Abstract
Geza Vermes has been an important figures in historical Jesus research as part of the call to take the ‘Jewishness’ of Jesus as a key aspect for understanding Jesus of Nazareth. Moller articulates the two main research questions of this book in the following way: ‘(a) What has Vermes’s role been in the coming of the third quest? (b) To what extent and in what ways are Vermes’s suggestions about Jesus reiterated and debated within the third quest?’ (p. 7).
To answer these questions the book is arranged in four parts. The first provides an overview of the development of the work of Vermes and its relationship to wider historical Jesus work. The second, comprising five chapters, probes what may be considered as the chief contribution of Vermes his emphasis on the Jewishness of Jesus. Third, Moller explores Vermes’ understanding of the hasid theory for situating Jesus within a particular strand of Judaism. Fourth, Moller draws several conclusions and offers prospects for further study.
In part one, Moller notes the significance of Vermes’ book Jesus the Jew (1973), which is the reason for making this the focus of part two. However, it is also noted that this book launched the hasid theory and that this idea had a significant impact on the continuing debate about the way in which Jesus was a representative of first-century Judaism. Moller also provides a brief biography of Vermes with a particular focus on the intellectual contours of his thought, along with the appearance of his major publications (pp. 17–30) In part two, Moller seeks to explore the extent to which Vermes was responsible for the change in attitude that led to making the Jewishness of Jesus central in historical Jesus research. Here it is noted how Vermes employs Jewish parallel material to aid understanding of the historical Jesus. Moller gently suggests two area in which a challenge might be mounted against Vermes’ construction. First, ‘Vermes constructs Judaism on the basis of texts from different times and places and takes them to envisage first-century Palestinian Judaism’ (p. 57). Second, as others have noted, the reason for Jesus’ death is not entirely compelling in Vermes’ account. According to Vermes there was no conflict with Judaism or Jews, but as Moller states Vermes’ position, ‘Jesus was crucified because the rulers of the day saw him as a “Galilean rebel”, and feared the commotion he might cause in Jerusalem at the Passover’ (p. 58). In assessment of the contribution of Vermes in regard to the recognition of the Jewishness of Jesus as a key turn in the third quest, it is noted that there were many precursors to understanding Jesus as a Jew in earlier twentieth century scholarship (p. 108). Moller puts forward the interesting hypothesis that Vermes’ work on the Son of Man issue may have been more significant in the reception and discussion of his ideas on the Jewishness of Jesus (pp. 120–121).
Likewise in the third part of the book, Moller suggests that Vermes’ hasid theory is to be valued not so much because it has been accepted as correct, but because of the debates it inspired. In particular, it has led scholars to develop better methods for using rabbinic sources and to engage more fully about the role of miracles in first-century Judaism. The two chapters that form part four are brief. Here Moller concludes that Vermes book Jesus the Jew was less significant as a watershed in changing attitudes to the Jewishness of Jesus, than is sometimes suggested. Moller suggests that change was already in process. Moller argues that Vermes’ work on the Son of Man may have been more significant, but not for its impact on New Testament scholarship. Rather, it provided Vermes with a reputation as somebody who wrote on the historical Jesus, and thus led to the scholarly interaction with his book Jesus the Jew. Again, although Vermes’ hasid theory has not necessarily won the day, it has shaped subsequent debates.
Moller has provided a balanced overview of the work and contribution of Geza Vermes. This work avoids being hagiographical, but also takes seriously his role in helping, alongside others, to move perceptions and to shape ongoing historical Jesus research. As such, this book is a fine addition to the history of scholarship on the study of Jesus of Nazareth in the second half of the twentieth-century.