A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Volume I - The Roots of the Problem and the Person

A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus

by John P. Meier, Joel Peter Johnson (Illustrator)

In this definitive book on the real, historical Jesus, one of our foremost biblical scholars meticulously sifts the evidence of 2,000 years to portray neither a rural magician nor a figure of obvious power, but a marginal Jew.

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

484 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 1991

About the author

John Paul Meier is a Biblical scholar and Catholic priest. He attended St. Joseph's Seminary and College (B.A., 1964), Gregorian University [Rome] (S.T.L, 1968), and the Biblical Institute [Rome] (S.S.D., 1976).

Meier is the author of nine books and more than 60 scholarly articles. He was editor of The Catholic Biblical Quarterly and president of the Catholic Biblical Association.

Meier is Professor of New Testament in the Department of Theology at the University of Notre Dame. Before coming to Notre Dame, he was Professor at The Catholic University of America.

Reviews

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is John Meier's first (of five?) volume, examining the historic Jesus. The real Jesus may be someone different, but Meier does not approach this volume with faith and church tradition as reliable sources. In fact, the inside of the jacket cover describes the historic Jesus as one that could be agreed upon by a Catholic, Protestant, Jew, and Agnostic.

This volume focuses on two major aspects of the historicity of Jesus. The first aspect identifies the sources, which by and large is exclusively the gospels. The next best source is Josephus, who only has a couple short references to Jesus and one of them is in question. He disputes the apocryphal gospels as being written much later and dependent on the actual gospels for source material.

The second major aspect Meier addresses is the roots of who Jesus was. He covers the infancy narratives and also explores the culture of the time to understand things such as what language Jesus spoke, his level of literacy, his relationship with his siblings, etc. Meier concludes this volume with a study on the chronology on Jesus' life (an interesting study, indeed).

The scholarship and readability of this book are profound. The reading does not gloss over evidence, yet it manages to be light enough for the casual reader interested in a deep understanding of the historical Jesus. This alone leads me to grant this review five stars. In general, he handled the historicity fairly. At times I felt his presumptions trended to the left of center (he doubts Jesus' birth in Bethlehem), but he does not take a definitive stance, leaving room for the reader to form his own opinions based on the evidence. I was taken aback by the strange title of this book, but by the end, I understand why John Meier titled it _A Marginal Jew_. Jesus was a man of humble upbringing, from a small town, and there is limited source data to understand who he was from a historic perspective. I look forward to reading the next volume.

[Shawn · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the first of a four-volume work by a Catholic biblical scholar. I found the author’s approach very interesting, whereby he attempts to jettison all myth and look solely at what empirical history has to offer us in portraying Jesus. Although this is rather complex reading, I deeply enjoyed it and intend to attempt Meier’s second volume soon.

It is difficult to explore the life of Jesus without encountering yourself. As Plato said: “the unexamined life is not worth living”. This study of the life of Jesus leads me to extend Plato’s premise to: “the un-sacrificed life is not worth living”. To be here, in this particular dimension of time, and to be for anything other than the precepts that constitute God, is not worth living.

Our spiritual existence temporarily straddles the physical world, which will eventually disappear, leaving us solely within the spiritual dimension. Let us go there in blazing glory, as did Jesus, standing firm in the truth, regardless of what physical threat comes at us. In this way, we accomplish the eternal objective of unmasking the physical world, to unveil spiritual reality.

Biography

Jesus grew up in an insignificant village (Nazareth) in the hills of Lower Galilee, a village so obscure that it is never even mentioned in the Old Testament. His mother was Mary, his father Joseph, and his four brothers: James, Joses, Jude, and Simon. Jesus had at least two unnamed sisters.

Nazareth was a village of close to 2,000 Jews. The Judaism of Galilean peasants was fiercely loyal to basics like the Mosaic Torah, circumcision, and the Jerusalem temple. Jesus lived for roughly 35-40 years in the first century. He was born around 6 B.C. to 4 B.C. and died in his later thirties or early forties (A.D. 28 - A.D. 33). We know at best, selected events from three or four years of his life.



As a carpenter, Jesus would have built many different things, including various pieces of furniture, cabinets, plows, yokes, windows, lattices, doors, etc. His occupation required technical skill, tools, sweat, and muscle power. Jesus worked, but eventually abandoned his livelihood and hometown and became “jobless” in order to undertake a prophetic ministry. Jesus gave up his physical labor for spiritual labor. Jesus came into the world to work and build, but his physical building eventually gave way to spiritual building.

Even though Jesus was obviously literate, there is no indication of higher studies at some urban center such as Jerusalem. Apparently, Jesus possessed a high degree of natural talent and genius, which more than compensated for his low level of formal education. Jesus came out of a peasant background. The author’s in-depth perspective of the term “peasant” is of some use to us here:

“Peasants differ from so-called primitive peoples. In primitive societies the producers control the means of production, including their own labor. They directly exchange their own labor and its products for the equivalent goods and services of others. However, as culture develops, the means of production pass from the hands of the primary producers into the hands of groups who do not engage in the productive process themselves. Rather, this new group, the rulers of the state or the city, assumes special executive administrative functions, backed up by force. The flow of goods and services becomes centralized in a state or city whose dominant members absorb the surpluses produced by the peasants, both to support themselves and to distribute the remainder to other groups in society. In other words, it is the rise of the state or the city that calls forth the precise social group we call peasants.” –John P. Meier

The author’s description of the peasant, allows us to quickly see how the substitution of money for work, as the prevailing medium of exchange, created a situation that enabled some to escape work by feeding parasitically upon the shoulders of their neighbors. Instead of loving their neighbor as themselves, they exploited their neighbor (as occurs today). Instead of contributing their own valuable work to society, they selfishly take advantage of society for selfish benefit. This gives us some perception of how one must have felt under the unyielding dominance of Rome, where certain citizens languished in vulgar excess, over the impoverished that they dominated. This also allows us to better perceive the true setting surrounding Jesus’ life.

It is clear that Jesus was an effective teacher. Three New Testament passages inform us that Jesus was literate: John 8:6, John 7:15, and Luke 4:16-30. We know that Jesus was very adept in the use of scripture. The scriptures tell us that Jesus was able to read and explain the Scriptures and we know this was a revered goal for all religiously minded Jews of this era. Jesus is presented by almost all the Gospel traditions as engaging in learned disputes over scripture and he was accorded the respectful title of rabbi or teacher. More than one of the Gospels present him preaching in the synagogues.

To outsiders like Josephus, Tacitus, and Lucian of Samosata, the most striking thing about Jesus was his crucifixion. In understanding Jesus, we must not forget that he met a violent end at the hands of governmental officials. The historical Jesus is one who’s words and deeds alienated powerful people. His freewheeling attitude toward the fine points of the law stands diametrically opposed to the legal extremists of the time. And He purposefully associated with the social lowlife of Palestine.

It is mysterious how Jesus eludes all neat theologies. Jesus refuses to fit into the boxes we create for him. Jesus is a bulwark against the reduction of the Christian faith to any particular ideology. Jesus remains a constant stimulus to theological renewal, even today driving theologians toward new paths.

Historical Validation

Gospels - The major source of our knowledge about Jesus comes from the four canonical Gospels: Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John, the first three of which are distinguished from John as the synoptic Gospels. These books were composed somewhere between A.D. 70 to A.D. 100.

Of particular interest are the number of Gospels not included in the Bible: Gospel of the Nazarenes, Gospel of the Ebionites, Gospel of Thomas, Secret Gospel of Mark, Gospel of the Egyptians, Acts of Pilate, Gospel of Truth, Gospel of Philip, etc., etc. etc. We can’t help but wonder who determined which Gospels should constitute the Bible and which should not?

Josephus - The writings of Josephus (A.D. 37 – A.D. 100), particularly The Jewish War (A.D. 70) and Jewish Antiquities (A.D. 90) reflect upon the times of Jesus. Josephus writes:

“At the time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds; and a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.” –Josephus

Josephus provides extra-biblical evidence in the first century A.D. for the life of Jesus. Josephus is a Jew telling us that during the rule of Pontius Pilate there appeared on the religious scene of Palestine this wise man named Jesus, who worked miracles and taught. And that Jesus’ followers continued in existence down to Josephus’ day. The remarkable thing about the writing of Josephus is that it confirms for us that the adherents of Jesus still hadn’t given up their loyalty to him, some 50 years later, even after his shameful death on the cross. Today, we now know these followers have continued to expand in number, resulting in the huge Christian church that exists in modern times.

Tacitus - Jesus was also mentioned by the Roman historian Tacitus (A.D. 56 – A.D. 117) who wrote Annuals, intended to cover a history of Rome. Tacitus writes:

“Therefore, to squelch the rumor, Nero created scapegoats and subjected to the most refined tortures those whom the common people called “Christians,” hated for their abominable crimes. Their name comes from Christ, who during the reign of Tiberius, had been executed by the procurator Pointius Pilate. Suppressed for the moment, the deadly superstition broke out again, not only in Judea, the land which originated this evil, but also in the city of Rome, where all sorts of horrendous and shameful practices from every part of the world converge and are fervently cultivated.” –Tacitus

Tacitus apparently saw Christians as a recently invented and rapidly spreading oriental cult that spurned the Roman gods, practiced secret and nefarious rites, and were therefore subversive of the good order of the Roman state. Tacitus fixes the time of Christ’s death as being during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius (A.D. 14-37) and the governorship of Pontius Pilate (A.D. 26-36). He affirms Christ’s death was a matter of execution by the Roman governor of Judea.

Others - Others, like Pliny the Younger (A.D. 61 - A.D. 112), mentioned the Christian’s custom of meeting before dawn to chant verses about Christ. Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 125 – A.D. 180) wrote in The Passing of Peregrinus of how Christians still worship Christ who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced a new cult into the world.

The Languages of Jesus

Latin - In the Greco-Roman world, the vast majority of ordinary people were functionally illiterate. Latin was used only by highly educated Roman elites. There is no reason to believe that Jesus knew or used Latin.

Greek - Greek served as the language of Rome itself, around the Mediterranean, through Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, and down into Egypt. Hellenization was underway and strongly encouraged by Herod the Great. Elaborate construction projects in the Greco-Roman style were initiated. About 20% of the residents of Jerusalem would have spoken Greek. The ruling and intellectual class sought to immerse themselves in Greek language and culture. For the Palestinian Jews, Hellenization would have seemed as if a tidal wave of Greek language was engulfing them. Josephus brags about his having learned Greek prose, poetry, and grammar. It is likely that Jesus knew and used some Greek for communication with Gentiles, including perhaps Pilate at his trial. Regular pilgrimages to the Hellenized city of Jerusalem would have exposed Jesus to Greek language and culture

Hebrew - Jesus would have learned Hebrew in the Nazareth synagogue and he probably used it when debating scripture with Pharisees or scribes. Hebrew suffered a great decline after the Babylonian exile. There is a scene in Luke 4:16-20 where Jesus reads form the Book of Isaiah, so he had knowledge of Hebrew.

Aramaic - Aramaic was the ordinary, everyday language spoken by the average Jew. Palestinian Jews were more comfortable with Aramaic. An interpreter was often needed when Roman leaders tried to deal with Palestinian Jews in Greek. Jesus almost necessarily spoke and taught in Aramaic. But Hellenizing was challenging Aramaic . Aramaic scholars have shown how the sayings of Jesus preserved in Greek tend to take on new poetic force and enhancements when re-converted back into Aramaic.

Action - We can be multilingual with our actions. We can convey meaning by what we do, or don’t do. We say more than a thousand words when we pick up a child with a smile, when we take the hand of a prostitute in obvious concern, when we venture caringly into the prison house, when we build relationships with exploited people in unknown lands, when we visit the sick and infirmed, etc., etc., etc. The actions of Jesus have carried forth potently for 2,000 years, with much greater intensity than any written document ever could have. Through his actions, Jesus has effectively penetrated every language in the world. Clearly the Word is multilingual today. And Jesus has shown that our actions can also garner amazing power when we become similarly engaged in the language of love.

Jesus as Illegitimate

Unlike Jesus’ mother, brothers, and sisters, Joseph is not mentioned once the ministry of Jesus begins. Much effort is made in the Bible to trace the lineage of Jesus to Abraham, through David; while simultaneously contending that Jesus was born of a virgin. This contradiction is never fully resolved. Why would the line of David have any importance for Jesus if Joseph is not his biological father? And didn’t Jesus refer to himself as the “Son of man”?

Illegitimacy would seemingly be in line with the way God often works, producing good out of bad. In the same manner that the line of David stems out of adultery, illegitimacy emphasizes the importance of spiritual birth over physical birth, and particularly over birthright of any sort. The clear relevance here is that mere physical birthright does not constitute justification for praising or elevating an individual. It is haphazard and foolish that Kings should be determined by the mere accident of physical birth. True legitimacy is gained only through a spiritual re-birth, by being born again of God.

A virgin re-birth awaits all of us who are willing to accept it. Jesus demonstrates for us that God does not issue forth from the seed of man; but rather, God is begotten in men. We must all be begotten of God. If you have been reborn of God, your second birth is of a virgin nature. The route to son-ship that we must all take is to be born spiritually by virginal impregnation of our souls by the spirit of God. Like Jesus, this doesn’t change our physical lineage, but it establishes for us a spiritual lineage to God.

This spiritual lineage does not require generations of posterity, but accrues to us directly through Jesus. This is the theme of Jesus’ life. Jesus confirms this in Matthew 12 (wherein he ignores his biological mother and siblings) saying that: “whoever does the will of his Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother”. Here Jesus confirms the greater importance of spiritual birth to physical birth. We are all called to be re-born sons of God and to deny the sovereignty of any who would claim dominion over us by subverting the will of our spiritual father.

Jesus as The Word

The fact that Jesus did not leave writings and that nearly a generation passed before others wrote of him is of serious consequence. The first writers about Jesus were the Apostles who wrote of what Jesus meant to them. The early church often recited from memory, combined sayings, added text, or otherwise tended toward the creation of the prevailing Gospel harmony that has come down to us over time, like theological artistry.

Redactions over the years involve what Jesus meant to redactors. Therefore, the scriptures, as they come down to us, are a refined picture of Jesus in the hearts of men, tweaked by years of reflection. It should not be the least bit surprising to us that the redactions coming down to us over the years may differ significantly in comparison to any picture that would have been taken on the spot.

The fact that we do not have “on the spot” reports should incline us to understand that we too must allow Jesus to define himself to us, to our hearts, to our modern culture, and in the particular context of our individual lives. God seeks less to give the world a written doctrine through Jesus than to give Jesus himself to the world, to our hearts.

Jesus didn’t bring any list of rules etched in stone. Jesus brought something very different: a message that is alive, adaptable, and relevant across the spectrum of time and history. The power of this Word eludes full understanding as a written theology and is instead unveiled within us, ultimately manifesting itself in our actions. We tell of the Word best by doing it and less by distilling it into text.

The remarkable thing about the life of Jesus is that He is fully substantiated by the existence and persistence of the church in the earth. Jesus is more prolific today than he was during his lifetime. Jesus is therefore more alive now, than he was then. But access to Jesus is obtained only through faith.

The church has not persisted because Christians have been able to prove their faith by human scholarship; but because of the spiritual power unleashed through belief. Countless Christians have believed firmly in Jesus Christ without any idea whatsoever about empirical research. Jesus is accessible to all believers, including those who will never study history or theology for even a single day of their lives.

We can see the Word about in the world. Its truthfulness is self evident. It needs no validation other than the obvious correctness all men discern who chose to enter into serious inquiry and self-examination. It matters less what is or is not proven about the historical Jesus than it does that the Word is indeed alive, thriving, and expanding throughout the world. Indeed, this very characteristic of the Word is what confirms that it is eternal and applicable to all peoples, places, and times.



"For the Word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." -Hebrews 4:12

[Peter Faul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Part of what is slowly becoming my favourite micro-genre of non-fiction, historical detective work. This book seeks to use the scant historical sources on Jesus to reconstruct some historical core that can be unambiguously agreed upon as true by people from all persuasions. The reader is cautioned that the reconstructed historical Jesus is in no way the same as the real Jesus that actually existed, as what can be reconstructed is necessarily a minuscule fragment of the whole.

The first half of the book lays out the sources and methodology. For sources we're left with mainly the gospels (which are themselves hugely problematic from the point of view of historical reconstruction) as well as a few lines from Paul and Josephus. It is persuasively argued that other candidate sources like the apocrypha and the Nag Hammadi Library are a dead end.

Once we've settled on using the gospels we need a way to determine fact from fiction. Here five criteria are used to determine the historicity of various claims about Jesus. These criteria must be used carefully and often in conjunction with one another before we can start to become certain about certain historical claims. For instance one such criterion is the criterion of embarrassment. Essentially acts of Jesus which Jesus's followers and the later church would find 'embarrassing' have a high probability of being historical. After all, why would they invent such a story. One such example is the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist.

Apparently more recent scholars believe that this criteria approach is deficient in some way. It's clear from the book however that the only sense in which they can be is if they are not permissive enough. What I mean is, the logic is so clearly presented that you can be sure that what is established using the criteria are very likely to be true.

The second half of the book concerns itself with the early years of Jesus, namely his infancy and the "hidden years". Even in this time period the book will need to grapple with questions of a supernatural nature, a challenge for the methodological naturalism employed in this book. Instead of trying to prove or disprove the Virgin birth, instead the question of to what extent did the virgin birth story exist around the time of Jesus. When do we first find references to it etc etc. On this front there are some interesting things that can be said. There is reason to suspect that Mary was never used directly as a source for the gospels, and in John 7:5 we see that Jesus's brothers do not believe him, which is a little hard to understand if his miraculous birth was well-known. Nevertheless, if not from his family one wonders where this fact derives from and why we would expect it, in this case to be true. I think the author is a bit too conservative in light of these facts, in not making a pronouncement one way or another. But nevertheless the entire discussion was fascinating.

The other really interesting topic discussed was the brothers of Jesus, namely whether they are biological siblings, or just cousins. A thorough analysis reveals that they more than likely were biological siblings.

I am excited to read the follow up books in the series. It's disappointing that it seems the series will never be finished, but I'm happy that at the very least there are four more books in this series presumably of the same quality.

[Beauregard Bottomley · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book provided an underwhelming re-presentation of all too familiar well worn-out tropes of Jesus while never straying too far from the unoriginal orthodoxical.

Perhaps in 1991 this book was breaking new territory. Today it at best would be called superfluous. There’s a real story that could be gleamed from the time-period, but the author purposely never ventured beyond the Biblical mundane.

There are a lot of stories that can be gleamed from the time-period and generalities can be inferred from other sources. I get the feeling that Jesus believed he was the fulfillment of messianic prophecies and his followers believed that too. There’s a story to be told when a society’s norms are collapsing and the Jews of Galilee are becoming economically marginalized and Herod is building Caesaria at the expense of the down-trodden and a social justice warrior such as Jesus wants to affect change. This book never tells that story because the author always keeps the story dull and within the Biblical point-of-view.

[Henry Sturcke · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is part of the Anchor Bible Reference Library. It intends to serve as an overview of the quest for the historical Jesus. Meier writes on two levels: the main body of the text, aimed at beginning graduate students in New Testament Studies as well as interested and informed non-theologians, can be read without reference to the endnotes. The notes, which make up more than half the book, engage the scholarly literature and are meant to serve those who want to deepen their own research on a given issue.
In introducing the topic of the book, Meier distinguishes between the “real” and the “historical” Jesus, with “real” denoting the Jesus of Nazareth who lived in the early first century and was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and “historical” referring to our reconstructions of that person. This is an important and useful distinction, even if it is difficult to observe consistently. Meier writes that this book “asks what, within the Gospels and other sources available, really goes back to the historical Jesus” (p. 10), leaving the reader to wonder how anything can “really” go back to a construct.
In addition to the “real” and the “historical” Jesus, there is a third figure: Jesus Christ as the object of faith. I found this statement, at about the halfway point in the book, to be a useful summary of Meier’s take on their relation: “What, then — ask the objectors — is the usefulness of the historical Jesus to people of faith? My reply is: none, if one is asking solely about the direct object of Christian faith: Jesus Christ, crucified, risen, and presently reigning in his Church. This presently reigning Lord is accessible to all believers, including all those who will never study history or theology for even a single day in their lives. Yet I maintain that the quest for the historical Jesus can be very useful if one is asking about faith seeking understanding, i.e., theology, in a contemporary context. . . . Theology is a cultural artifact; therefore, once a culture becomes permeated with a historical-critical approach, as has Western culture from the Enlightenment onward, theology can operate in and speak to that culture with credibility only if it absorbs into its methodology a historical approach” (p. 198).
This book is divided into two parts, roughly equal in length. The first half is devoted to a survey of possible sources of useable material for constructing the historical Jesus. In many ways, Meier provides a useful summary of these sources, and his endnotes give a good overview of the state of research at the time this book appeared. Yet at times, his evaluation of the work of other scholars reflects a tendentiousness that doesn’t fit well with the aim of the book nor the series in which it appears.
For instance, in setting the stage for his discussion of the manuscripts found at Nag Hammadi, instead of simply referencing the work done by Christopher Tuckett in evaluating these texts for what they can contribute to the search for the historical Jesus, he prefaces the discussion by writing, “Fortunately for us, we do not have to agonize our way through every Christian document in the Nag Hammadi Library.” Meier’s exasperation with the material shows.
He also saves for last his discussion of one document found there that could indeed contribute to the quest for the historical Jesus, the Gospel of Thomas. This allows him to assume a framework (late, tainted by “Gnosticism”) that tilts the treatment toward dismissing any potential evidence found there.
In the second half of the book, Meier turns to the question of the life of Jesus before he left Nazareth. He offers a balanced discussion of the infancy narratives, largely drawing on the work of Raymond Brown. I particularly liked Meier’s decision to use the so-called “hidden years” (the years before Jesus was baptized by John and began his public ministry) for a general discussion of family life and education available to a peasant youth in the village of Nazareth in the early decades of the first century. I was surprised by his reticence concerning the contact with Hellenistic culture that would have been afforded growing up so close to Sepphoris, which Herod Antipas used as his capital during Jesus’s youth. The many building projects Antipas initiated would have offered work to all available practitioners of the building trades in the area; it is inconceivable that Joseph and Jesus would have distanced themselves from it, even if the family was, as Meier speculates, highly patriotic.
At the outset, Meier outlines his intention to present this work as a consensus document. His image for this aim is that his book could be the result of locking four New Testament scholars — Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, agnostic — in the basement of the library of Harvard Divinity School until they had reached agreement. In common with most scholars working in the Western world, he failed to realize there should be at least five scholars locked in the room, with at least one representing the riches of the Eastern churches.
Rather than balancing the viewpoints of his four hypothetical scholars, much of the text, for instance, those sections dealing with the virgin birth and the family of Jesus, engages Meier’s own fellow Roman Catholics, intending to reassure them that application of the historical-critical approach is not a rejection of the particular faith claims of the Catholic tradition. His position is that these claims are the result of dogmatic discussion after the composition of the New Testament sources, and therefore not the concern of historical treatment of the New Testament. I think he’s correct in this, but let’s have a show of hands: how many of you have come across the word “prescind�� in your reading in the past year? I haven’t. Yet, in this book, it appears repeatedly. I didn’t keep count, but it seems to me that Meier uses it — his preferred term for compartmentalizing matters of faith and matters of Biblical scholarship — about a dozen times. This gives a rough idea of how the space he devotes to this discussion unbalances the book overall.
The Gospel of John famously concludes with the remark, “But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” If that is true of the deeds of Jesus, it’s even more applicable to the many books analyzing and interpreting the small selection of those words and deeds that the evangelists did record. When this book appeared, nearly thirty years ago, it was announced as the first of two volumes, with the second to treat Jesus’s public ministry and his crucifixion. Instead, four more volumes have appeared so far, and Meier is said to be working on volume 6.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

ONE OF THE FINEST RECENT HISTORICAL TREATMENTS OF THE LIFE OF JESUS

John Paul Meier (born 1942) is a Catholic priest and biblical scholar who is Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame. The successor volumes to this book are 'Vol. 2 - Mentor, Message, and Miracles,' 'Volume Three,' and 'Volume 4: Law and Love.'

He wrote in the Introduction to this 1991 book (which received the Imprimatur), "This book grapples with one of the greatest puzzles of modern religious scholarship, the historical Jesus... by the 'historical Jesus' I mean the Jesus whom we can recover, recapture, or reconstruct by using the scientific tools of modern historical research... My method follows a simple rule: it prescinds from what Christian faith or later Church teaching says about Jesus, without either affirming or denying such claims." (Pg. 1)

He admits, "I must candidly confess that I work out of a Catholic context... In what follows I will do my best to bracket what I hold by faith and examine only what can be shown to be certain or probable by historical research and logical argumentation." (Pg. 6)

He states, "While Mary might theoretically be the ultimate source for some traditions in the Infancy Narratives, grave problems beset the claim that she is the direct source of any narrative as it now stands. To begin with... Matthew and Luke diverge from or even contradict each other on certain key points... the story of Mary's purification in the temple confuses a number of distinct Jewish rituals... To be blunt: either Mary was not the source of the story of her purification or else she had a remarkably poor memory about important events... Either way, the case for the historical reliability of the Infancy Narratives is not enhanced." (Pg. 210)

He notes, "The Magi find Mary and Jesus when they enter 'into the HOUSE' (2:11), not into a stable or a cave. Presumably this is house Joseph and Mary dwell in permanently in Bethlehem. This in turn fits well with the fact that Herod... orders the slaughter of all boys in Bethlehem... 'two years of age and younger.' ... In other words, Matthew's story does not presume that Jesus has just been born when the Magi arrive." (Pg. 211)

He says, "Matthew thinks of Bethlehem as Joseph's permanent home---so much so that he must strain to explain how Jesus wound up living permanently in Nazareth as so was called 'the Nazorean'... Luke presents the opposite pattern... Another reason must be found for Mary's presence in Bethlehem when Jesus was born. Luke's solution is a world-wide census decreed by Caesar Augustus when Quirinius was governor of Syria (2:1)---unfortunately, such a census (which would have had to occur ca. 5 B.C.) cannot be documented in any other ancient source. According to ancient records, Quirinius, who became governor of Syria at A.D. 6, conducted a census of Judea, but not of Galilee, in A.D. 6-7. Attempts to reconcile Luke 2;1 with the facts of ancient history are hopelessly contrived." (Pg. 212-213)

He concedes, "Taken by itself, historical-critical research simply does not have the sources and tools available to reach a final decision on the historicity of the virginal conception as narrated by Matthew and Luke. One's acceptance or rejection of the doctrine will be largely influenced by one's own philosophical and theological presuppositions, as well as the weight one gives Church teaching." (Pg. 222)

He concludes, "Nevertheless, if---prescinding from faith and later Church teaching---the historian or exegete is asked to render a judgment on the NT and patristic texts we have examined, viewed simply as historical sources, the most probable opinion is that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were true siblings." (Pg. 331)

On the question of whether the Last Supper was a Passover meal, he points out, "Various scholars have tried to harmonize the Synoptic and Johannine chronologies... the attempts at reconciliation usually boil down to some theory that shows that ... They are simply calculating the date of Passover according to different Jewish calendars or modes of reckoning... Among the older solutions, the best known was the one of ... Paul Billerbeck... [Yet] Billerbeck cannot prove that any two-day slaughter of Passover lambs ever took place in the Jerusalem temple during the time of Jesus." (Pg. 390-391) He concludes, "a number of considerations lead me to favor the basic outline of the Johannine chronology as the most likely." (Pg. 395)

Whether or not one agrees with Meier on every issue, this book is "MUST READING" for anyone studying the historical Jesus.

[Andrew Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent research illustrating what can be implied from the historical references about Jesus. Very detailed and with exceptional footnotes. Covers early years of Jesus, before he started his ministry. Discusses references made by Josephus and Tacitus.
Concludes by saying that Jesus was most likely born in Nazareth ca. 7 or 6 B.C. He begun his public ministry early in 28 A.D. In 30 A.D. on Thursday evening, April 6 he celebrated his Last Supper. Arrested soon after he was handed over to Pilate early in the morning of Friday, April 7. He was dead by the evening of Friday, April 7, 30. He was about thirty six years old.

[Kathleen Basi · Rating 5 out of 5]

During part 1, where Meier sets out his methodology, I thought I was not going to make it through. Immediately after getting into the meat of the study, I was hooked. A long, deep, slow read, a page or two at a time. I did not read the footnotes, which double (at least) the length of the book. I would never have finished if I had tried; in the short pieces of time I had to read this, I would have lost the thread of the narrative.

[Barbara · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book as assigned in an advanced theology course at my local college. I recommend part II of the book for the average reader who wants to learn about Christ's life in first century Palestein. Part I focuses on sourcing and is not necessary to anyone interested in simply getting to know more about Christ's humanity.

[Oleg · Rating 5 out of 5]

I. Об авторе

Джон Пи Майер (John P. Meier, 1942–2022) — выдающийся американский библеист, один из ведущих специалистов по теме исторического Иисуса и раннего христианства. Он был профессором теологии в Университете Нотр-Дам (Индиана) и автором многотомного исследования «A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus» («Маргинальный еврей: переосмысление исторического Иисуса»), которое считается его главным трудом и которое оказало значительное влияние на современное научное понимание исторической личности Иисуса Христа.

Первый том «Маргинального еврея» был написан более 30 лет назад. Однако тщательность научной проработки материала у Майера такова, что я, не будучи специалистом в библеистике, уверен в актуальности многих его выводов.


II. Введение

Цель книги — установить ограниченный консенсус относительно исторического Иисуса.

Под историческим Иисусом автор понимает такого Христа, которого мы можем «восстановить» и исследовать с помощью научных инструментов современной исторической науки. Исторический Иисус может дать нам фрагменты «реального» человека, но не более того. Исторический Иисус всегда будет меньше, чем истинная личность (это применимо в принципе ко всем людям).

Независимо от того, называем ли мы это предвзятостью, мировоззрением или позицией веры, каждый, кто пишет об историческом Иисусе, пишет с некоторой идеологической точки зрения; ни один критик не является исключением. В случае автора, он откровенно признаёт, что работает в католическом контексте. Тем не менее, в книге Джон П. Майер старается максимально отстраняться от того, что он принимает на веру, и рассматривать только то, что можно показать как достоверное или вероятное с помощью исторических исследований и логических аргументов.

III. Источники сведений об историческом Иисусе

Четыре канонических Евангелия являются единственными крупными документами, содержащими значительные блоки материала, относящегося к поискам исторического Иисуса. Остальная часть Нового Завета предлагает лишь отдельные релевантные фрагменты, преимущественно в посланиях Павла. За пределами Нового Завета единственным независимым нехристианским свидетелем Иисуса в I веке н. э. является Иосиф Флавий, но его знаменитое «Свидетельство Флавия» (Testimonium Flavianum) требует критической редакции для удаления позднейших христианских вставок. Даже после этого Иосиф подтверждает основные черты портрета Иисуса, представленного в Евангелиях, но не добавляет ничего принципиально нового. Если Тацит является независимым источником — что сомнительно — он лишь дополнительно подтверждает казнь Иисуса по приказу Понтия Пилата в Иудее во времена Тиберия. Остальные языческие греко-римские авторы (Светоний, Плиний Младший, Лукиан Самосатский) не дают ранней независимой информации об Иисусе.Таким образом, для практических целей наши ранние независимые источники по историческому Иисусу сводятся к четырём Евангелиям, нескольким разрозненным данным в других частях Нового Завета и Иосифу Флавию.

Джон П. Майер не считает, что раввинские материалы, агады, апокрифические Евангелия и кодексы Наг-Хаммади (в частности, Евангелие от Фомы) дают нам надёжную дополнительную информацию об Иисусе, независимую от Нового Завета. В этих поздних документах скорее отражена реакция на тексты Нового Завета или их переработка раввинами, занятыми религиозной полемикой, и гностическими христианами, развивавшими мистические спекулятивные системы.

К лучшему или худшему, в поиске исторического Иисуса мы в значительной мере ограничены каноническими Евангелиями.


III. Об Иисусе

A. Имя  

«Иисус» (Yesu) к первому веку стало распространённой формой имени, хотя «Иешуа» / «Иисус Навин» (Joshua) не исчез полностью.«Иисус» оставался популярным именем среди евреев до начала II века н. э., когда, возможно, христианское почитание Иисуса Христа заставило евреев прекратить использовать «Иешуа» как личное имя. Вместо этого они возродили «Иисус Навин» как обычную форму имени, которую носили многие известные раввины. Таким образом, после II века имя «Иисус» стало редким среди евреев.

Имя «Иешуа» изначально означало «Яхве помогает» или «Пусть Яхве поможет». Затем первоначальная этимология была забыта, и возникла народная этимология. Имя стали толковать как «Яхве спа��ает» или «Пусть Яхве спасёт».

Имя Иисуса из Назарета, возможно, имеет дополнительный смысл в контексте Галилеи I века. Вероятно, не случайно, что, как и он сам, все родственники Иисуса носят имена, отсылающие к патриархам, исходу из Египта и вступлению в обетованную землю. Его предполагаемый отец — Иосиф, это имя одного из двенадцати сыновей Иакова/Израиля и прародителя через Ефрема и Манассию двух из двенадцати колен.Его мать — Мария, на иврите Мириам, имя сестры Моисея. Его четыре брата — Иаков, Иосия, Симон и Иуда — названы в честь патриарха, породившего двенадцать сыновей/колен Израиля (Иаков) и трёх из этих двенадцати сыновей.

Б. Рождение и юность: источники

Детство Иисуса описано только в Евангелиях от Матфея и Луки, но они противоречат друг другу.

У Матфея, Мария и Иосиф живут в Вифлееме; затем, спустя некоторое время после рождения Иисуса (до двух лет), в Вифлеем приходят волхвы и входят в дом (не в пещеру, не в вертеп). Потом Ирод хочет истребить новорождённых, и Святое Семейство бежит в Египет. Они возвращаются после смерти Ирода, но так как Иудеей правит Архелай (сын Ирода), они оседают в Галилее (где правит другой сын Ирода).

У Луки же Мария и Иосиф изначально из Назарета. Чтобы привести их в Вифлеем, Лука ссылается на перепись, которая, по римским источникам, произошла примерно на 11 лет позже (6–7 гг. н. э.).
Отсюда лишь два исторических вывода, о которых учёные могут согласиться: Иисус родился во время правления Ирода. Его матерью и предполагаемым отцом были Мария и Иосиф (хотя Иосиф прямо не упоминается у Марка).

Место рождения Иисуса установить невозможно. Вифлеем упоминается только у Матфея и Луки, а другие Евангелия, а также послания апостолов об этом городе умалчивают.

Следует помнить, что в целом история может мало что сказать с уверенностью или высокой вероятностью о рождении, младенчестве и юности подавляющего большинства исторических деятелей древнего Средиземноморья. Иисус примечателен тем, что хотя бы некоторые факты его биографии можно подтвердить с достаточно высокой степенью уверенности или вероятности.

В. Семья, семейное положение и «скрытые годы»

Семья Иисуса состояла из матери Марии, предполагаемого отца Иосифа, четырёх братьев и как минимум двух сестёр.
Отсутствие Иосифа во время публичного служения Иисуса лучше всего объясняется традиционной идеей, что он к тому времени уже умер. Мать Иисуса, братья и сёстры дожили до периода его служения, хотя и не без некоторого напряжения в отношениях между ними и Иисусом.

Полное молчание о жене или детях в Новом Завете лучше всего воспринимать как указание на то, что Иисус избрал весьма необычный, но не неизвестный путь целибата.

Выросший в Назарете, Иисус говорил на арамейском как на повседневном языке, при этом изучая иврит в местных синагогах и, возможно, получая более формальное образование от отца. Осваивая ремесло плотника, Иисус, вероятно, был вынужден или считал полезным выучить некоторые греческие выражения для деловых целей. Частые поездки семьи в Иерусалим на великие праздники давали ему возможность слышать больше греческого в этом многоязычном городе. Иисус, плотник из Назарета, был беден по современным американским меркам, но по меркам своего общества он не был беднее большинства галилеян.

Иисус в Назарете был неприметен, и его обыденность подразумевала обычный статус мирянина, без особых религиозных полномочий. Как галилейский мирянин, он сначала казался незначительным для первосвященнических семей в Иерусалиме — пока не стал казаться опасным. Частые визиты Иисуса в Иерусалим во время служения могли способствовать быстро растущей взаимной враждебности между иерусалимскими священниками и галилейским мирянином.

IV. Хронология жизни Иисуса

Иисус родился — скорее всего в Назарете, а не в Вифлееме — около 7 или 6 года до н. э., за несколько лет до смерти царя Ирода Великого (4 год до н. э.). После неприметного воспитания в набожной семье еврейских крестьян в Нижней Галилее он был привлечён движением Иоанна Крестителя, который начал своё служение в районе Иорданской долины около конца 27 или начала 28 года н. э. Крещённый Иоанном, Иисус вскоре начал собственное публичное служение в начале 28 года н. э., когда ему было около тридцати трёх или тридцати четырёх лет.Он регулярно чередовал проповедничество между родной Галилеей и Иерусалимом (включая окрестности Иудеи), посещая святой город на великие праздники, когда большие толпы паломников гарантировали ему большую аудиторию. Это служение длилось два года и несколько месяцев. В 30 г. н. э., находясь в Иерусалиме на приближающуюся Пасху, он, по-видимому, почувствовал, что растущая враждебность иерусалимских храмовых властей к нему скоро достигнет апогея. Он отпраздновал прощальную трапезу со своим ближайшим кругом учеников в вечер четверга, 6 апреля по современному исчислению, то есть в начале четырнадцатого дня нисана, дня приготовления к Пасхе по еврейскому литургическому исчислению. Арестованный в Гефсимании в ночь на 7 апреля, он сначала был допрошен некоторыми еврейскими чиновниками (менее вероятно — всем Синедрионом), а затем передан Пилату рано утром в пятницу, 7 апреля. Пилат быстро приговорил его к смерти через распятие.После бичевания и насмешек Иисус был распят за пределами Иерусалима в тот же день. Он умер к вечеру пятницы, 7 апреля 30 г. н. э. Ему было около тридцати шести лет.

[Claudio · Rating 3 out of 5]

Per chi si avvicina per la prima volta agli studi su Gesù storico può trovare qui una trattazione soddisfacente.
Per chi ha letto le opere più importanti da Guignebert a Bultmann fino ai più recenti Jeremias, Bornkamm, Vermes, Sanders, Jesus Seminar, ecc.. non troverà in questo volume niente di sorprendentemente nuovo. Il libro si serve dei risultati già raggiunti dai citati studiosi in due secoli di studi per esaminare le fonti (i vangeli), l'ambiente storico del tempo, Gesù ebreo con la mentalità dell'epoca, ecc..Riporto un brano conclusivo:
Per chi si avvicina per la prima volta agli studi su Gesù storico può trovare qui una trattazione soddisfacente.
Per chi ha letto le opere più importanti da Guignebert a Bultmann fino ai più recenti Jeremias, Bornkamm, Vermes, Sanders, Jesus Seminar, ecc.. non troverà in questo volume niente di sorprendentemente nuovo. Il libro si serve dei risultati già raggiunti dai citati studiosi in due secoli di studi per esaminare le fonti (i vangeli), l'ambiente storico del tempo, Gesù ebreo con la mentalità dell'epoca, ecc..Riporto un brano conclusivo:
Gesù di Nazaret nacque - più verosimilmente a Nazaret e non a Betlemme - nel 6 o 7 a.C. circa, qualche anno prima della morte del re Erode il Grande (4 a.C.}. Dopo una educazione non straordinaria in una famiglia devota di contadini giudei nella bassa Galilea, fu attratto dal movimento di Giovanni Battista che cominciò il suo ministero nella valle del Giordano verso la fine del 27 d.C. o all'inizio del 28. Battezzato da Giovanni, subito, per conto suo, Gesù cominciò, agli inizi del 28, il suo ministero pubblico, quando aveva circa trentatré o trentaquattro anni. Alternò regolarmente la sua attività tra la nativa Galilea e Gerusalemme (inclusa l'area circostante della Giudea), salendo alla città santa per le grandi feste, quando grandi folle di pellegrini potevano garantire un uditorio che altrimenti non avrebbe potuto raggiungere. Questo ministero si protrasse per due anni e pochi mesi.
Nel 30 d.C., mentre Gesù era a Gerusalemme per l’approssimarsi della festa di pasqua, evidentemente ebbe la sensazione che la crescente ostilità delle autorità del tempio di Gerusalemme nei suoi confronti stesse per raggiungere il culmine. Celebrò un solenne banchetto di addio con il gruppo più ristretto dei suoi discepoli un giovedì sera, il 6 aprile secondo il nostro computo moderno, l’inizio del quattordicesimo giorno di Nisan, il giorno della preparazione di pasqua, secondo il computo liturgico giudaico. Arrestato nel Getsemani nella notte tra il 6 e il 7 aprile, dapprima fu esaminato da alcuni capi giudei (meno verosimilmente dall'intero sinedrio) e poi consegnato a Pilato venerdì, 7 aprile di buon mattino. Pilato, rapidamente, lo condannò a morte per crocifissione. Dopo essere stato flagellato e schernito, Gesù fu crocifisso, fuori Gerusalemme nello stesso giorno. Morì la sera di venerdì, 7 aprile 30. Aveva circa trentasei anni.
Ciò che sorprende è che a scrivere il libro è un teologo cattolico chiamato a tenere conferenze anche dall'università vaticana a Roma. Si giustifica affermando che il suo intento è di studiare il Gesù storico e non quello della fede. Ma può un prete cattolico conciliare il dogma della feda con i risultati della ricerca storica? Vedremo nei prossimi volumi.

[Michelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been meaning to read this for years and finally did it - although it's long and put me behind my reading target! It's very thorough but still very interesting.

So Meier is looking into the issue of the historical Jesus and various aspects of his life. For each aspect he pulls together basically every source that has a bearing on the issue (mostly the four canonical Gospels, sometimes Paul's letters, other early Jewish sources like Qumran, secular sources such as Josephus, Tacitus, etc) and synthesises what can be said about it and with what probability. Although he was a Catholic priest, he takes a handful of criteria (e.g. criterion of embarrassment, criterion of multiple attestation, etc; a few of these have since fallen out of favour I believe) and applies them fairly. There is a lot of close reading of texts, which I adore. There was only one section where I found myself getting bored, because I knew what I would conclude from the first source, but he insisted on going through every other source.

He concludes that Jesus did exist, and to various degrees of possibility/probability other aspects of his life, e.g. did he have a wife (probably not). He also figures out to a fair degree of precision the probable years of major events of Jesus' birth, start of ministry, and death.

The rest is for future volumes, e.g. which miracles does Meier consider historical (in the sense that they were part of the Jesus lore at the time of his death, roughly, not that a miracle actually happened). Unfortunately, Meier died in 2022 leaving his sixth volume unfinished, which would have covered Jesus' self-identification and the end of Jesus' life - just the bits I would have most wanted Meier's painstaking reconstruction. So it goes.

[David Szatkowski · Rating 4 out of 5]

Meier poses the question - what would a Catholic, Protestant, Jew, and atheist all say about the historical (person) Jesus of Nazareth? What evidence can we use to talk about the historical facts of Jesus (as opposed to the Christ of Faith)? Meier, who is Catholic, puts aside what he ascertains by faith through the Church's teaching on Jesus Christ. So, based on the historical evidence of Jesus in and outside the canonical gospels...what can we say? And why? This book was originally published as a rebuttal to Crossan (so I'm told) and was to be 2 volumes (per the introduction). This series (5 total) seeks to answer that question. This volume focuses on questions such as: when and where was Jesus born? When did he die? What can we say about Joseph? What can we say about the family of Jesus? The end notes of each chapter will allow you to pursue specific lines of scholarship and debate, should you chose to read them. You can also read the bibliography for further information on specific points. I do not recommend this book for those unfamiliar with historical-critical method, or those who have not done some history/Bible study in the past. Also, be aware, the text is written for those who study on the graduate/upper level undergraduate level, so the text can be dense at times. If you are interested in reading this book, you might find it more easily via online book stores (and finding a used copy) than on the shelves of current bookstores as it was published in 1991.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

John Meier's pursuit of constructing a historical Jesus is driven by a critical examination of the Gospels and insightful consideration of the contexts that surround them while dosed with a healthy amount of skepticism. Meier's matter-of-fact approach (that is, to take away the claims and data that are based on faith) to his pursuit however I feel is held back by his goal of appealing to different denominations (Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Atheists, etc.). In effect I feel that some of his claims lack solidity, such as the aspect of Jesus's virgin birth left in the dark despite the conventions of natural science having us presuppose that anyone born should at least have parents who fucked. Regardless, his analysis is well-grounded and thorough while his writing is understandable and engaging enough to the learned reader.

[Kyle Evens · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first in Msgr. Meier’s series and also my favorite. It hits on the appropriate amount of literary criticism and develops a reasonable schema for ferreting out POTENTIAL truths from obvious fabrication. That is what makes this a good text vis-a-vis typical texts in the ‘Bible History’ cottage industry—we are going along with Father Meier in an effort to determine what events, dates, speeches could NOT have happened rather than foolishly attempting to prove that which is ultimately a question of faith.

The later volumes carry on this tradition but as the focus becomes much narrower in Christological and Gospel-as-redactional-criticism, it gets to be a lot more work to find issues that at times feel had no need to be disproven.

[Christopher Chandler · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's not as comprehensive as other Historical Jesus books, but it might be my favorite for what it is. It's a phenomenal introduction to some of the important questions and roadblocks to studying Jesus. Even the way the book is laid out makes you feel like you're making progress really quickly. I think pt2 "Roots of the Person" provide some of the most fascinating little details a lot of books skip over like the origins of Jesus' name, language, and education levels.

You don't get much of Jesus' adult life in this volume (that's the following works), but this is about as good an introduction as I know of.

[Sandra · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not for the casual reader. This is a scholarly work that takes a careful look at what we know, what we can know about the historical Jesus. Volume 1 is the setup volume, that defines the scope, meaning of historical, sources and the infancy narratives of Jesus.

Although the book is, as I said, a scholarly work, it is highly readable. One of the things I most appreciated was that the author confines the finer details and most esoteric commentary to the notes section, so that the book itself flows beautifully.

For those truly interested in studying the life of Christ from an historical context, this is a must read.

[Graham Marker · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an excellent book on two things. 1: The criteria and background that is required to perform historical inquiry about not only Jesus and the Gospels, but into 1st century Palestine and Jerusalem. 2. What historians can say with confidence about the outline of Jesus' life. Not necessarily what he said and thought, but more so the general outline and time table. I particularly enjoyed the chapters about Jesus' family, potential martial status (or lack thereof), and his childhood. I can't wait to read the rest of the series.

[Jairo Pérez · Rating 5 out of 5]

Meier, como el gran erudito que es, da una gran introducción (a personas ya conocedores de estudios bíblicos) al problema del estudio del Jesús Histórico, sentando bases para determinar la historicidad de los episodios concernientes al Nazareno y exponer la importancia del estudio de su vida. Este libro es un clásico y una lectura obligatoria para cualquiera interesado en la vida del hombre más influyente de la historia, Jesús de Nazaret.

[Cooper Renner · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really two books in one: the main text for the educated general reader, the copious chapter notes for the scholar. A careful examination of the available evidence for the life of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jew from the margins of his society, as a man, an investigable figure, as opposed to the Jesus of Faith, Jesus the lord. I read the main text and very few of the notes.

[David Diaz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Apart from the assumption that the Jesus of history is different than the Christ of faith, this book yields exceptional insight into the historical milieu of first century Palestine. Nevertheless, because of its underlying assumptions, the conclusions are what one might expect from one who deconstructs the biblical text using predominantly historical-critical methods.

[Ryan Panzer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Borrowed this book from my grandpa, thinking I'd skim a few pages and maybe read something interesting. I wound up reading the entire volume and immediately beginning volume two. Book is an intriguing and objective look at the importance and limitations of studying the historical Jesus.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

So was it a Passover Meal, or wasn’t it? Meier does a good job in sifting the scanty evidence for things we have come to believe down through the ages. I’ve read this book a couple of times. Very detailed and much beyond the understanding of many of us, but still worthwhile and thought provoking.

[Spencer Edsall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Certainly includes the most research I have ever seen in a book. Meier gives a fascinating look at the life of Jesus, going into great detail. He does a good job at looking at Jesus both as a historian and as a theologian.

[Costangeles · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s not an easy, light book. It’s dense, cautious, and highly academic. But if you care about separating historical reality from theological imagination, Meier has a goldmine prepared for you. Definitely not for everyone, but if you’re curious and skeptical, this is worth every page.

[Katy Sisko · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very well done, a good overview of the topic without obvious biases. Looking forward to vol. 2

[Mark Nichols · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent, an important subject in the hands of a careful, respectful and thorough historian.

[Joseph J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Groundbreaking and thought provoking. My theology professor recommended it (after I bought it making me feel great!) From personal experience, conversation stimulating.

[Dan Nuxoll · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book draws a clear distinction between what can be ascertained using the criteria of history and what is a matter of belief. Moreover, instead of using the clumsy dichotomy between historical and not historical, the book discusses events in terms of degrees--how likely are events to have occurred as presented. The author is also vividly aware that history can identify what is likely to have occurred, but that is different from what actually occurred. The fact that an event is historically implausible does not mean that it did not occur. Meier is perfectly clear that this is a book of history.

The segregation of belief and history is somewhat difficult in the case of Christianity, however. Christianity is distinctive in that it believes that God entered history in a specific place and a specific time--the person of Jesus is central to Christianity. The story of Jesus is vital to Christians, so Christians are sensitive to questions of historicity.

This is the first of a projected series of volumes (I don't believe the last has been published yet). I think this is a very judicious approach to the issues. This is not a "spiritual" book in the sense that it will inspire one. However, I learned a good deal about first century Judaism and I think it helps me understand the New Testament better.

By the way, I am a believing Catholic.

[Jacob · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book provided a somewhat promising start to this 4 volume series. I thought Meier did a good job of presenting the difficulties and setting forth his methodology. Many of his discussions on 'reconciling' texts were interesting and fair, especially his covering of the Lord's Supper/Passover. I question whether it is possible or right to discuss Jesus apart from theology. How can one speak of the 'real' Jesus w/o introducing theology? This is an interesting question in its own right, but perhaps more intricate as we discuss the implications of his divinity, miracles, and resurrection. Can we talk about miracles w/o talking about theology? Or to word it another way, does it take faith (whether Christian or other) to believe in miracles? If Jesus performed miracles, can we talk about the 'real' Jesus w/o introducing faith? I would disagree with some of his methodology, but I found it to be a good and interesting read.