What do you think?
Rate this book
The Passover Plot
Finally back in print, this special 40th anniversary edition of Dr. Schonfield's international multimillioncopy bestseller is set to rock the establishment view of the life of Jesus all over again. There is probably no other figure in modern Jewish historical research who is more controversial or famous than Hugh J. Schonfield, who once "The scholars deplore that I have spilled the beans to the public. Several of them have said to me, 'You ought to have kept this just among ourselves, you know.'" What he did to "spill the beans" was present historical evidence suggesting that Jesus was a mortal man, a young genius who believed himself to be the Messiah and deliberately and brilliantly planned his entire ministry according to the Old Testament prophecies--even to the extent of plotting his own arrest, crucifixion and resurrection. Since Schonfield's death in 1988, his popularity and the interest in his prodigious work, which included over 40 books, has drawn increasing attention, particularly outside Judaism. In fact, it is probably fair to say that his contribution to the Gentile understanding of Jewish aspirations among those within the Christian cultural framework has been without parallel. In true Christian tradition, he has also been the cause of much contention. In the wake of resurgent interest in religious history spurred by Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ and Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code , this 40th anniversary edition of The Passover Plot is set to engage a completely new generation of readers searching for truth.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1965
68 people are currently reading
424 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
January 5, 2015
Schonfield commits the one sin never to be forgiven in the serious scholar: appropriating the ideas of an earlier scholar and claiming them as his own "new" discoveries.
The first significant clue that Schonfield is preparing to recycle old ideas and present them as his own "original" research lies in his bibliography. Any serious researcher attempting an investigation into the "real" Jesus must begin with Albert Schweitzer's "The Quest of the Historical Jesus." Although over a century old, Schweitzer's work collects and summarizes the investigations of New Testament scholars from the beginning of the 18th century through the start of the 20th, and though dated remains the preeminent source for the earliest scholarly efforts to reconstruct a life of the historical person Jesus.
Schweitzer's work is so well-known within the field that Schonfield must certainly have been intimately familiar with it for decades prior to writing his work. Yet he carefully avoids all reference to it, and for good reason.
One of the early chapters in Schweitzer assesses the work of Karl Friedrich Bahrdt. In "Popular Letters About the Bible" and "An Explanation of the Plans and Aims of Jesus", a series of tractates that began appearing in 1702 (over 250 years before "The Passover Plot") Barhdt outlines the essential elements of Schonfield's supposedly "original" thesis: that Jesus and his followers staged a fake death through crucifixion, administering drugs to make it appear Jesus was dead within a few hours after being nailed to the cross (crucifixion's principal appeal for the Romans was the slow and agonizing process of death, usually extending over a period of days).
Schonfield knew this from his reading of Schweitzer even if he did not read Barhdt's own work. He presents no original ideas of his own. "The Passover Plot" deserves to be forgotten as another tired recycling of a centuries-old interpretation of the death and resurrection of Jesus; and Schonfield himself should be forgotten as just another talentless hack trying to pawn off the work of others as his own. For the reader who wants reliable information on the subject she or he should begin with Schweitzer rather than waste time reading Schonfield's tiresomely-pretentious ripoff of the genuine scholars who preceeded him.
The first significant clue that Schonfield is preparing to recycle old ideas and present them as his own "original" research lies in his bibliography. Any serious researcher attempting an investigation into the "real" Jesus must begin with Albert Schweitzer's "The Quest of the Historical Jesus." Although over a century old, Schweitzer's work collects and summarizes the investigations of New Testament scholars from the beginning of the 18th century through the start of the 20th, and though dated remains the preeminent source for the earliest scholarly efforts to reconstruct a life of the historical person Jesus.
Schweitzer's work is so well-known within the field that Schonfield must certainly have been intimately familiar with it for decades prior to writing his work. Yet he carefully avoids all reference to it, and for good reason.
One of the early chapters in Schweitzer assesses the work of Karl Friedrich Bahrdt. In "Popular Letters About the Bible" and "An Explanation of the Plans and Aims of Jesus", a series of tractates that began appearing in 1702 (over 250 years before "The Passover Plot") Barhdt outlines the essential elements of Schonfield's supposedly "original" thesis: that Jesus and his followers staged a fake death through crucifixion, administering drugs to make it appear Jesus was dead within a few hours after being nailed to the cross (crucifixion's principal appeal for the Romans was the slow and agonizing process of death, usually extending over a period of days).
Schonfield knew this from his reading of Schweitzer even if he did not read Barhdt's own work. He presents no original ideas of his own. "The Passover Plot" deserves to be forgotten as another tired recycling of a centuries-old interpretation of the death and resurrection of Jesus; and Schonfield himself should be forgotten as just another talentless hack trying to pawn off the work of others as his own. For the reader who wants reliable information on the subject she or he should begin with Schweitzer rather than waste time reading Schonfield's tiresomely-pretentious ripoff of the genuine scholars who preceeded him.
August 6, 2008
This was so ludicrous that I just had to finish it. The Passover plot revolves around Jesus planning his own "resurrection" by resuscitation. It all would have worked perfectly except that he was pierced on the cross by one of the soldiers. The disciples wanted so badly to believe in a resurrection anyway that they convinced themselves that they saw him after his death and that's how Christianity began. Much silliness.
September 16, 2012
The copy on the back of the paperback version of this book I have was some hilariously sensationalized bits about the SHOCKING REVELATIONS THAT WILL SHATTER YOUR FAITH contained within. So, I was pleasantly surprised by the academic tone actually struck by the writer.
Schonfield feels smart and affable when discussing the way we have to re-evaluate our understanding of ancient times in light of the Dead Sea scrolls, and his discussion of the eschatology of Judaism during the time of Jesus was interesting. Even his idea that a person could, with sufficient will and planning, attempt to live out various old testament prophecies, is interesting insofar as it puts the idea of Jesus as Messianic figure in context.
But his discussion of how Jesus may have actually done this, up the swooning on the cross and briefly being revived later, is just insanely speculative. He gives much, much too much credence to snippets of the Bible or Dead Sea scrolls that he wants to use to support his arguments, generally making the same sort of error that fundamentalist believers often make in justifying their own positions. There is too much that is just unknowable from that era to make the sort of generalizations that Schonfield ultimately arrives at.
I guess this book was wildly controverial when it first was published, but that seems almost quaint now. It's a fun and entertaining read for those that have some familiarity with the historical origins of Christianity, but is basically a throw away book when it's all said and done.
Schonfield feels smart and affable when discussing the way we have to re-evaluate our understanding of ancient times in light of the Dead Sea scrolls, and his discussion of the eschatology of Judaism during the time of Jesus was interesting. Even his idea that a person could, with sufficient will and planning, attempt to live out various old testament prophecies, is interesting insofar as it puts the idea of Jesus as Messianic figure in context.
But his discussion of how Jesus may have actually done this, up the swooning on the cross and briefly being revived later, is just insanely speculative. He gives much, much too much credence to snippets of the Bible or Dead Sea scrolls that he wants to use to support his arguments, generally making the same sort of error that fundamentalist believers often make in justifying their own positions. There is too much that is just unknowable from that era to make the sort of generalizations that Schonfield ultimately arrives at.
I guess this book was wildly controverial when it first was published, but that seems almost quaint now. It's a fun and entertaining read for those that have some familiarity with the historical origins of Christianity, but is basically a throw away book when it's all said and done.
December 30, 2008
A most amazing little book by a Jewish scholar who has extensively studied all available sources over the life and work of Jesus.
His main point is that we can only begin to understand how Jesus saw himself if we learn more about the messianic beliefs that were very strong in his time and place. Jesus saw himself as the Messiah spoken of in the Old Testament; but what does that mean? Schonfield explains it all. One thing is does *not* mean is any claim to divinity. Jesus did *not* see himself as a deity or as a god or a son of God.
The fact that later Christians started seeing Jesus as divine has caused immense confusion because it totally contradicts the Jewish tradition of the messiah which was Jesus' context. Schonfield thinks all these internal contradictions within Christian belief have been a big stumbling block for any real understanding of Jesus' own beliefs about his mission in life.
A most interesting book with very refreshing ideas. Mom and Dad had this book, so I guess it was recommended to them by somebody like Pastor Crist.
His main point is that we can only begin to understand how Jesus saw himself if we learn more about the messianic beliefs that were very strong in his time and place. Jesus saw himself as the Messiah spoken of in the Old Testament; but what does that mean? Schonfield explains it all. One thing is does *not* mean is any claim to divinity. Jesus did *not* see himself as a deity or as a god or a son of God.
The fact that later Christians started seeing Jesus as divine has caused immense confusion because it totally contradicts the Jewish tradition of the messiah which was Jesus' context. Schonfield thinks all these internal contradictions within Christian belief have been a big stumbling block for any real understanding of Jesus' own beliefs about his mission in life.
A most interesting book with very refreshing ideas. Mom and Dad had this book, so I guess it was recommended to them by somebody like Pastor Crist.
October 18, 2014
I read this book prior to having read the bible in its entirety and, so, with a rather naive acceptance of Dr. Schonfield's arguments and evidences. From this perspective, the book is provocative and fun, an easy read.
Now, knowing a bit more, Schonfield's arguments are no longer compelling. At best he makes a plausible case much as a novelist would if treating of the life of Jesus. From a scholarly perspective, he is too dependent on the biblical texts themselves and too ready to stretch such evidences to fit his theses. His giving testamonial precedence to the gospel attributed to John is quite eccentric. Evidences which do not fit his theses are overlooked. Still, he's not ignorant, just eager to make a case.
Now, knowing a bit more, Schonfield's arguments are no longer compelling. At best he makes a plausible case much as a novelist would if treating of the life of Jesus. From a scholarly perspective, he is too dependent on the biblical texts themselves and too ready to stretch such evidences to fit his theses. His giving testamonial precedence to the gospel attributed to John is quite eccentric. Evidences which do not fit his theses are overlooked. Still, he's not ignorant, just eager to make a case.
October 17, 2019
Interesting, but a bit far-fetched. I do think it is provocative what he says about other players in the Gospels that are behind the scene, though, such as young man who runs away from Gethsemane or Joseph of Arimathea or the person in whose home they eat the Last Supper. I wish we could know more about the relationship of these mysterious people to Jesus. Schonfield believes that they were Jesus' other "friend group" who helped him survive his crucifixion. Without his disciples knowing, Jesus plotted with these "other people" to help him fulfill the prophesies about the future messiah and finally to die and rise again. One of these secret friends gave him a soporific drug on the cross that sent him into a swoon so that he only seemed dead. After Jesus had been a mere six hours on the cross, he was only "mostly dead" (quoting Princess Bridge). Another secret friend, Joseph of Arimathea, came along and took Jesus to his own family tomb, where efforts to revive Jesus were immediately commenced. Jesus briefly regained consciousness, but the spear-wound to his side had been too much, and he soon succumbed and was buried elsewhere. His disciples found the tomb empty and a young man there, one of Jesus' secret friends, who told them that Jesus had risen. In this hyper alert state, the disciples encountered various strangers, whom they later identified as Jesus (e.g. on the road to Emmaus or on the Sea of Galilee in John). The disciples don't recognize Jesus at first, says Schonfield, because it was NOT Jesus - only someone they through wishful thinking identified as Jesus. Similarly, John the Baptist, though not bearing perhaps the same facial features, had been identified as Elijah.... While this theory is creative, I don't think it can be taken seriously.
August 14, 2015
The book is divided into two sections: the first speculative, and the second a historical background to the writing of the gospels. The second section is by far the better, as it sticks to a more academic style. The first section is unfortunately very difficult to take seriously. The idea that large parts of the New Testament were composed largely to give credence to the prophecies in the Old Testament is valid, but the suggestion that Jesus planned everything that happened in Passion Week, right down to how long he would be on the cross, is very far-fetched.
November 1, 2020
This was a required reading book in my freshman Western Civilization class at UCLA in 1965. I was shocked to the core when I read it. Now, 55 years later, (and after finding an old copy in the bargain bin at Half-Price Books) I realize that Schonfield is guilty of exactly what he accuses Jesus of doing: concocting an elaborate plot with breath-taking holes, gaps and leaps of faith, but in his case, for the purpose of selling books.
I am glad to say that I am not only older, but wiser, and I can discern garbage when I see it. The Passover Plot is garbage and a waste of time.
I am glad to say that I am not only older, but wiser, and I can discern garbage when I see it. The Passover Plot is garbage and a waste of time.
May 27, 2008
He brings up some interesting ideas, but he doesn't offer strong support for how much creedence he lends to various source material.
May 26, 2012
This is a great read! The author has plausible explanations for the last week of Jesus life.
Be prepared to disagree!
The author challenges Christian understanding of the "Jewishness of Jesus!"
Be prepared to disagree!
The author challenges Christian understanding of the "Jewishness of Jesus!"
August 4, 2016
This book is an interesting read, but as with a lot of books on revisionist theology a lot of it is pure speculation and opinion based.
May 22, 2025
Who would’ve thought Jesus was a Slytherin.
January 22, 2012
This life of Jesus by H.J.Schonfield was controversial at the time of publication.
It displays much erudition, and it is an enjoyable read even for the layman.
Not that I agree with everything that is written here. For example I don't agree with the author that the timing of the birth of Jesus was an act of God, but then I don't believe in Gods in any shape or form. So I can hardly believe that.
I would take issue with the author on the central theme that Jesus connived his own death to fulfill some Jewish Messianic conspiracy. Schonfield produces copious references to support his thesis, but I was left with the feeling that almost any prophecies can be proven in hindsight.
The economist Gerald Celente regularly makes predictions and the ones that come true are broadcast far and wide, but the ones that don't come true are quietly forgotten. And Nostradamus's prophecies have be worked and re-worked to fit the times we live in. Failed prophecies are resurrected to be retold some time in the future.
But the book was a seminal work when it came out that spawned discussions on the Manhood of Christ, a figure who has been largely recast in the mold of a real live Santa Claus by the post-Hellistic Christian world.
Christians believe the fairy tale self-raising Jesus was real. Our heritage and upbringing numbs our intellectual doubts, and makes us accept the supernatural as real. We adjust our reality to suit the fairy tale, rather than approaching the fairy tale with suitably adjusted sensibilities.
Schonfield eloquently opens our eyes to the doubts we all have about God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, and the way the Theologians tell the story.
It displays much erudition, and it is an enjoyable read even for the layman.
Not that I agree with everything that is written here. For example I don't agree with the author that the timing of the birth of Jesus was an act of God, but then I don't believe in Gods in any shape or form. So I can hardly believe that.
I would take issue with the author on the central theme that Jesus connived his own death to fulfill some Jewish Messianic conspiracy. Schonfield produces copious references to support his thesis, but I was left with the feeling that almost any prophecies can be proven in hindsight.
The economist Gerald Celente regularly makes predictions and the ones that come true are broadcast far and wide, but the ones that don't come true are quietly forgotten. And Nostradamus's prophecies have be worked and re-worked to fit the times we live in. Failed prophecies are resurrected to be retold some time in the future.
But the book was a seminal work when it came out that spawned discussions on the Manhood of Christ, a figure who has been largely recast in the mold of a real live Santa Claus by the post-Hellistic Christian world.
Christians believe the fairy tale self-raising Jesus was real. Our heritage and upbringing numbs our intellectual doubts, and makes us accept the supernatural as real. We adjust our reality to suit the fairy tale, rather than approaching the fairy tale with suitably adjusted sensibilities.
Schonfield eloquently opens our eyes to the doubts we all have about God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, and the way the Theologians tell the story.
February 25, 2020
Diligent scholarship and fascinating imagination meet for an in-depth look at the history of Christianity from the Jewish perspective. Pointing out new twists and turns in this familiar story, Schonfield gives us an entirely different view on the stories of the New Testament. A must-read for anyone interested in Biblical conspiracy or the history of Christianity!
February 2, 2018
Read this fifty plus years ago. Intriguing theory, but I saw holes in it then.
June 25, 2021
I would rather eat Civil War hardtack fished from the septic system than read this tedious, droning, pseudointellectual piffle again.
Read
February 8, 2024This is pretty much the historical biography of Jesus, with the same facts that are in a book I translated by a historian professor who is a believer, and in most of the historical books on the life of Jesus. The author adds his theory of what plans he thinks Jesus had and some stuff he thinks Jesus did ahead of big events so as to fulfill prophesies, such as arrange for the ass to take him into Jerusalem and the room for the last supper. He thinks Jesus went in advance and set those things up. Whatever. I remember the big stink when this book came out, and that is why I wanted to read it. It turns out to be the usual facts we pretty much know, plus a few theories. The whole question of resurrection/no resurrection is not addressed in the historical work I translated. This author concludes that it didn't happen and gives explanations along "mistaken identity" and "later retelling" lines. Again, whatever. People either believe or they don't. What I love in the Jesus resurrection story is the "noli me tangere" encounter with Mary Magdalene.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 7, 2018
Very interesting book. It was written in 1965 and scholars have been actively working since then so some things Schonfield shares are out of date. His major premise is that Jesus was an active member of the Nazoreans [a messianic, zealous group], that he had deeply studied all the prophecies related to the coming of the Messiah, and then he actively managed the events so that he would fulfill those prophecies. There is a huge amount of speculation in the book without much, if any, evidence to support it. Yes, it is possible; but did it actually happen? I am not convinced.
I did learn a great deal about the times and events contemporary with the life of Jesus. It is clear that Jerusalem and Judea were as bloody and violent then as they frequently are these days. That historical perspective was worth the read.
I did learn a great deal about the times and events contemporary with the life of Jesus. It is clear that Jerusalem and Judea were as bloody and violent then as they frequently are these days. That historical perspective was worth the read.
August 2, 2024
Ahhh conspiracy theories. I love them.
I find christian resurrection/crucifixtion ones some of the funniest. They're as wierd as christian myth making sometimes. A.K.A. the movie "The Robe" or "The Story of Longinus" and other such wonder tales of christian faith.
I remember when I read this, although I'm an Atheist, I couldn't quite buy into HJS's theory. Has an interesting kernel of plausibility in it but like all good conspiacy theories, just a little too much "let's assume" in it.
And yeah, the second half of a book dragged a bit too much. Oh well.
So a bit of a disapointment, I was expecting more bells and whistles. But it still gets 4☆'s just because it still pisses a lot of christians off and that's always fun, lol.
I find christian resurrection/crucifixtion ones some of the funniest. They're as wierd as christian myth making sometimes. A.K.A. the movie "The Robe" or "The Story of Longinus" and other such wonder tales of christian faith.
I remember when I read this, although I'm an Atheist, I couldn't quite buy into HJS's theory. Has an interesting kernel of plausibility in it but like all good conspiacy theories, just a little too much "let's assume" in it.
And yeah, the second half of a book dragged a bit too much. Oh well.
So a bit of a disapointment, I was expecting more bells and whistles. But it still gets 4☆'s just because it still pisses a lot of christians off and that's always fun, lol.
Read
November 26, 2020The book is a good read- what an imagination of the author, try9ng to subvert the truth and the reality of miracles. Most jews hate jesus and christians, and he is a pathetic EXAMPLE of a hater to the point of spending his time writing a book FULL of loopholes. Of course now we have more evedence and this was written 55 years ago. I don't know any jews who are haters of christianity, but they are out there just as there are christians who are haters of jew. Can we all get over this and become one world lovers???
February 16, 2021
I read this book about 20 years ago. At the time, I recalled the song sung by Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane ("Jesus Christ Superstar") which indicates he's having second thoughts about God's "plan" and his execution. Clearly both suggest that Christ followed an agenda which put Him squarely where He needed to go. 'Doesn't really matter if the premise in the book is true or not. The end result is a "Dan Brown". Scores of people suddenly are looking at Christ again , reopening worldwide discussions about faith. And that - is what a 5-star book does.
March 11, 2024
In his introduction the author wrote: "Most books about Jesus have been devotional, apologetic or polemical, and I wished mine to be none of these". I think the author succeeded in this. This book was filled with lots of information, brought to my attention many important details I never heard before, looked at known facts from a different perspective and was overall well written. I can recommend this book to anyone interested in the topic
January 3, 2023
A new look at the actual events of the life of Christ
Thought provoking and expansive. It leaves the reader in a state of query. What actually did happen during life and times of Jesus? This book makes you reexamine your own faith and provides further information to aid in that quest. One does not have to agree with the premise to glean much from information provided.
Thought provoking and expansive. It leaves the reader in a state of query. What actually did happen during life and times of Jesus? This book makes you reexamine your own faith and provides further information to aid in that quest. One does not have to agree with the premise to glean much from information provided.
January 18, 2023
"Schonfield's imaginative reconstruction is devoid of a scintilla of proof, and rests on dubious inferences from passages in the Gospels whose historical reliability he himself has antecedently rejected on page after page. In my view, the book should be dismissed as the mere curiosity it is." (Samuel Sandmel of Hebrew Union College in Saturday Review, December 3, 1966)
January 22, 2019
Heavy reading
The prime interest here was the first part of the book which presented an intelligent theory of the jurisdiction . It makes senset
The prime interest here was the first part of the book which presented an intelligent theory of the jurisdiction . It makes senset
Want to read
November 3, 2020I did not plan to read this book. I was just trying to find more information as someone recommended it to me. Please remove me from planning to read this book.
February 6, 2022
Interesting take that I recall even now, decades after reading it.
October 23, 2022
Challenging book.
April 29, 2023
Interesting euhemeristic reading of Jesus's story. Interesting from an anthropological perspective, and gives a nice overview of the Jewish sects of 1st Century Palestine. The book is divided into 2 parts, roughly "fictional" and "non-fictional" respectively. Overall a very entertaining read, which may be a bit too influenced by the hype about the discoveries at Nag Hammadi and Qumran (and who can blame it?).
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews