Collection
Status
Available
Description
Biography & Autobiography. Politics. Religion & Spirituality. Nonfiction. HTML:#1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER � �A lucid, intelligent page-turner� (Los Angeles Times) that challenges long-held assumptions about Jesus, from the host of Believer Two thousand years ago, an itinerant Jewish preacher walked across the Galilee, gathering followers to establish what he called the �Kingdom of God.� The revolutionary movement he launched was so threatening to the established order that he was executed as a state criminal. Within decades after his death, his followers would call him God. Sifting through centuries of mythmaking, Reza Aslan sheds new light on one of history�s most enigmatic figures by examining Jesus through the lens of the tumultuous era in which he lived. Balancing the Jesus of the Gospels against the historical sources, Aslan describes a man full of conviction and passion, yet rife with contradiction. He explores the reasons the early Christian church preferred to promulgate an image of Jesus as a peaceful spiritual teacher rather than a politically conscious revolutionary. And he grapples with the riddle of how Jesus understood himself, the mystery that is at the heart of all subsequent claims about his divinity. Zealot yields a fresh perspective on one of the greatest stories ever told even as it affirms the radical and transformative nature of Jesus� life and mission. Praise for Zealot �Riveting . . . Aslan synthesizes Scripture and scholarship to create an original account.��The New Yorker �Fascinatingly and convincingly drawn . . . Aslan may come as close as one can to respecting those who revere Jesus as the peace-loving, turn-the-other-cheek, true son of God depicted in modern Christianity, even as he knocks down that image.��The Seattle Times �[Aslan�s] literary talent is as essential to the effect of Zealot as are his scholarly and journalistic chops. . . . A vivid, persuasive portrait.��Salon �This tough-minded, deeply political book does full justice to the real Jesus, and honors him in the process.��San Francisco Chronicle �A special and revealing work, one that believer and skeptic alike will find surprising, engaging, and original.��Jon Meacham, Pulitzer Prize�winning author of Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power �Compulsively readable . . . This superb work is highly recommended.��Publishers Weekly (starred review).… (more)
Media reviews
There is a sense in which each "biographer" of Jesus of Nazareth is like my young son: once I finish the work then I will know what the subject looks like. Reza Aslan is no different. He is an Iranian-American writer and scholar of religions and is a contributing editor for The Daily Beast. He is
Show More
best known as the author of No God but God: The Origin, Evolution, and Future of Islam, which has been translated into thirteen languages and named by Blackwell as one of the 100 most important books of the last decade. His new book is Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. In a recent interview with The Nation Aslan is asked, Your Jesus is "the man who defied the will of the most powerful empire the world had ever known--and lost." Sounds a bit like Bradley Manning.He answers:
I think you could make a lot of comparisons in that regard. The historical Jesus took on the powers that be on behalf of the poor and the dispossessed, the outcast and the marginalized; he sacrificed himself for a group that most Romans--and the Jewish elite--didn't consider to be real people, much less people worthy of salvation.
Most of his approach is evident in that answer. Jesus, he argues, was outcast and marginalized, probably illiterate, and filled with zeal for the Jewish religion he was born into. He reminds us that the gospels were written after 70 CE, an important date because that is when the Romans returned and destroyed Jerusalem, burning the temple to the ground. The Romans slaughtered thousands of Jews, exiled the rest, and made Judaism a "pariah religion". [Read the interview here.] Show Less
Zealot reflects wide reading in the secondary literature that has emerged in the scholarly study of the historical Jesus. In that sense, as one colleague of mine puts it, Aslan is a reader rather than a researcher. Aslan’s reconstruction of the life of Jesus invests a surprisingly literalist
Show More
faith in some parts of the gospel narratives. For example, he argues, against the scholarly consensus, that the so-called “messianic secret” in the Gospel of Mark (a text written four decades after the death of Jesus) reflects an actual political strategy of the historical Jesus rather than a literary device by which the author of that text made sense of conflicting bits of received tradition. His readings of the canonical gospels give little attention to the fact that the writers of these texts were engaged in a complex intertextual practice with the Hebrew scriptures in Greek, that these writers were interested in demonstrating that Jesus fulfilled prophecies written centuries earlier—in short, that the gospel writers were writers with (sometimes modest, sometimes expansive) literary aspirations and particular theological axes to grind. Biblical scholars have, over many decades, sought to develop methods of textual analysis to tease out these various interests and threads.
But Aslan does not claim to be engaged in literary analysis but in history-writing. One might then expect his reconstruction of the world of Jesus of Nazareth to display a deep understanding of second-temple Judaism. Yet, his historical reconstruction is partial in both senses of the term.
...
Simply put, Zealot does not break new ground in the history of early Christianity. It isn’t clear that any book framed as a “the life and times of Jesus of Nazareth” could, in fact, do so. Indeed, if it had not been thrust into the limelight by an aggressive marketing plan, the painfully offensive Fox News interview, and Aslan’s own considerable gifts for self-promotion, Zealot would likely have simply been shelved next to myriad other examples of its genre, and everyone could get back to their lives. As it is, the whole spectacle has been painful to watch. And as it is with so many spectacles, perhaps the best advice one might take is this: Nothing to see here, people. Move along. Show Less
Zealot likewise fits the temper of our times neatly -- too neatly. Aslan's controversial Fox News interview, about whether his Islamic background allows him to write an objective historical account of Jesus, obscures the real problem: the hubris of the professional provocateur.
Aslan has advanced
Show More
his career -- he is a professor of creative writing, not a historian -- with self-serving criticism of the "demonization" of Islam under the Bush administration. Having fled Iran in 1979 for the United States, he interprets the 9/11 attacks as a clarion call to Muslims in the Middle East to overthrow oppressive regimes. Thus, the Arab Spring is seen as the happy fruit of that horrific event: an unequivocal march toward political freedom. "Across the board," he told Mother Jones, "what has happened is that the regimes in the region now understand that they can no longer just ignore the will of the people." (Aslan has less to say about the pernicious influence of radical Islamist jihad in directing the "will of the people" in Egypt, Syria, Libya and beyond.) Show Less
“Zealot” shares some of the best traits of popular writing on scholarly subjects: it moves at a good pace; it explains complicated issues as simply as possible; it even provides notes for checking its claims.
But the book also suffers from common problems in popularization, like proposing
Show More
outdated and simplistic theories for phenomena now seen as more complex. Mr. Aslan depicts earliest Christianity as surviving in two streams after Jesus: a Hellenistic movement headed by Paul, and a Jewish version headed by James. This dualism repeats 19th-century German scholarship. Nowadays, most scholars believe that the Christian movement was much more diverse, even from its very beginnings.
Mr. Aslan also proposes outdated views when he insists that the idea of a “divine messiah” or a “god-man” would have been “anathema” to the Judaism of the time, or when he writes that it would have been “almost unthinkable” for a 30-year-old Jewish man to be unmarried. Studies of the past few decades — including “King and Messiah as Son of God” (Adela Yarbro Collins and John J. Collins) and my own “Sex and the Single Savior: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation” — have overturned these once commonplace assumptions.
There are several other errors, though most are minor. Show Less
Scholars and believers alike tend to contrast sharply the founders of Christianity and Islam: Jesus the apolitical man of peace who turns the other cheek; and Muhammad the politician, jurist and general who takes much of the Arabian Peninsula by force. In “Zealot,” Reza Aslan blurs this
Show More
distinction, depicting Jesus as a “politically conscious Jewish revolutionary” whose kingdom is decidedly of this world.
...
In short, Jesus was a frustrated Muhammad — a man who, like Islam’s founder, came to revolutionize the world by force yet, unlike Muhammad, failed. This makes for a good read. It might even make for a good movie. Just don’t tell me it’s true. Show Less
Aslan is best known for “No god but God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam” and his appearances on “The Daily Show,” but his literary talent is as essential to the effect of “Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” as are his scholarly and journalistic chops. This
Show More
book, he explains in an author’s note, is the result of “two decades of rigorous academic research into the origins of Christianity.” It’s also a vivid, persuasive portrait of the world and societies in which Jesus lived and the role he most likely played in both. Show Less
Had Reza Aslan not been interviewed in a gauche and silly fashion on Fox News, I doubt this book would be being reviewed at all. Zealot, to be as kind as possible, trudges down some very well-worn paths; its contribution to studies of Christianity is marginal bordering on negligible; and its
Show More
breathless style suggests hasty thought. Show Less
User reviews
LibraryThing member cushlareads
I bought this book without knowing about the fuss over the author’s interview on Fox News. It was sitting in my favourite independent bookshop and looked interesting, and the owner’s daughter had recommended it to her mother. At just over 200 pages, it looked like an accessible read about
As the negative reviews will tell you, Aslan has not written anything startlingly new. He presents a Jesus who was a Jewish peasant from Nazareth whose aim was to fight Roman domination of the Jews living in Palestine – the regions around Jerusalem that were governed by Rome with support from the Jewish upperclasses. I loved the overview I got of the region, the politics, the importance of the temple in Jerusalem, and the gleanings about Jesus and his followers. The material on the infighting between Paul, James and Peter after his death was fascinating. I am curious to see what my Christian friends think of some of the claims – that James was Jesus’ brother, for example. I thought he treated both Christianity and Judaism with respect, although he does tend to dismiss bits of the gospels as unreliable when they don’t fit his story and rely on others when they do. I didn’t love the lack of footnotes but I will look for other books to fill in gaps and give me a more balanced view.
Recommended if you are interested in religions and their development.
Show More
Jesus. My Catholic upbringing was heavy on gospels and short on history, so it looked like a good way to fill in some gaps. I was not disappointed. His writing style is gripping and the story was easy to follow, with decent maps and a timeline to help.As the negative reviews will tell you, Aslan has not written anything startlingly new. He presents a Jesus who was a Jewish peasant from Nazareth whose aim was to fight Roman domination of the Jews living in Palestine – the regions around Jerusalem that were governed by Rome with support from the Jewish upperclasses. I loved the overview I got of the region, the politics, the importance of the temple in Jerusalem, and the gleanings about Jesus and his followers. The material on the infighting between Paul, James and Peter after his death was fascinating. I am curious to see what my Christian friends think of some of the claims – that James was Jesus’ brother, for example. I thought he treated both Christianity and Judaism with respect, although he does tend to dismiss bits of the gospels as unreliable when they don’t fit his story and rely on others when they do. I didn’t love the lack of footnotes but I will look for other books to fill in gaps and give me a more balanced view.
Recommended if you are interested in religions and their development.
Show Less
LibraryThing member NielsenGW
There is a curious line in Josephus’ The Antiquities of the Jews. It reads: “…so he [Ananus, high priest of Judea] assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others…” This is one of the few
Aslan finds, in a very close reading of the Biblical and historical source material, that a different picture of Jesus emerges. He places Jesus in the historical context of the age. First century BCE Jews rebelled against their Roman leaders, especially as they began to denigrate the holiness of the Temple of Jerusalem by appointing unqualified high priests. Those who advocated for a separate nation for the Jews became known as Zealots. Aslan’s contention is that Jesus’s activities and sayings point to him being more a part of this movement that previously thought. Only after his crucifixion did he change the way in people believed and worshipped.
This book was interesting, but not in the way I thought it would be. While there is a good discussion on the life of Jesus, there is also a lot more on the history of ancient Judea and political movements of the day. Those who do not normally study in this era will pick a great deal of contextual information on Biblical history. Also, Aslan’s commentary on translation leads one to believe that the Biblical sources are not as cut and dry as they would seem to be. A curious and engaging book.
Show More
non-Biblical passages that give credence to the existence of an historical Jesus, and indeed, most historians are on board with the existence of a person named Jesus who lived and preached to Jews in Galilee and Judea. But what else can be gleaned from the historical record? And does this information change the way historians should view the life of Jesus? Reza Aslan’s believes so, and traces the life, teachings, and even his political agenda in Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. Aslan finds, in a very close reading of the Biblical and historical source material, that a different picture of Jesus emerges. He places Jesus in the historical context of the age. First century BCE Jews rebelled against their Roman leaders, especially as they began to denigrate the holiness of the Temple of Jerusalem by appointing unqualified high priests. Those who advocated for a separate nation for the Jews became known as Zealots. Aslan’s contention is that Jesus’s activities and sayings point to him being more a part of this movement that previously thought. Only after his crucifixion did he change the way in people believed and worshipped.
This book was interesting, but not in the way I thought it would be. While there is a good discussion on the life of Jesus, there is also a lot more on the history of ancient Judea and political movements of the day. Those who do not normally study in this era will pick a great deal of contextual information on Biblical history. Also, Aslan’s commentary on translation leads one to believe that the Biblical sources are not as cut and dry as they would seem to be. A curious and engaging book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Opinionated
A fascinating outline of the life and times of the historical Jesus. Rest assured, you don't need to be a Christian or be religious (I am neither) to enjoy this. Also, you shouldn't expect any discussion of the tenets of Christian faith such as the Resurrection. Aslan shrugs his shoulders at these;
And to this end sets a scene of apocalyptic fervor in 1st Century Judea; there are many messiahs, there is dissatisfaction with a bloated Jewish priesthood, and uprisings against Rome, which are brutally crushed. Its a turbulent time; but one potential messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, created enough concern for his name to be recorded by Roman historians.
The discussion of the "times" is illuminating - but sadly there are just very few sources to use when discussing Jesus' life. In the end, Aslan is forced to rely on the scriptures and although his textual analysis of these is fascinating, he does rather pick and choose the sources he is prepared to believe. If "Luke"'s description of the birth of Jesus is not to be taken literally (which seems self evident given that there is no record of the Roman's conducting any census etc), why then should his account of any other part of Jesus ministry be taken literally? .
However Aslan makes a strong case for the following 1. That Jesus was executed for the crime of sedition 2. That the idea that the Romans, specifically Pilate, were reluctant to execute him but bowed to Jewish pressure is ludicrous given Pilate's reputation for blood thirsty cruelty is well established 3. That far from being the meek, other worldly pacifist, Jesus was agitating for revolutionary change on earth in his lifetime. The last shall be first, and the first shall be last was meant to be taken literally. 4. His main battle was with the bloated, out of touch priesthood controlling the temple - but in the end he wanted to evict the Romans too. 5. In short, Jesus was a zealot. A man so passionate in his fundamental religious beliefs that he was prepared to fight and die for them.
There are 3 parts of the book I found particularly interesting; firstly Aslan's discussion of the meaning of the parable of the Good Samaritan. He argues that the point of the parable is not to praise the Samaritan; exactly the opposite. Samaritan's were held to be almost the lowest of the low in Judaism as they did not place the temple at the centre of their worship. Jesus' point here, Aslan contends, was not the good behaviour of the Samaritan but the bad behaviour of the priests who ignored the injured traveller . Look, Jesus, is saying, these priests are so bad that even a Samaritan, a Samaritan for goodness sake, behaves better than they do.
Secondly the discussion of the "Render unto Caesar" teaching. This is better translated as "Give back to Caesar" Aslan says, and I am in no position to argue with him. But if that translation is better, then the meaning of the teaching does seem to be clear. Look, Jesus is saying, this coin has Caesar's face on it. Its his. He can have it back. This land is God's and he wants it back
Thirdly the split in early Christianity between the Jerusalem sect based around Jesus' brother James, and the Greek converts led by Saul / Paul. This deserves a book of its own; but essentially James and those who had known what Paul describes as "flesh and blood" Jesus see their faith as essentially a fundamentalist strand of Judaism. Paul takes Jesus and turns him into something else entirely , something acceptable to Greeks and ultimately Romans
Its a very interesting book, but just to reemphasise it has very little to do with Christianity and the reader shouldn't expect that. Readers however may be struck by the similarity of the historical Jesus, as portrayed by Aslan, and the Jesus of the liberation theology movement of the 70s and the 80s. And they will see very little in the historical Jesus to support any love of free market economics, capitalism, or right wing reactionary politics generally. The last shall be first, and the first shall be last
Show More
either you believe them or you don't. They are nothing to do with history, and its the historical Jesus Aslan is seekingAnd to this end sets a scene of apocalyptic fervor in 1st Century Judea; there are many messiahs, there is dissatisfaction with a bloated Jewish priesthood, and uprisings against Rome, which are brutally crushed. Its a turbulent time; but one potential messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, created enough concern for his name to be recorded by Roman historians.
The discussion of the "times" is illuminating - but sadly there are just very few sources to use when discussing Jesus' life. In the end, Aslan is forced to rely on the scriptures and although his textual analysis of these is fascinating, he does rather pick and choose the sources he is prepared to believe. If "Luke"'s description of the birth of Jesus is not to be taken literally (which seems self evident given that there is no record of the Roman's conducting any census etc), why then should his account of any other part of Jesus ministry be taken literally? .
However Aslan makes a strong case for the following 1. That Jesus was executed for the crime of sedition 2. That the idea that the Romans, specifically Pilate, were reluctant to execute him but bowed to Jewish pressure is ludicrous given Pilate's reputation for blood thirsty cruelty is well established 3. That far from being the meek, other worldly pacifist, Jesus was agitating for revolutionary change on earth in his lifetime. The last shall be first, and the first shall be last was meant to be taken literally. 4. His main battle was with the bloated, out of touch priesthood controlling the temple - but in the end he wanted to evict the Romans too. 5. In short, Jesus was a zealot. A man so passionate in his fundamental religious beliefs that he was prepared to fight and die for them.
There are 3 parts of the book I found particularly interesting; firstly Aslan's discussion of the meaning of the parable of the Good Samaritan. He argues that the point of the parable is not to praise the Samaritan; exactly the opposite. Samaritan's were held to be almost the lowest of the low in Judaism as they did not place the temple at the centre of their worship. Jesus' point here, Aslan contends, was not the good behaviour of the Samaritan but the bad behaviour of the priests who ignored the injured traveller . Look, Jesus, is saying, these priests are so bad that even a Samaritan, a Samaritan for goodness sake, behaves better than they do.
Secondly the discussion of the "Render unto Caesar" teaching. This is better translated as "Give back to Caesar" Aslan says, and I am in no position to argue with him. But if that translation is better, then the meaning of the teaching does seem to be clear. Look, Jesus is saying, this coin has Caesar's face on it. Its his. He can have it back. This land is God's and he wants it back
Thirdly the split in early Christianity between the Jerusalem sect based around Jesus' brother James, and the Greek converts led by Saul / Paul. This deserves a book of its own; but essentially James and those who had known what Paul describes as "flesh and blood" Jesus see their faith as essentially a fundamentalist strand of Judaism. Paul takes Jesus and turns him into something else entirely , something acceptable to Greeks and ultimately Romans
Its a very interesting book, but just to reemphasise it has very little to do with Christianity and the reader shouldn't expect that. Readers however may be struck by the similarity of the historical Jesus, as portrayed by Aslan, and the Jesus of the liberation theology movement of the 70s and the 80s. And they will see very little in the historical Jesus to support any love of free market economics, capitalism, or right wing reactionary politics generally. The last shall be first, and the first shall be last
Show Less
LibraryThing member AuntieClio
This is a great book to read on the history of the life and times of Jesus of Nazareth. Aslan has gotten much criticism from the less-informed "news" anchors about how he, a person of Middle Eastern persuasion, would even THINK about writing a book about Jesus.
Well, first Aslan moved to America at
ETA: (My mistake, Aslan converted back to Islam in 1990, however this does not negate the notion that he actually knows what he's writing about.)
Ancient Christianity is a topic which absolutely fascinates me. People get so worked up over what they think they know, when they don't really know much at all. It's interesting to me to read about the Jesus others don't like to acknowledge, the subversive who went up against the existing power structures of both Rome and Jews in Jerusalem and, ultimately, lost.
Aslan's book sets the stage for us by discussing the political atmosphere of the time, and describing what it was like to live in Middle East when Jesus began his ministry. Aslan explains the power structure of Rome in the area, and how it worked (or didn't) with the Jewish leadership.
This is a thoroughly researched, well-written biography of a man who has reached mythological status of biblical proportions (yes, I went there) throughout the world. Whether one believes Jesus is a historical figure or not, Zealot explains how this one man, of many who claimed to be the messiah, came to be recognized as the leader of a new religion.
I found this book to be utterly fascinating and recommend it to anyone interested in knowing more about this historical Jesus and the times he lived in.
Well, first Aslan moved to America at
Show More
a very young age and is an American citizen. Second, he converted from Islam to Christianity when he was 15. And third, it's his job to think and write about these things since he has a Ph. D. in sociology of religions. This particular book is the culmination of 20 years of work in the field.ETA: (My mistake, Aslan converted back to Islam in 1990, however this does not negate the notion that he actually knows what he's writing about.)
Ancient Christianity is a topic which absolutely fascinates me. People get so worked up over what they think they know, when they don't really know much at all. It's interesting to me to read about the Jesus others don't like to acknowledge, the subversive who went up against the existing power structures of both Rome and Jews in Jerusalem and, ultimately, lost.
Aslan's book sets the stage for us by discussing the political atmosphere of the time, and describing what it was like to live in Middle East when Jesus began his ministry. Aslan explains the power structure of Rome in the area, and how it worked (or didn't) with the Jewish leadership.
This is a thoroughly researched, well-written biography of a man who has reached mythological status of biblical proportions (yes, I went there) throughout the world. Whether one believes Jesus is a historical figure or not, Zealot explains how this one man, of many who claimed to be the messiah, came to be recognized as the leader of a new religion.
I found this book to be utterly fascinating and recommend it to anyone interested in knowing more about this historical Jesus and the times he lived in.
Show Less
LibraryThing member morningrob
This is a bit of a difficult book to evaluate. I would say that one's reaction to the book depends upon what one desires from such a book. This is not an objective overview of historical Jesus scholarship, nor does it intend to be. However, if one desires an extremely well written narrative of one
A missing part that would have made this book helpful, would be to have gone into some reasons why he thinks the theory he thinks is best is actually the best theory. There are some additional problems with this book. I found his discussion on Paul highly unsatisfying. It was as if Paul's writings and life somehow took place both before and after the writing of the Gospels and Acts in Aslan's reconstruction of Paul's mission.
Outside of this problem, the rest of this book falls in line with the understanding of Jesus as a revolutionary figure. Part of the problem with this theory and Aslan does nothing to fix it, is that it does not adequately explain why the Jesus movement would have survived, as the author writes, revolutionary movement were quite common in Palestine during this time. This theory does not explain why this particular movement survived after the death of its founder. This is as much a problem for Aslan's book as it is for the theory he is basing it on.
Show More
particular theory regarding the historical Jesus, then this book would be more than acceptable. Aslan uses scholarly investigations to create an exgaging narrative regarding Jesus as a harbinger of a revolutionary movement. The book is obviously biased towards this view, which the author admits to in his prologue. A missing part that would have made this book helpful, would be to have gone into some reasons why he thinks the theory he thinks is best is actually the best theory. There are some additional problems with this book. I found his discussion on Paul highly unsatisfying. It was as if Paul's writings and life somehow took place both before and after the writing of the Gospels and Acts in Aslan's reconstruction of Paul's mission.
Outside of this problem, the rest of this book falls in line with the understanding of Jesus as a revolutionary figure. Part of the problem with this theory and Aslan does nothing to fix it, is that it does not adequately explain why the Jesus movement would have survived, as the author writes, revolutionary movement were quite common in Palestine during this time. This theory does not explain why this particular movement survived after the death of its founder. This is as much a problem for Aslan's book as it is for the theory he is basing it on.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Big_Bang_Gorilla
Being an account of first century Christianity and Jewish nationalism which aspires to link the two into a fairly new, if such a thing can be imagined, picture of the ministry of Christ. The critics' main takeaway from this book seems to be that Aslan is saying that Jesus was a zealot, which
Aslan engages in an odd selectivity toward his source material (basically the scriptures). He is at pains to debunk them at times, dismissing the accounts of many small-to-medium points of Christian doctrine such as the birth narrative and the slaughter of the innocents as ahistorical, illogical, or even "preposterous", yet he relies unhesitatingly on said scriptures to piece together the life and career of Jesus. That's understandable, of course, since there aren't any non-scriptural contemporary accounts of that ministry, unless you count the apocrypha, but, in the absence of a defense of the parts of gospel which he is accepting, which is rarely forthcoming, one tends to wonder at what point the gospel narratives have become credible. And, on the big stuff, such as the resurrection and the miracles, Aslan simply punts, saying that it doesn't matter what he, or. for that matter, science says about their veracity, only what Jesus' contemporaries thought about them.
Aslan ultimately is offering a basically socio-political savior, a hybrid of the religious left's leftist orator arguing for economic and social equality and the religious right's angry man of violence, action, and reprisal. Given this, and his implicit rejection of Jesus' messiahship claims in his dwelling on the many competing messiahs who were Jesus' contemporaries, one has to question his conclusion, audience-pleasing though it doubtless is, that Jesus is "worth believing in". Given the totality of his portrait, one might as well say that an admirer of the presidential campaign of Wendell Willkie should then see Willkie as well "worth believing in".
Show More
conclusion is indeed in the book, but is an extremely reductionist summary of a book which is much more wide-ranging. Aslan is a superlative writer who writes with more vigor and clarity than anybody I've read in some time, the type of writer you want to ride along with. His intellectual approach does, however, contain some incongruities.Aslan engages in an odd selectivity toward his source material (basically the scriptures). He is at pains to debunk them at times, dismissing the accounts of many small-to-medium points of Christian doctrine such as the birth narrative and the slaughter of the innocents as ahistorical, illogical, or even "preposterous", yet he relies unhesitatingly on said scriptures to piece together the life and career of Jesus. That's understandable, of course, since there aren't any non-scriptural contemporary accounts of that ministry, unless you count the apocrypha, but, in the absence of a defense of the parts of gospel which he is accepting, which is rarely forthcoming, one tends to wonder at what point the gospel narratives have become credible. And, on the big stuff, such as the resurrection and the miracles, Aslan simply punts, saying that it doesn't matter what he, or. for that matter, science says about their veracity, only what Jesus' contemporaries thought about them.
Aslan ultimately is offering a basically socio-political savior, a hybrid of the religious left's leftist orator arguing for economic and social equality and the religious right's angry man of violence, action, and reprisal. Given this, and his implicit rejection of Jesus' messiahship claims in his dwelling on the many competing messiahs who were Jesus' contemporaries, one has to question his conclusion, audience-pleasing though it doubtless is, that Jesus is "worth believing in". Given the totality of his portrait, one might as well say that an admirer of the presidential campaign of Wendell Willkie should then see Willkie as well "worth believing in".
Show Less
LibraryThing member foof2you
This book looks at Jesus from a historical perspective, not a biblical one. I liked this book and it might not be for everyone because it will challenge some beliefs.
Mr Aslan has plenty of footnotes to backup his statements and the book is well sourced. One must remember that this is a history
Mr Aslan has plenty of footnotes to backup his statements and the book is well sourced. One must remember that this is a history
Show More
book, the bible is a book but not a history book. A history book has sources that can be and should be corroborated. Show Less
LibraryThing member jcbrunner
There isn't that much new information in this biography if you paid attention in church history and had a somewhat enlightened teacher. Aslan naturally could not uncover more information about the historical man than the few basic morsels already known. The value of the biography lies in showing
Jesus was most likely not a pacifist but one among many of the Zealot movement whose USP was free healing services. The Romans crucified him as a Jewish rebel - aspects that became troublesome in marketing the new religion to gentiles in the Roman Empire. After Jesus' death (and potential resurrection), his followers were led by his brother James as a Jewish sect. Aslan presents Saul/Paul as the driving force of the second makeover of turning the Jewish messiah into the Christ, open to gentile believers and acceptable to Romans by creating and promoting his peaceful good citizen image.
Show More
the different transformations and re-interpretations of the healer/rebel from Nazareth to a Jewish messiah to the Greek Christ. Aslan firmly places Jesus among the many prophets and preachers agitating for purge of the temple and the Roman yoke that ended with defeat and destruction of the temple in the Jewish-Roman War of 66-73.Jesus was most likely not a pacifist but one among many of the Zealot movement whose USP was free healing services. The Romans crucified him as a Jewish rebel - aspects that became troublesome in marketing the new religion to gentiles in the Roman Empire. After Jesus' death (and potential resurrection), his followers were led by his brother James as a Jewish sect. Aslan presents Saul/Paul as the driving force of the second makeover of turning the Jewish messiah into the Christ, open to gentile believers and acceptable to Romans by creating and promoting his peaceful good citizen image.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dooney
I found Zealot by Resa Aslan simultaneously fascinating and problematic. It is fascinating because Aslan does a fabulous job of portraying the political milieu and social unreast that existed in Israel and its relations with Rome during the time of Jesus and the first century CE. It is excellent at
Show More
addressesing the confusion of the time, and through that the confusion and unsettledness of human interpretation of ideas and events. The book is problematic because Aslan's biases are exceedingly obvious. This doesn't entirely detract from the book and I do think that Aslan makes his point that Jesus of Nazareth was a fascinating figure from a completely historical perspective, whatever one makes of Jesus Christ. However, the book is riddled with antagonism and cynicism and rather blinkered and unreasoned opinions, and is best suited to a reader who is willing to read the book as a conversation, although granted rather one-sided. Show Less
LibraryThing member Thomas.Cannon
I was hoping for something scholarly and based more in fact. However, it is definitely interesting and food for thought. I enjoyed reading about the world that Jesus lived in.
LibraryThing member speljamr
This is a book about what could be one of the hardest subjects a historian could attempt to tackle. The historic Jesus is a character that has very little real historic verification, leading most scholars to take best guesses on what the real Jesus may have been like, or if he even existed. And
In the process of piecing together a more realistic picture than the dramatic stories presented in the canonical gospels Aslan is quick to dismiss the portions that are plainly absurd and only there to present a particular picture to the audience the gospel version is intended for. For example, The stable in Bethlehem picture, because Bethlehem did not even exist in that time based on known historical documents, Nazareth did however. Or also the scenes with Pontius Pilate, who in some versions of the story tries to save Jesus, but is historically accounted for as absolutely hating the Jewish people,so much so that complaints are regularly sent to the Roman Emperor regarding the numerous crucifixions. And just as equally Aslan is quick to point out when the version presented adds insight to the real man and highlights his real motivations when looked at in the historic context in which it takes place.
The research done by the author is well documented in the notes and bibliography, which is sure to give the reader plenty more to explore should he or she wish to do so. Unless your the type who refuses to stray one ounce from your dogma, this book is a must read for believers and non-believers alike. It adds to the many other volumes on this subject and paints a picture of a man who is probably more fascinating than the one presented by the religion in his name.
Show More
this book is no different as Aslan attempts to build a picture based on the available historic evidence and what records we do have about actual events around that time and place. It does start off with one assumption though: that Jesus was a real man and not a deified entity created from the various self proclaimed messiahs of the time, as other works on this subject have claimed.In the process of piecing together a more realistic picture than the dramatic stories presented in the canonical gospels Aslan is quick to dismiss the portions that are plainly absurd and only there to present a particular picture to the audience the gospel version is intended for. For example, The stable in Bethlehem picture, because Bethlehem did not even exist in that time based on known historical documents, Nazareth did however. Or also the scenes with Pontius Pilate, who in some versions of the story tries to save Jesus, but is historically accounted for as absolutely hating the Jewish people,so much so that complaints are regularly sent to the Roman Emperor regarding the numerous crucifixions. And just as equally Aslan is quick to point out when the version presented adds insight to the real man and highlights his real motivations when looked at in the historic context in which it takes place.
The research done by the author is well documented in the notes and bibliography, which is sure to give the reader plenty more to explore should he or she wish to do so. Unless your the type who refuses to stray one ounce from your dogma, this book is a must read for believers and non-believers alike. It adds to the many other volumes on this subject and paints a picture of a man who is probably more fascinating than the one presented by the religion in his name.
Show Less
LibraryThing member hjvanderklis
Every author has a purpose writing, an explicit or hidden agenda. Some time ago I read Jacob Slavenburg – Valsheid in geschrifte (1995) and Katrijne Bezemer – Op weg met de Gnosis, both stripping Jesus Christ to his logeia, assumed words literally spoken by the historical Jesus, the core ethics
According to the author the result of 20 years of research was laid down in Zealot – The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. Given his age, not all research can be his own. Some reviewers even doubt whether he actually has written the book himself. I’ll leave that question for the author to answer. In my opinion Aslan, author of the internationally bestseller No god but God compiled a fascinating, provocative, and meticulously researched biography that challenges long-held assumptions about the man many know as Jesus of Nazareth.
As a myth buster Aslan confronts the reader with difficulties on his birthplace (Bethlehem), cousin / herald John the Baptist, workmanship, message (did or didn’t he reveal himself as Messiah, God’s Son, King of the Jews? What were his aspirations? What is the Kingdom of the heavens/God.. all about?), quotation from the Tenach, prophesies about the Christ, Jesus’ “crime”, death, and resurrection. Crucial is the concept of being “zealous”, the jealous anger that YHWH already showed when He gave Moses the Ten Commandments. And no, Aslan doesn’t make Jesus a Zealot, since that party simply didn’t exist during Jesus’ life.
In the second part he devotes a lot of attention to the division between the Jewish followers of Jesus, headed by James the Just, Jesus’ brother, Peter, and the gentile converts by the ministry of Paul, portrayed as zealous too, but wandering away from his Jewish former belief system. And to put it mildly, Aslan’s no friend of Paul. Skip 200 years and you’re watching the bishops of this new religion shape the canon of the New Testament and declare a creed in Nicea that prefers a distance from the historical Jewish Jesus, zealous for the Kingdom of God, and a God became man, died for our sins, was risen by God and restored glory again. a peaceful spiritual teacher . And he grapples with the riddle of how Jesus understood himself, the mystery that is at the heart of all subsequent claims about his divinity.
By telling and quoting a lot (the remaining 30% of the book contains notes), emphasizing the errors made by fellow humans, it’s easy to forget the balk in your own eyes. Aslan reduces Christ’s revelations to a messianic secret, which only hints, not reveals. Nowhere the nature, activities and influence of the Church is mentioned. Acts 2, Hebrews and epistles from Peter, John’s Revelations, are ‘forgotten’. His ethics and Beatitudes, which the gnostics need so much, don’t get attention, neither do concepts like sin, punishment, atonement and redemption. What remains is a good man with a message and a goal, to bring freedom, a message worth believing in, but no more. A concept that perfectly matches an Islamic point of view: you can’t ignore that Jesus actually existed, but his followers really messed things up.
Show More
to cling to in a gnostic manner. Others, like Bart Erhman’s Misquoting Jesus emphasize the human editing of biblical texts, leaving faith and Christianity as forgerous and misleading. The Iranian-American author Reza Aslan (1973) introduces himself as having found Jesus Christ on a youth camp when he was 15. As soon as he began studying, he abandoned his faith in Jesus as only begotten Son of God, Christ and one you can have a personal relationship with. Though not revealed in this book, it’s no secret, that the author is a practicing Shia Muslim. Core to the Islamic creed is a god without a son, so it shouldn’t be surprising the reader, that a cut-off between Jesus and his heavenly Father, is Aslan’s paradigm.According to the author the result of 20 years of research was laid down in Zealot – The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. Given his age, not all research can be his own. Some reviewers even doubt whether he actually has written the book himself. I’ll leave that question for the author to answer. In my opinion Aslan, author of the internationally bestseller No god but God compiled a fascinating, provocative, and meticulously researched biography that challenges long-held assumptions about the man many know as Jesus of Nazareth.
As a myth buster Aslan confronts the reader with difficulties on his birthplace (Bethlehem), cousin / herald John the Baptist, workmanship, message (did or didn’t he reveal himself as Messiah, God’s Son, King of the Jews? What were his aspirations? What is the Kingdom of the heavens/God.. all about?), quotation from the Tenach, prophesies about the Christ, Jesus’ “crime”, death, and resurrection. Crucial is the concept of being “zealous”, the jealous anger that YHWH already showed when He gave Moses the Ten Commandments. And no, Aslan doesn’t make Jesus a Zealot, since that party simply didn’t exist during Jesus’ life.
In the second part he devotes a lot of attention to the division between the Jewish followers of Jesus, headed by James the Just, Jesus’ brother, Peter, and the gentile converts by the ministry of Paul, portrayed as zealous too, but wandering away from his Jewish former belief system. And to put it mildly, Aslan’s no friend of Paul. Skip 200 years and you’re watching the bishops of this new religion shape the canon of the New Testament and declare a creed in Nicea that prefers a distance from the historical Jewish Jesus, zealous for the Kingdom of God, and a God became man, died for our sins, was risen by God and restored glory again. a peaceful spiritual teacher . And he grapples with the riddle of how Jesus understood himself, the mystery that is at the heart of all subsequent claims about his divinity.
By telling and quoting a lot (the remaining 30% of the book contains notes), emphasizing the errors made by fellow humans, it’s easy to forget the balk in your own eyes. Aslan reduces Christ’s revelations to a messianic secret, which only hints, not reveals. Nowhere the nature, activities and influence of the Church is mentioned. Acts 2, Hebrews and epistles from Peter, John’s Revelations, are ‘forgotten’. His ethics and Beatitudes, which the gnostics need so much, don’t get attention, neither do concepts like sin, punishment, atonement and redemption. What remains is a good man with a message and a goal, to bring freedom, a message worth believing in, but no more. A concept that perfectly matches an Islamic point of view: you can’t ignore that Jesus actually existed, but his followers really messed things up.
Show Less
LibraryThing member klburnside
I never would have picked up this book if it hadn't been for the Fox News controversy, and even after that I'm not exactly sure why I did.
I found the history of the time and place to be more fascinating than the history of Jesus himself. The descriptions of the temple in Jerusalem and the
I found the history of the time and place to be more fascinating than the history of Jesus himself. The descriptions of the temple in Jerusalem and the
Show More
relationship between the priestly order and the Roman empire were fascinating. I was fascinated by the Romanization of the early church and the power that Paul had in shaping the direction of the church. Some parts got quite boring, like the very long section on the phrases "son of man" and "son of god" and who said them and what they meant. Show Less
LibraryThing member DubiousDisciple
Captivating! Reza is a good story teller who holds your attention on every topic. His perception of Jesus differs considerably from mine, but that’s part of what made the reading interesting for me.
Aslan portrays Jesus as a revolutionary predicting a violent overthrow of the current government,
Indeed, this process is even longer than I imagined, for in Aslan’s opinion, it begins even before the Gospels. It begins back at the time of Stephen’s stoning. “What Stephen cries out in the midst of his death throes is nothing less than the launch of a wholly new religion … buried with [Stephen] under the rubble of stones is the last trace of the historical person known as Jesus of Nazareth.” Aslan believes Paul also taught that Jesus was God on earth, so the high Christology of today’s Christianity began quite early after Jesus’ death.
But let’s get back to Jesus the Revolutionary. Says Aslan, “Of all the stories told about the life of Jesus of Nazareth, there is one … that, more than any other word or deed, helps reveal who Jesus was and what Jesus meant.” So differently do Aslan and I view Jesus that I actually imagined he was thinking about Jesus feeding the multitude. He wasn’t, of course. He was talking about when Jesus violently attacks the Temple. Fascinating how different Jesus can look, depending upon which side of him you hold up to the light. Aslan’s book is one-sided, a very well-written page-turner about Jesus, the Zealot.
This is not to say that Jesus himself openly advocated violent actions. But he was certainly no pacifist. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace, but the sword.”
When Jesus holds up a penny and says, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are God’s,” he is not encouraging an aesthetic life unhindered by the cares of the world. Says Aslan, Jesus’ answer is “as clear a statement as one can find in the gospels on where exactly he fell in the debate between the priests and the zealots.” Jesus says, give the coin with its abominable picture of Caesar back to Rome, and take back the land which God has given to us. This is not instruction to get along; this is instruction to draw a dividing line between heathen and God-follower; a line between Judea and Rome.
I believe Aslan contains a few errors in his research, but they are minor and do not distract from the conclusion. Of greater importance is recognizing where Aslan’s own strong opinions come into play. Yet this is a book I can wholeheartedly recommend, as both thought-provoking and entertaining.
Aslan portrays Jesus as a revolutionary predicting a violent overthrow of the current government,
Show More
both Roman and Judean. Woe to the corrupt ruling class, because the Kingdom of God is coming, with chilling destruction! Aslan points out that in the political turmoil of the first century, calling oneself the Messiah was tantamount to declaring war on Rome, and thus he assumes Jesus followed the mold of every other Jewish messianic figure of the time. The apparent failure of this portrayal is that the Gospels take pains to highlight the daftness of the apostles and their dream for a military overthrow, repeatedly redefining the Kingdom of God instead as a peaceful grassroots infiltration. Aslan recognizes this, and insists that the tone of the Gospels reflect post-war attitudes of complacency and cooperation with Rome, after the nation’s zeal had been stamped out by defeat. “Thus began the long process of transforming Jesus from a revolutionary Jewish nationalist into a peaceful spiritual leader with no interest in any earthly matter.”Indeed, this process is even longer than I imagined, for in Aslan’s opinion, it begins even before the Gospels. It begins back at the time of Stephen’s stoning. “What Stephen cries out in the midst of his death throes is nothing less than the launch of a wholly new religion … buried with [Stephen] under the rubble of stones is the last trace of the historical person known as Jesus of Nazareth.” Aslan believes Paul also taught that Jesus was God on earth, so the high Christology of today’s Christianity began quite early after Jesus’ death.
But let’s get back to Jesus the Revolutionary. Says Aslan, “Of all the stories told about the life of Jesus of Nazareth, there is one … that, more than any other word or deed, helps reveal who Jesus was and what Jesus meant.” So differently do Aslan and I view Jesus that I actually imagined he was thinking about Jesus feeding the multitude. He wasn’t, of course. He was talking about when Jesus violently attacks the Temple. Fascinating how different Jesus can look, depending upon which side of him you hold up to the light. Aslan’s book is one-sided, a very well-written page-turner about Jesus, the Zealot.
This is not to say that Jesus himself openly advocated violent actions. But he was certainly no pacifist. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace, but the sword.”
When Jesus holds up a penny and says, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are God’s,” he is not encouraging an aesthetic life unhindered by the cares of the world. Says Aslan, Jesus’ answer is “as clear a statement as one can find in the gospels on where exactly he fell in the debate between the priests and the zealots.” Jesus says, give the coin with its abominable picture of Caesar back to Rome, and take back the land which God has given to us. This is not instruction to get along; this is instruction to draw a dividing line between heathen and God-follower; a line between Judea and Rome.
I believe Aslan contains a few errors in his research, but they are minor and do not distract from the conclusion. Of greater importance is recognizing where Aslan’s own strong opinions come into play. Yet this is a book I can wholeheartedly recommend, as both thought-provoking and entertaining.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Citizenjoyce
Do I consider that history or historical fiction? On the history side, Resa Asian does a fascinating job of describing the politics around the time of Jesus. Though it reads like a combination Dovekeepers and The Testament of Mary, it seems like an accurate analysis to me both in the relationship
To me where the book bends toward fiction rather than history was in Part 2 in which Aslan works interminably to show that Jesus intended to be a radical nationalistic revolutionary and that he had no real interest in anyone but the Jews. The icing on the fictional cake to me was his acceptance of the miracles. He says that lots of people saw them, everyone believed them and there is no point in trying to explain them rationally. Hm.
Lastly, a major thing that made me think the book was more polemic than history is that Aslan refers to paganism as a cult once, twice specifically calls Christianity a religion yet consistently refers to Judaism as a cult. Perhaps he's explained this stance in interviews, but I found it pointedly antagonistic.
Show More
of Rome to the Jews, the demarcation of classes, the number of messiahs that came both before and after Jesus and the origins of Christianity. Aslan's contention is that James the Just, the brother of Jesus, was the natural head of the Jesus movement after Jesus's death and that almost everyone supported him except for Paul who was quite the self promoter. What got James and his followers into trouble was his insistence on lambasting the rich and powerful and supporting the rights of the poor, he could be the patron saint of OWS. He declared that new converts to the movement did not have to be circumcised but they did have to follow Jewish law and that their actions in regards to the poor were important. Paul, on the other hand, wanted to make a religion that was easy to accept, especially by the powerful Romans, so he emphasized that all a convert had to do was believe, not act. Asian thinks that the Roman destruction of the temple was in response to the Jews' reaction to execution of James and that with the temple gone and no established Jewish hierarchy, Paul was able to slip in and head the new religion. To me where the book bends toward fiction rather than history was in Part 2 in which Aslan works interminably to show that Jesus intended to be a radical nationalistic revolutionary and that he had no real interest in anyone but the Jews. The icing on the fictional cake to me was his acceptance of the miracles. He says that lots of people saw them, everyone believed them and there is no point in trying to explain them rationally. Hm.
Lastly, a major thing that made me think the book was more polemic than history is that Aslan refers to paganism as a cult once, twice specifically calls Christianity a religion yet consistently refers to Judaism as a cult. Perhaps he's explained this stance in interviews, but I found it pointedly antagonistic.
Show Less
LibraryThing member JSKupperman
Due to attention this book received from the now infamous FOX news interview, Reza Aslan's _Zealot_ has received perhaps more than its 15 minutes of fame. This is not to say Zealot is a bad book. It is not. In fact. It is a very good book. However, it is not the bombshell dropping, revelation about
Zealot is simply a history of the life, and the context of that life, of Jesus. There are no earth shattering revelations about Jesus's life in this book. There are no highly controversial theories in this book. What you will find in Zealot is a concise history of Jesus, and the history in which that history takes place. You will read about all of the wars, all of the politics, the economic woes, and the religious turmoil and pro- and anti-Temple Jewish sects. You will see Jesus acting as one of any number of would-be messiahs during this time. You will see the later theology separated from the historical events. And if you've read on the life of the historical Jesus, you will see that none of what Aslan says is new.
I would suggest that if you've spent any time researching the life of the historical Jesus, you will have little need for this book. Except for one thing: it is immensely readable. This is because Zealot is written as a narrative, not an academic history. There are no difficult words, no academic jargon, there are not footnoted citations. Even the notes are easy to read. And that is what makes Zealot a good book; not some original content, but its readability. So, if you are looking for another book on the life of the historical Jesus, this is not a bad one to pick up. If you are just beginning to look into the life of the historical Jesus, this is a good book with which to begin.
Show More
the life of Jesus some have made it out to be. Zealot is simply a history of the life, and the context of that life, of Jesus. There are no earth shattering revelations about Jesus's life in this book. There are no highly controversial theories in this book. What you will find in Zealot is a concise history of Jesus, and the history in which that history takes place. You will read about all of the wars, all of the politics, the economic woes, and the religious turmoil and pro- and anti-Temple Jewish sects. You will see Jesus acting as one of any number of would-be messiahs during this time. You will see the later theology separated from the historical events. And if you've read on the life of the historical Jesus, you will see that none of what Aslan says is new.
I would suggest that if you've spent any time researching the life of the historical Jesus, you will have little need for this book. Except for one thing: it is immensely readable. This is because Zealot is written as a narrative, not an academic history. There are no difficult words, no academic jargon, there are not footnoted citations. Even the notes are easy to read. And that is what makes Zealot a good book; not some original content, but its readability. So, if you are looking for another book on the life of the historical Jesus, this is not a bad one to pick up. If you are just beginning to look into the life of the historical Jesus, this is a good book with which to begin.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tloeffler
One of the more fascinating books about the historical Jesus that I've ever read. Reza Aslan makes an excellent case for his theory that Jesus was just another itinerant preacher, treated the same as all the others, who somehow had the followers with more tenacity than others. Particularly
Show More
interesting to me was the information on Paul, who comes across as pretty much the con man I always thought he was. My only criticism would be that his notes at the end on each chapter could have almost been classified as additional chapters. Show Less
LibraryThing member bibleblaster
A solid exploration of the historical Jesus (and, most especially, the historical context of Jesus' time). Some really interesting insights into the difference between Paul's and James' take on Jesus, as well as the issues to which the Gospel writers were responding.
LibraryThing member gbelik
This is a fascinating story of Jesus as a historical figure in his own time and place. It present him as a Jew who was a radical opponent of Roman occupation and of the Jewish establishment's collaboration with that occupation. It's definitely not the story told in Sunday School, but rather a more
Show More
interesting and more believable tale. The book also deals with the apostles and with Jesus' brother James and Paul the convert and how the movement changed over the first century after Jesus' death. Show Less
LibraryThing member TerriBooks
I have mixed responses to this book. On the one hand, I think the first section includes a superb explanation of the difference between facts and truth, something I always struggle with when I lead a bible class. I may just copy those pages, the author does it so well. He also does a wonderful job
Aslan obviously approaches the story of Jesus with his own lens, and you can probably find scholars who agree with his premises and conclusions, even scholars of strong Christian faith. But you don't have to use that lens. There is a lot that we will never know, and to a certain extent, our faith is going to tell us it doesn't matter. It's Jesus the Christ, not the historical Jesus, that is the subject of our faith. But I found his discussion of the rift between St Paul and St James particularly difficult to swallow, and feel he's not well-supported by the scholarship. It seems sensationalized to me.
This book would be a reasonable, digestible introduction to some of the methods and sources of New Testament scholarship for an interested layperson. But it must be taken with a grain (or two) of salt.
Show More
in describing what the gospels are, i.e, not a history or biography of Jesus. His description of the political climate in Palestine during the decades surrounding Jesus' life is spell-binding; nothing really new to me, but written in a way to really keep my interest and attention. Aslan obviously approaches the story of Jesus with his own lens, and you can probably find scholars who agree with his premises and conclusions, even scholars of strong Christian faith. But you don't have to use that lens. There is a lot that we will never know, and to a certain extent, our faith is going to tell us it doesn't matter. It's Jesus the Christ, not the historical Jesus, that is the subject of our faith. But I found his discussion of the rift between St Paul and St James particularly difficult to swallow, and feel he's not well-supported by the scholarship. It seems sensationalized to me.
This book would be a reasonable, digestible introduction to some of the methods and sources of New Testament scholarship for an interested layperson. But it must be taken with a grain (or two) of salt.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dickmanikowski
Intriguing examination of the life of Jesus in the historical context of His time. The author delves into the turbulent world of Palestine during a period in which both the Roman conquerors and the powerful hierarchy that controlled the Temple were trying to keep a lid on an increasingly agitated
Show More
population. He also explores the power struggle between St. Paul and the Apostles over the message that eventually evolved into Christianity. Show Less
LibraryThing member thesmellofbooks
Clears a lot of things up. Puts Jesus in the context of his faith and times. Excellent book and stirring narrative.
LibraryThing member etxgardener
I picked up this book from the library solely because so many people were outraged by it. I am far from a Biblical scholar (although the author, despite all the protests about him as the author, is), nor am I an expert on ancient history., so I found this take on the historical Jesus to be
Is Aslan right? Or is he wrong? Who knows? But he does have an interesting theory that deserves a non-emotional discussion.
Show More
extremely interesting.Is Aslan right? Or is he wrong? Who knows? But he does have an interesting theory that deserves a non-emotional discussion.
Show Less
LibraryThing member michigantrumpet
Reza Aslan’s Zealot came to my attention with the media buzz surrounding an interview of Aslan on Fox News. Aslan may have both benefitted and or suffered as a result. Certainly, there is an element of ‘any publicity is good publicity’ at play, as well as a rush to bookstores by Fox-haters to
The book is divided into three parts. The first provides a review of the seething tumultuous political and religious conflicts in Jerusalem, Judea and Galilee in the years prior to and during Jesus’ birth and ministry. I found this portion to be especially interesting. To Aslan, the impact of the Roman despotic rule, and collaboration with the high priests of the Temple cannot be underplayed. Many chafed under the Roman occupation, and dreamed of the return of Jewish rule. Prior to and during Jesus’ lifetime, many “messiahs” agitated in the countryside, only to be executed for their sedition and danger to the establishment. The second part looks specifically at the historic life and ministry of Jesus up to the time of his crucifixion. I was taken by Aslan’s description of ‘fact’ vs. ‘truth.’ Any lover of great fiction will point to the many truths contained therein. In this portion, I felt the most on familiar ground. The final third addresses the actions of the early church and particularly the conflict between Paul, James the Just, Peter and John.
Throughout the book, Aslan examines contemporary references and documentary and archeaologic evidence. The extensive end notes are especially important to readers. Aslan acknowledges where disagreements lie, and the basis of his own positions within those disputes. In addition to his training in the sociology of religions, Aslan received his Masters degree in writing from the renowned University of Iowa and the Iowa’s Writers’ Workshop. His writing is quite accessible to the non-academic reader.
Show More
show their support. Some academics, far more knowledgeable than I, have complained that Aslan’s examination of the historic Jesus fails to stake out new ground over prior scholarship. As a lay reader and member of a mainline protestant church, I found “Zealot” to be thought provoking, readable and informative. Those with a fundamentalist belief in the absolute inerrancy of the Bible will not be pleased, although I suspect that would be true of most books about the historic Jesus. Aslan is clear his book is about “Jesus the man” and not “Jesus the Christ.” Much is up to one’s faith. The book is divided into three parts. The first provides a review of the seething tumultuous political and religious conflicts in Jerusalem, Judea and Galilee in the years prior to and during Jesus’ birth and ministry. I found this portion to be especially interesting. To Aslan, the impact of the Roman despotic rule, and collaboration with the high priests of the Temple cannot be underplayed. Many chafed under the Roman occupation, and dreamed of the return of Jewish rule. Prior to and during Jesus’ lifetime, many “messiahs” agitated in the countryside, only to be executed for their sedition and danger to the establishment. The second part looks specifically at the historic life and ministry of Jesus up to the time of his crucifixion. I was taken by Aslan’s description of ‘fact’ vs. ‘truth.’ Any lover of great fiction will point to the many truths contained therein. In this portion, I felt the most on familiar ground. The final third addresses the actions of the early church and particularly the conflict between Paul, James the Just, Peter and John.
Throughout the book, Aslan examines contemporary references and documentary and archeaologic evidence. The extensive end notes are especially important to readers. Aslan acknowledges where disagreements lie, and the basis of his own positions within those disputes. In addition to his training in the sociology of religions, Aslan received his Masters degree in writing from the renowned University of Iowa and the Iowa’s Writers’ Workshop. His writing is quite accessible to the non-academic reader.
Show Less
LibraryThing member nmele
Basically, this is a popular summary of the current state of scholarship about Jesus, based largely on the work of members of the Jesus Seminar. Hard to see what all the fuss was about.
ISBN
140006922X / 9781400069224