proposal is that the Christian Bible presents the radicality of a just and nonviolent God repeatedly and relentlessly confronting the normalcy of an unjust and violent civilization. Again and again throughout the biblical tradition, God's radical vision for nonviolent justice is offered, and again and again we manage to mute it back into the normalcy of violent injustice. (p. 94)

[T]o claim an already-present Kingdom demands some evidence, and the only such that Jesus could have offered is this: it is not that we are waiting for God, but that God is waiting for us. The present Kingdom is a collaborative eschaton between the human and divine worlds. The Great Divine Cleanup is an interactive process with a present beginning in time and a future (short or long?) consummation. Would it happen without God? No. Would it happen without believers? No. To see the presence of the Kingdom of God, said Jesus, come, see how we live, and then live likewise....

To experience the Kingdom, he asserted, come, see how we live, and then live like us. This invitation presumes that Jesus was promulgating not just a vision or a theory but a praxis and a communal program, and that this program was not just for himself but for others as well. What was it?

Basically it was this: heal the sick, eat with those you heal, and announce the Kingdom's presence in that mutuality. (p. 116, 118)

It is crucially important, especially in the light of ancient and enduring Christian anti-Judaism, to be quite clear that this double demonstration [i.e. chasing the "money lenders" out of the Temple] was not against Judaism as such, not against Jerusalem as such, not against the Temple as such, and not against the high priesthood as such. It was a protest from the legal and prophetic heart of Judaism against Jewish religious cooperation with Roman imperial control. It was, at least for Christian followers of Jesus, then or now, a permanently valid protest demonstration against any capital city's collusion between conservative religion and imperial violence at any time and in any place. (p. 132)

It is certainly correct... to call Jesus's death—or in fact the death of any martyr—a sacrifice, but substitution and suffering are not the point of sacrifice. Substitutionary atonement is bad as theoretical Christian theology just as suicidal terrorism is bad as practical Islamic theology. Jesus died because of our sins, or from our sins, but that should never be misread as for our sins. In Jesus, the radicality of God became incarnate, and the normalcy of civilization's brutal violence (our sins, or better, Our Sin) executed him. Jesus's execution asks us to face the truth that, across human evolution, injustice has been created and maintained by violence while justice has been opposed and avoided by violence. That warning, if heeded, can be salvation. (pp. 140-1)

[Paul] told [the Ephesians] to "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure." (2:12b–13). But if God does all the willing and working, why should we fear and tremble? Not because the radicality of God will punish us if we fail, but because the normalcy of civilization will punish us if we succeed. (p. 164)

My proposal is that justice and love are a dialectic—like two sides of a coin that can be distinguished but not separated. We think of ourselves as composed of body and soul, or flesh andspirit. When they are separated, we have a physical corpse. Similarly with distributive justice and communal love. Justice is the body of love, love the soul of justice. Justice is the flesh of love, love is the spirit of justice. When they are separated, we have moral corpse. Justice without love is brutality. Love without justice is banality. (p. 190)

[T]he full Rapture program [in the U.S.] cannot be readily dismissed as simple religious fantasy arising from faith's freewheeling imagination. For those who accept its vision, there are very specific connections to American foreign policy relations in the volatile Middle East. For example, how can there ever be both a Palestinian and an Israeli state between the Mediterranean and the Jordan if it is against God's end-time plans for Jesus's return? (p. 201)

[A]s Christianity follows John [of Patmos, author of The Book of Revelations] in emphasizing the Second over the First Coming, and apocalypse over incarnation, it finds itself waiting for God to act violently while God is waiting for us to act nonviolently. (p. 230)

It is the radicality of God's justice and not the normalcy of civilization's injustice that, as a Christian, I find incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth. Thereafter, within the Christian Bible's New Testament, first Paul of Tarsus lives and proclaims that same radical God until his vision is deradicalized by the pseudo-Pauline letters, and finally, John of Patmos deradicalizes the nonviolent Jesus on the donkey by transforming him into the violent Jesus on the battle stallion. (p. 238)

The good news... is that the violent normalcy of human civilization is not the inevitable destiny of human nature. Christian faith and human evolution agree on that point. Since we invented civilization some six thousand years ago along the irrigated floodplains of great rivers, we can also un-invent it—we can create its alternative. In the challenge of Christian faith, we are called to cooperate in establishing the Kingdom of God in a transformed earth. In the challenge of human evolution, we are called to Post-Civilization, to imagine it, to create it, and to enjoy it on a transfigured earth. (pp. 241-2)

[Nathan Ormond · Rating 5 out of 5]

Historically accurate, careful exegesis and seamless plenary reading of Scripture that doesn't pull punches, push aside conscience or ignore any inconvenient contemporary knowledge. An authentic and honest Christian witness and just the kind of genuine theology that I believe the Western world and its Christianities need today.

This book excels in exploring the nature of power, justice, and Politics from the perspectives of history, sociology, and Christian ethical teaching. It made me reflect on my personal relationship to politics, where questions about just violence and force are (unfortunately) becoming increasingly pertinent with the rise of authoritarian governments and the undermining of democracy by aggressive foreign nations and billionaires. It brings Christ's teachings and the lives of various saints and their approaches to political violence into a non-ideological, honest and difficult but fundamentally peaceful perspective, offering theological justifications for engaging with politics in this way, whilst offering a vision of the Christian life and "post-civilisational" political body through a careful exegesis of Jesus's "Kingdom" teaching. This was particularly valuable to me, because I have been worried about the way that Martin Luther's "two Kingdom" theology blunted the effectiveness of Christianity in responding to the rise of Nazism (following the work of Alec Ryrie), where I see similar "spiritualisation" and "de-realisation" of ethics and politics in American theology into a kind of apathetic vote for authoritarianism, then turning your conscience off and getting on with your life, rather than the radical call to metanoia, contrition and communal engagement that is shines so brightly through the gospels. I think that Crossan does a really good job of avoiding this pitfall and offering an actionable alternative, fully grounded in the world, challenging yourself to live the good life, not merely as a theoretical story, but in life itself.

I'm also reading a few other things at the same time as this which I think compliment these themes really well, namely: Kenneth Clarke's documentary series "Civilisation", Tom Holland's "Dominion" (which I am INCREDIBLY critical of, and view this book as an antidote to), Goliaths Curse, A Theory of Liberal Socialism (Matt McManus), and The Dawn of Everything (Graeber). These books place an emphasis on political theory, archaeology, non Western perspectives and sociology in a way that I think complements Crossan's theological message very nicely.

On a pessimistic note, I think that most Christians (particularly Americans) are probably too ideologically captured, myopic and unsophisticated to be able to walk on the tightrope that Crossan offers.

[Justin · Rating 1 out of 5]

First I will say I enjoyed plenty of tidbits in this book. Especially those that provided a different viewpoint on how the Bible presents God himself in relation to violence and non-violence. The problem is that Mr. Crossan says this is the premise of the book. Juxtaposing the “violence of Civilization” with the “non-violence of the Sacred”. Then he never really approaches that.
This book is just a series of tangents to try and defend his modern sensibilities with the parts of the Bible (i.e. the letters of Paul that he likes) with no pointing us back to his original premise of “civilization vs. God”.

He spends almost a whole chapter comparing 9-11 and its actual violence to the “imagined violence” of the nutty “Left-Behind” series. Seriously, he does that. I think the “Left-Behind” series and dispensationalism in general is nutty and silly (we can agree on that Mr. Crossan) but to compare it to 9-11?! He then names a couple fringe violent “Christian” movements (“Army of God”, “Christian Identity”) with the violence of conservative Islam. Comparing a couple hundred people (maybe) with millions to try to make the claim they’re both equally as dangerous. This is fantasy.

Not to mention his completely out of left field, boring, and uninspired (no pun intended) attacks on modern politics/new/entertainment. How brave of you to attack Fox News, Jerry Falwell, and Gibson’s The Passion of Christ. You can only image the whole chapter he would have wasted on Trump. I’m no fan of any of these groups or people but I hardly come to book on “Jesus Against Rome” for a take on them.

I’m ready to be challenged on how I view any one of my interpretations of the Bible (or the human condition) but, although I started this book excited for the prospect, I found his own picking, choosing, and waxed-nose approach to the Bible just way too easy to see through.
Where was the “God & Empire” (or better yet “God vs. Empire”)? It was nowhere to be found in this book sadly.

[Neil Purcell · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have read some of Crossan's books and have seen him speaking on several You Tube channels and have always found his ideas and insights interesting and persuasive. In "God and Empire" Crossan presents a coherent and well-supported worldview, grounded in sacred scripture and in the historical and cultural context in which these sacred texts were written.

I have always found the notions of a violent and vengeful God to be appalling and unbelievable. The idea that God is going to end the world in a great slaughter of unbelievers is absurd, in my estimation. I do not believe in God, but if we must imagine a deity, let it be all-loving, non-violent, forgiving and mercifully just.

Jesus described the Kingdom of God in just such terms, and in stark contrast with the Roman empire's violent and vengeful injustice, but the religion founded by his followers is much more comfortable today with violence and retribution and much less committed to non-violence, forgiveness, and distributive justice than Jesus would be happy to see. If you see this yourself, you might find in "God and Empire" some inspiration and new perspectives on the ancient ideas of Jesus and Paul in the earliest days of the Christian church that remain relevant, if largely misunderstood, today.

In Trump's America, these misunderstandings have shaped a political movement that seeks to persecute migrants and gay people, to cut social spending and public assistance to the poor, the sick, the hungry and the homeless, to end assistance to sick and hungry people around the world, to divert resources to the military and to militarize the police, and to cut taxes on the wealthiest members of the world's wealthiest nation. In short, today's Jesus people want America to be more like ancient Rome. If, like me, you're wondering how they could have gotten everything so wrong, John Dominic Crossan has more than a few bright ideas to share with you.

[Sharon · Rating 5 out of 5]

I used to think of "civilization" -- the transition from hunter-gatherer societies to permanent settlements with domesticated animals and crops -- as a Good Thing. Now I'm not so sure.

John Dominic Crossan presents the Bible, and particularly the Christian scriptures, as a history of civilization and all its injustices: violence, war, patriarchy, slavery, economic and social inequities, summarized as "peace through victory" or "injustice through violence." But the Bible is also the history of God, who repeatedly and relentlessly confronts the normalcy of an unjust and violent civilization with a program of non-violence, justice, peace, equity -- "peace through justice" or "justice through non-violence."

Both visions are there. How do we choose? Is the Christian Bible violent or non-violent? Is it for or against Jesus and Paul's lives of non-violent resistance? Is the U.S. the new Roman Empire? What about the violence in the Apocalypse of John? Does it supersede the social justice preached by Jesus and Paul? Many American Christians seem to think so. Are they justified? In my opinion, no, they are not, but I sure wish the Church Fathers had never included John's book in the canon. (Just like I wish the authors of the Bill of Rights had done a better job of drafting the Second Amendment.)

I came away from this book with a better appreciation of Paul. Some of the Letters attributed to him were not written by him, but form a record of the old patriarchal norms of "civilization" once again rising up to suppress the radical inclusivity and equity of the earliest Christian communities where men and women shared duties and responsibilities equally. Give me THAT old time religion!

[Connie · Rating 3 out of 5]

John Dominic Crossan is brilliant. But this is not a book to read for fun. It’s a deep, deep dive that uses plenty of academic language and complex ideas that then relate and intertwine to create and support Crossan’s thesis. For Biblical scholars, it’s excellent. For laypeople, it can be a tough slog at times. The basic premise is that Roman civilization was violent and unjust. The spread of the Roman Empire made this the “norm.” People were subdued by political, economic and military force. Jesus was revolutionary in teaching a radical message of nonviolence and peace through justice and equality rather than Rome’s peace through victory. Jesus’ message was that God’s radical nonviolent and just kingdom was here now if we would only participate in it by turning toward it and away from society’s violent and unjust normalcy. Paul shared this message in the books he actually authored. Books written in Paul’s name but not actually thought to be authored by him change the message somewhat and give God a slightly more violent (normal) edge in the predicted Second Coming. John, writing in Revelation, envisions a violent apocalypse as God’s triumphant return. Crossan invites us to embrace Jesus’ original vision of peace through justice in God’s kingdom, which is already here on earth.

[Dennis Harrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

An outstanding review and interpretation of the growth of civilisation and the normalcy adopted by societies to gather in groups and clans and achieve societal objectives of power, protection from and dominance over others through violence. He emphasises the radicality of Christ's message, practice, and example of changing society through non-violence. Where there is inequality in the distribution of goods and wealth anger, bitterness and resentment arise and through the injustice conflicts occur. Crossan argues that the new Jerusalem depends upon our becoming participants with God to bring about a new day of justice, brotherhood and peace.

Crossan is a great scholar and I have read this book as an adjunct to his "The Last Week" (co-written with Marcus Borg). This book adds a greater depth to the time and life of Jesus and the Christian message. "Put your sword back into its place says Jesus to Peter in the garden of Gethsemane , for all who take to the sword will perish by the sword". When there is the "in-group" and the "out-group' problems arise. Everyone/all have to be embraced and advanced to avoid future conflict. The politics to achieve it is the challenge and will not happen without a massive change of heart. Recommended reading.

[Baylor Heath · Rating 4 out of 5]

“It is not accidental ignorance, but essential arrogance that dooms empires to the dustbin of time and the graveyard of history.”

I must say, this isn’t quite what I expected. I think Crossan spends a lot of time untangling Christianity and empire, but doesn’t quite accomplish what the subtitle suggests (Jesus Against Rome). Guess I was expecting a something a little more punk rock 🤘

Crossan is a Christian but doesn’t believe Jesus is God or that Jesus’ return is a literal one. At least that first one baffles me…I knew such Christians existed, but I’d never really heard from one. I’m actually open to the second coming becoming non/literal. It’s certainly crossed my mind before but I’ve never heard someone actually state it as a possibility.

Crossan spends a long time on certain rabbit trails, like which of Paul’s letters are authentic and which are pseudo letters. I could hardly see how that was pertinent to the main argument. It felt like he was just compelled to explain the historical Paul, with little relevance to the topic of the book.

Anyway, here’s my favorite formulation from the book:

Peace through victory (Rome) vs peace through justice (Jesus)

[K Ogie · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a great book disputing all that Christian Nationalism stands for! Crossan uses carefully planned evidence from many different religious texts to argue against patriarchy, misogyny, homophobia, racism, prejudice, and imperialism. There are so many pieces that I absolutely adored, and I found myself nodding in agreement throughout the text. There is a quote Crosaan uses throughout the text that I can't help but agree, "It is the radicality of God's justice and nt the normalcy of civilization's injustice that as a Christian, I find incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth." All arguments of Christian Nationalism use the foundation of our civilization's normalization of violence , hate and harm, separation and division, to use deformed tenets of Christianity to coerce uninformed and easily suseptible citizens to build a cohort of hate.
This book clearly outlays a phenomenal and well developed argument against all the allegations used by Christian Nationalists to harm others.

[Scott Satterwhite · Rating 5 out of 5]

I saw Crossan speak several years ago, and I found his scholarship fascinating. By recentering the concept that the goal of Jesus was to make heaven on Earth instead of thinking of heaven as a place in the sky has revolutionary implications. All of which ties Crossan's argument about non-violence as the underlying message of Jesus over the God of Empire, Christian soldier, based on violence. According to Crossan, this is a bad interpretation of the New Testament that could potentially lead to the destruction of the planet. If one feels that heaven is here on earth, that person will take better care of the earth and it's inhabitants, but if we think of heaven as somewhere in the sky, then there is no reason to care for the planet or the people living in I thought this book was very interesting, and worth the read.

[Travis Sharpe · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up this book from a used book store not quite sure what it was, but figured it was worth a couple dollars to read. I am a pascifist because of my faith in Jesus and I believe Jesus has always been against empire. I finished the book even more convinced of these callings, especially the call to nonviolence. Too often the church has fallen into the trap of taking of violence as "a last resort" or believing it's the only way that will make evil listen. But Crossan reminds us Jesus was victorious precisely because he rode into Jersulam on a donkey to give himself up, not on a war stallian to conquer the enemies. We must not pick up the weapons of war, or gravitate towards the ways of Rome. The way to change the world is through an alternate politic.

[Joshua Carney · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is my second trip through G&E. I read Crossan because he's courageous. I consider myself confessional and sometimes find his stripe of liberalisms to be too much. Still this is what makes him interesting. He takes his historical and archeological research and constructs narratives to make sense of the text and his theology. i admire the attempt. this is why I keep reading him.

on the whole, the book takes up the non-violent message of Jesus and compares it both to problematic texts from within scripture but also against the consistently violent force of "civilization" which has existed through out history.

[Pearl Loewen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this book out of a free basket, and I am glad I did. I have always appreciated John Dominic Crossan’s knowledge as a historian, scholar, and theologian. While I do not always fully agree with his conclusions, this is an important book, I think, for understanding how anti-Christian an empire actually is, and seeing how American has become one. I am not American, but have become increasingly concerned about what is occurring in that country, knowing that it can happen anywhere. I thank JDC for this prophetic word.

[Heather · Rating 3 out of 5]

This gave an interesting perspective on the brutal underpinnings of what we think of as civilization, and the extent to which Christian theology was a readical reversal of Roman deification of the ruling powers. While I did not agree with Crossan's critique in every respect, it was thought-provoking and many of the historical notes--like the mutilation of the portraits of female teachers pictured beside Paul in an ancient mural--were fascinating.

[Gavin Stephenson-Jackman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Certainly a very interesting read and I very much agree with his conclusions. It's just a little scary how easy it was to equate what he was saying with what is happening today in the US. It is so easy to see the "I've got mine, you get yours" attitude in the current administration and the justice through violence metaphor. So different from the previous administration's justice through peace.

[Thomas Keller · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good read. Crossan strives for a feeling of being there. Now you, reader, see yourself standing in front of this great spectacle of Rome and wonder how the words so familiar to us were flashed graffiti like onto the minds of the "oppressed". Holy scripture was at one time revolutionary. It still blows up.

[Joan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crossan is not always an easy read but he has some fascinating and insightful observations about Biblical history. This book was published in 2007 but there is a lot that is so very relevent today. His basic thesis is that the Bible is the story of a nonviolent God in conflict with an unjust and violent civilization.

[Mick Maurer · Rating 5 out of 5]

My first book completed in 2025, my second work by John Dominic Crossan. The first being in 2024, Render Unto Caesar. I have three more of Crossan's works in my book pile. I agree with him on Mark's Little Apocalypse rather than John's Great Apocalypse.