Status
Available
Call number
Publication
New York : The New Press, 2012.
Description
Makes the powerful case that the conventional understandings of Jesus and the origins of Christianity are wrong: that Jesus' core teachings were not a break from Jewish beliefs and that Jesus was embraced by many Jews as the Messiah of the ancient Jewish texts.
User reviews
LibraryThing member DubiousDisciple
Just when you think you’ve got it all figured out, along comes Daniel Boyarin, a professor of Talmudic Culture and Rhetoric at the University of California.
You think Christianity’s unique contribution to Judaism was the introduction of a god-man? Wrong. Could it be the idea of a suffering
Christianity’s one claim to fame may be the insistence that the Messiah had already arrived, but that’s about the extent of its uniqueness. Otherwise, Christianity is a very Jewish offshoot of a Jewish religion. Boyarin draws from texts like the Book of Daniel and 1st Enoch to explain the title Son of Man (which, it turns out, is a much more exalted title than Son of God) and in turn to expose the expectation of many first-century Jews of just such a divine savior.
This is a fascinating, controversial book presenting a very different look at Jesus as one who defended Torah from wayward Judaic sects (the Pharisees), rather than vice versa. I don’t think the arguments are fully developed yet, but certainly Boyarin introduces “reasonable doubt” against traditional scholarship. Let the arguing begin.
You think Christianity’s unique contribution to Judaism was the introduction of a god-man? Wrong. Could it be the idea of a suffering
Show More
savior? Wrong again. Maybe that Jesus rejected Jewish dietary laws and Sabbath restrictions, freeing us from the Law? Hardly; Boyarin paints a very Jewish Jesus in his reading of the Gospels, certainly a Jesus who keeps kosher.Christianity’s one claim to fame may be the insistence that the Messiah had already arrived, but that’s about the extent of its uniqueness. Otherwise, Christianity is a very Jewish offshoot of a Jewish religion. Boyarin draws from texts like the Book of Daniel and 1st Enoch to explain the title Son of Man (which, it turns out, is a much more exalted title than Son of God) and in turn to expose the expectation of many first-century Jews of just such a divine savior.
This is a fascinating, controversial book presenting a very different look at Jesus as one who defended Torah from wayward Judaic sects (the Pharisees), rather than vice versa. I don’t think the arguments are fully developed yet, but certainly Boyarin introduces “reasonable doubt” against traditional scholarship. Let the arguing begin.
Show Less
LibraryThing member vpfluke
For Daniel Boyarin, Jesus Christ is fundamentally Jewish, and did not set out to establish a new religion. The thought of Jesus was not a break from current Judaism. Boyarin tries to flip our undestanidng of son of man vs son of God. He argues that 'Son of God' was given to a number of signiificant
Boyarin is not entirely satisfactory in explainng the resurrection, but he does give a considerable alternate view of Christ and his place in Judaism, and is worth reading for that.
Show More
monarchs, and what was unique for Jesus was to be called Son of Man, a more divine term in Judaism, if not angelic. Enoch, who seems to partake of divinity in apocryphal literature was deemed Son of Man.Boyarin is not entirely satisfactory in explainng the resurrection, but he does give a considerable alternate view of Christ and his place in Judaism, and is worth reading for that.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ChristinasBookshelf
This book was written by a Jewish scholar of the Talmud, not a Christian. The main argument of the book is that the interpretation of Isaiah 53 which is standard amongst Christians is not a new innovation by Christians in the first century CE/AD.
The book is based on Jewish midrashic interpretation.
Something that was new to me is his argument that Christianity and Judaism didn't fully diverge until much later than commonly believed. I had been taught that the fall of Jerusalem was when Christians started to declare themselves not Jewish in belief due to persecution, but he showed evidence that many people considered themselves both, or they believed Christian theology but called themselves Jewish or vice versa even at the time of Constantine.
I recommend this book to theology geeks, particularly those interested in Judaism, Jewish biblical scholarship, and the history of theology. I highlighted so much in this book because I want to revisit it many times!
The book is based on Jewish midrashic interpretation.
Show More
If you are a Christian and don't understand midrash, this might be a challenging read. If you are a Christian and want to learn midrash and solid biblical hermeneutics, I highly, highly recommend the BEMA podcast.Something that was new to me is his argument that Christianity and Judaism didn't fully diverge until much later than commonly believed. I had been taught that the fall of Jerusalem was when Christians started to declare themselves not Jewish in belief due to persecution, but he showed evidence that many people considered themselves both, or they believed Christian theology but called themselves Jewish or vice versa even at the time of Constantine.
I recommend this book to theology geeks, particularly those interested in Judaism, Jewish biblical scholarship, and the history of theology. I highlighted so much in this book because I want to revisit it many times!
Show Less
Language
Original publication date
2012
Physical description
xxiii, 200 p.; 20 cm
ISBN
9781595584687