Abstract
The Oxford University Press series entitled ‘Biblical Refigurations’ is designed to offer fresh perspectives on the interpretation of biblical characters, using a variety of old and new methodologies. Previously published volumes have naturally had a narrow focus, ranging from Jeroboam to Joseph of Arimathea. But now James Crossley (a general editor of the series) has tackled a significantly larger brief in the current volume. It seems a fair question for me to ask whether little over 200 pages of text (even allowing for a small font size) can do justice to the life of the historical Jesus.
The justification must rest in the selectivity of certain aspects and critical approaches. A clue to these is provided in the name of Maurice Casey, to whom this book is dedicated. (See my review of Casey’s final book in Theology 118.1, pp. 53f.). Crossley worked closely with Casey on establishing the early Palestinian tradition (see the first endnote on p. 171). Another clue is offered by Crossley’s status at Sheffield as ‘Professor of Bible, Culture and Politics’.
This book is not presented as any kind of ‘Life of Jesus’. Instead it is proposed to rethink an approach to either the historical Jesus, or preferably the earliest Palestinian tradition, and suggest ‘how a Galilean protest movement could lay the foundation for its own kind of imperial rule’ (p. 1). It will examine the social conditions of the time (the ‘chaos of history’ of the book’s title) as well as, or much more than, any kind of dynamic leadership. Not only are there tensions in the coming together of diverse cultural patterns; but also the paradoxes in the situations raise questions whether the outcomes represent continuity or disjunction.
Two chapters are more theoretical. The first, entitled ‘Does Jesus plus Paul equal Marx plus Lenin?’, is a rapid survey of the field of historical Jesus studies. The second is a quite destructive critique of methodologies in historical reconstruction, ending with some words of Geza Vermes: ‘research aiming to be innovative should not be bound by strict, predetermined rules’ (cited on p. 7).
These are followed by three practical case-studies on specific topics. ‘The Dictatorship of God?’ is concerned with the kingdom of God and Christology. The eschatological material shows the tension between reaction and revolution, obviously relevant in later centuries to the present day. The second study focuses on the language of ‘sinners’, the reversal of rich and poor and the concepts of Law, purity and morality. The final study, entitled ‘Camping with Jesus?’, treats of issues of gender and revolution with reference to the early Palestinian tradition. Here a major focus of the argument is the story in Mark 6.17–29 of Herod Antipas and the beheading of John the Baptist, ‘to assess early gendered interactions with social upheaval’ (p. 163). How could a mother behave like that in prostituting her daughter?
I can applaud this book’s clarion call for the relevance of biblical scholarship to issues of modern life, society and politics. But I feel uneasy at various stages of the contextual and exegetical arguments.