Book Notice: Richard Horsley on The Prophet Jesus and the Renewal of Israel

Richard Horsley

The Prophet Jesus and the Renewal of Israel: Moving Beyond a Diversionary Debate
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2012.
Available at Amazon.com

An old nutty debate in historical Jesus studies was whether Jesus was a Cynic-like teacher of Jewish wisdom traditions with an anti-apocalyptic gloss (e.g. John Dominic Crossan) or more like an apocalyptic teacher who was preparing Israel for the end of a/the world (e.g. Dale Allison). In this book, Richard Horsley tries to split the horns of the dilemma by pointing out that both sides have mi-used the sayings traditions and have operated with an inadequate view of apocalytpicism. According to Horsley, the “apocalyptic” texts of Daniel and 1 Enoch do not hold forth an “apocalyptic scenario” with a tribulation which climaxes in the return of a heavenly Son of Man. He says: “Rather apocalyptic texts, both those that address the historical crises posed by imperial rules’ attacks on second-temple Jerusalem and the later ones struggling to deal with the destruction of Jerusalem and the people, focus on the future of judgment of oppressive empires and the restoration of the people of God” (p. 52). Instead, Horsley believes that Jesus was a prophet of national restoration who critiqued the priestly aristocracy, something that grates against Neo-Schweitzerian and Neo-Liberal portraits of Jesus. Horsley’s volume is an interesting minority report and will probably draw ire from both sides of the debate. However, he is right to challenge reliance on the sayings tradition and to question the assumed idea of “apocalyptic” in which many scholars operate. I would concur with the idea of Jesus as a prophet of national restoration, but I find it hard to separate it from general apocalyptic themes of socio-political catastrophe, judgment, tribulation, resurrection, heavenly portents, and cosmic upheaval. The debate itself is somewhat passe, having reached its zenith in the late 90s and early 00’s, but it is a subject still relevant to anyone studying the historical Jesus. My biggest disappointment with this book was the absence of E.P. Sanders, James Dunn, N.T. Wright, and Gerd Theissen from discussion; scholars who have made no little contribution to such a debate.