Jesus and the Politics of Roman Palestine , livre ebook
151
pages
English
Ebooks
2013
Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage
Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus
Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement
Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement
151
pages
English
Ebook
2013
Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage
Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus
Publié par
Date de parution
17 décembre 2013
Nombre de lectures
0
EAN13
9781611172942
Langue
English
In Jesus and the Politics of Roman Palestine, Richard A. Horsley offers one of the most comprehensive critical analyses of Jesus of Nazareth's mission and how he became a significant historical figure. In his study Horsley brings a fuller historical knowledge of the context and implications of recent research to bear on the investigation of the historical Jesus. Breaking with the standard focus on isolated individual sayings of Jesus, Horsley argues that the sources for Jesus in historical interaction are the Gospels and the speeches of Jesus that they include, read critically in their historical context.
This work addresses the standard assumptions that the historical Jesus has been presented primarily as a sage or apocalyptic visionary. In contrast, based on a critical reconsideration of the Gospels and contemporary sources for Roman imperial rule in Judea and Galilee, Horsley argues that Jesus was fully involved in the conflicted politics of ancient Palestine. Learning from anthropological studies of the more subtle forms of peasant politics, Horsley discerns from these sources how Jesus, as a Moses- and Elijah-like prophet, generated a movement of renewal in Israel that was focused on village communities.
Following the traditional prophetic pattern, Jesus pronounced God's judgment against the rulers in Jerusalem and their Roman patrons. This confrontation with the Jerusalem rulers and his martyrdom at the hands of the Roman governor, however, became the breakthrough that empowered the rapid expansion of his movement in the immediately ensuing decades. In the broader context of this comprehensive historical construction of Jesus's mission, Horsley also presents a fresh new analysis of Jesus's healings and exorcisms and his conflict with the Pharisees, topics that have been generally neglected in the last several decades.
Publié par
Date de parution
17 décembre 2013
Nombre de lectures
0
EAN13
9781611172942
Langue
English
JESUS and the POLITICS of ROMAN PALESTINE
JESUS and the POLITICS of ROMAN PALESTINE
Richard A. Horsley
2014 University of South Carolina
Published by the University of South Carolina Press Columbia, South Carolina 29208
www.sc.edu/uscpress
23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Horsley, Richard A. Jesus and the politics of Roman Palestine / Richard A. Horsley.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-61117-293-5 (hardbound : alk. paper) -
ISBN 978-1-61117-294-2 (ebook) 1. Jesus Christ-Historicity.
i. Title.
BT303.2.H675 2013
232.9 5-dc23
2013015100
Contents
Preface
1. Getting the Whole Story
2. Jesus and the Politics of Roman Palestine
3. Jesus and Imperial Violence
4. Illness and Possession, Healing and Exorcism
5. Renewal of Covenantal Community
6. Conflict with the Scribes and Pharisees
7. The Crucifixion as Breakthrough
Notes
Bibliography
Index
Preface
The core chapters of this book are expansions of the 2010 Hall Lectures at the University of South Carolina and associated institutions. The Nadine Beacham and Charlton F. Hall Sr. Lectureship in New Testament Studies and Early Christianity, sponsored by the Department of Religious Studies in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University, was established by alumnus and Columbia businessman Charlton F. Hall Jr. in memory of his father and mother. I am deeply grateful for the opportunity to have delivered these lectures and for the opportunity to have become acquainted with the donor, Charleton Hall. I am also specially grateful to Professor Donald Jones for arranging the Lectures and for his and the university s warm hospitality.
The overall theme of the 2010 Hall Lectures was Jesus and Empire. The particular lectures were titled:
I. Jesus and the Politics of Roman Palestine
II. Jesus Healing and Exorcism
III. Jesus and the New World (Dis)Order
Insofar as new research in several related areas is challenging the standard assumptions of historical Jesus studies and the standard approach has come to a procedural dead end, it is necessary to explore new possibilities that take the recent research into account.
Violence and Jesus s response to it are issues that were debated long before serious attention was given to political economic dynamics in the Roman imperial world. Recent books on Jesus, however, have almost avoided the subject. More critical and candid recent treatment of Roman military practices by Roman historians, on the other hand, suggests that imperial violence may have been more of a factor in the context in which Jesus worked than previously recognized.
Jesus s conflict with the scribal retainers, including the Pharisees, continued to play an active role in the politics of Roman Palestine under the rule of Herod the Great and the high priestly aristocracy, contrary to the recently influential hypothesis that they had withdrawn from politics to emphasize piety. Recent books on the historical Jesus have almost avoided the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees that is so prominent in the Gospel sources.
Since crucifixion played a key role in the politics of Roman Palestine, it seemed not only appropriate but also important to discuss the Romans crucifixion of Jesus, which is often not dealt with in books on the historical Jesus. The crucifixion of Jesus in the historical context is considered in connection with Jesus s mission of renewal of the people in opposition to the rulers.
Readers will find the assumptions, approach, analysis, and discourse in this volume to be different in many ways from what has been standard in investigation of the historical Jesus. For this I should deliver an apology, in the double sense that I apologize to readers for being out of step and presenting revisionist history and that I offer an explanation of what I am doing.
Coming from undergraduate study of history into New Testament studies and other subfields of theology in divinity school (in the 1960s) required some reorientation. Here was a field of ostensibly historical study in which the sources were read and studied piecemeal, verse by verse, with a good deal of word study. Peoples, the state, movements, historical actors, and events were (and are) dissolved into -isms, such as Judaism, Hellenism, and apocalypticism. Diversity and dynamics were dissolved into theological constructs and schemes. Focused on a quest for doctrines, such as christologies or soteriologies, New Testament scholars neglected the overall narratives of the Gospels and their contingent historical contexts as irrelevant for the ideas they were abstracting from texts.
My generation of New Testament scholars began casting about for alternative approaches during the 1970s and 1980s, often reverting to approaches learned in our undergraduate majors. New approaches began emerging in the field, such as a more sophisticated literary criticism and various kinds of social scientific analysis. But this usually meant reading the Gospels as if they were modern novellas or borrowing structural-functional anthropological or sociological models that had been abandoned in those fields a decade or so earlier. With the give-and-take of critical discussion, however, several criticisms gradually gained in sophistication as New Testament studies diversified (and splintered). During the past few decades, moreover, research proceeded into areas that had not even been imagined before, such as oral performance and scribal practice. The emergence of diverse criticisms and specializations in New Testament studies, however, has meant that specialists do not stay abreast of developments in other specialties.
The study of the historical Jesus that developed in the 1980s and expanded in the 1990s built largely on standard previous criticisms, especially form criticism. And as interest in the historical Jesus mushroomed, Jesus scholars worked mainly at developing increasing sophistication in the already familiar criticisms, for example in refining the criteria by which the authenticity of the separate sayings of Jesus were evaluated. Studies of the historical Jesus, moreover, continued to work within the general Christian theological scheme of Christian origins according to which Jesus was a unique individual revealer who addressed individuals who withdrew from Judaism and organized a movement ( the church ) after his resurrection. Interpreters generally accepted the modern Western assumptions that Jesus was a religious figure who dealt with ( Jewish ) religious matters, such as the Torah/Law and the Temple and synagogues and religious leaders. And they continued to work within and perpetuated the standard synthetic constructs of New Testament studies, such as (early) Judaism, (early) Christianity, apocalypticism, wisdom, and miracles.
This scheme and these general synthetic constructs, however, tend to obscure historical particulars, including diversities and complexities.
Like many others, I was never comfortable with the standard assumptions, constructs, and procedures in the field. In my own historical investigations over nearly a half-century I criticized and abandoned many of the standard concepts and modern assumptions in the field as they appeared to obscure the diversities and complexities and dynamics evident in primary sources. In this volume I draw upon these previous investigations on various interrelated fronts and refer to them for further discussion of analyses, procedures, and the new assumptions based on close examination of those sources in historical context.
For example, Judaism had been discussed as sectarian, with the fourth of the sects identified as the Zealots, a long-standing party that advocated revolt against Roman rule. Closer reading of Flavius Josephus s histories, however, indicated that such synthetic concepts were hiding a number of movements that had taken different social forms and pursued different agendas. 1 Many in the field came to acknowledge the diversity of movements (and the inapplicability of the construct the Zealots ). Few scholars of Jesus and the Gospels, however, have recognized the other main point about those diverse movements, the difference between popular movements of villagers (led by kings/messiahs or prophets ) and the protests by dissident circles of scribes, who had no wider following among the people. 2
My ensuing investigation into the historical Jesus, attempting to discern how Jesus s mission would appear if he were no longer contrasted with the historically false foil of the Zealots, also led to criticism and abandonment of other standard scholarly constructs and procedures. 3 The differences between elite scribal culture and protests and popular culture and movements-what anthropologists called the contrast between the great tradition and the little tradition -led to the recognition that the apocalyptic and wisdom texts produced by scribal circles were not good sources for the views of popular movements and leaders such as Jesus. It was also evident in that investigation that apocalyptic texts were sometimes being misread or misrepresented, for example, as attesting an expectation of a rebuilt Temple (as subsequent study of those texts have shown).
More important, however, my initial investigation into the social context evident in the content of Jesus s teachings led to the recognition that Jesus was catalyzing a movement based in the village communities that constituted the fundamental social form of Galilean and Judean society. This, of course, departs from the standard theological scheme of Christian origins according to which a movement or the church originated only
