The Apocalyptic Jesus: A Debate

by Robert J. Miller (Editor), Dale C. Allison Jr. (Contributor), Marcus J. Borg (Contributor)

Did the historical Jesus preach that God was about to bring an end to human history and impose the divine kingdom on the earth and all its peoples? Four eminent New Testament scholars -Dale Allison, Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, and Stephen Patterson- come together under the direction of Robert J. Miller to debate this, the single most important question about the historical Jesus. Borg, Crossan, and Patterson argue that Jesus taught that God's kingdom was already here, not that it was coming in the near future. Dale Allison defends the widely-held view that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. Everyone's cards are on the table in this candid exchange. The disagreements are sharp and the debate is both pointed and respectful. This book is an eloquent exploration of a pressing issue that strongly affects how we understand the historical Jesus and Christian life today.

Genres: Religion, Biblical Studies, Nonfiction

168 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2001

About the author

Law School Professor, Lewis & Clark Law School, Portland Oregon

Tribal Judge

"

Reviews

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A DIALOGUE ON THIS ISSUE BETWEEN FOUR LEADING SCHOLARS

This 2001 book contains essays, and responses to essays, by Dale Allison ['Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet'], Marcus Borg ['Jesus: A New Vision'], John Dominic Crossan ['The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant'], and Stephen Patterson ['The Search for Jesus: Modern Scholarship Looks at the Gospels']. Allison is the lone defender of the "apocalyptic Jesus" position.

Editor Robert J. Miller ['The Jesus Seminar and Its Critics'] wrote in his Introduction, "This book is an extended exchange between Allison on the one hand and Borg, Crossan, and Patterson on the other. The book aims to facilitate this exchange in such a way that the participants go beyond simply staking out and defending opposing positions. In this book they have the opportunity to respond to one another, to assess the debate, to engage in self-criticism, and to explore the broader implications of each position." (Pg. 11)

Borg argues, "I think Jesus did preach repentance... Rather, my argument is the more specific claim: the MOTIVE for Jesus' preaching of repentance was NOT because time was short. To put it positively: Jesus did preach repentance, but not because he thought the end was near." (Pg. 34)

Allison points out, "One large flaw in the case for the non-apocalyptic Jesus is the obvious: Jesus endorsed the apocalyptic Baptist and was followed by a religious movement that produced texts full of apocalyptic language and images." (Pg. 110) Borg later admits, "The greatest strength of Dale's position is the reasonableness of his primary assumption: that if John the Baptizer and early Christianity both had an apocalyptic eschatology, so did Jesus. It creates a plausible prima facie case." (Pg. 117)

This is an excellent "dialogue" between these opposing viewpoints [Bart Ehrman also takes the "apocalyptic" view in his 'Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium'], that will be of great interest to those studying the historical Jesus.

[Arthur George · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is structured as a dialogue/debate between 4 leading New Testament scholars over whether Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. (This would mean that he taught that God would imminently bring about the end of the present world, thus overthrowing the forces of evil (mainly the Romans and the temple priesthood) and replace it with the Kingdom of God on earth.) Each of the 4 has a different viewpoint, but only Dale Allison considers Jesus an apocalypticist, while the others don't, though for differing reasons. Each presents an introductory essay stating his position, and the others each respond. Then each is asked to asses the strengths and weaknesses of his own position and those of the others. In the end, the book serves as a good introduction to the controversy, so that the reader gains an understanding of the main issues. That being said, I found the quality of portions of the argumentation on all 4 sides rather weak, and they betray that we find the Jesus that matches our own ideals. Also, personally I would have liked a more detailed discussion of the fine points, but this would make it not such a basic introduction, and the scholars in question probably would have been unwilling to devote more time and effort to their contributions.

[Shane Wagoner · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best debates I've read in a long while. Allison definitely held his own against his three opponents and argued his position with amazing skill and enthusiasm. I'm thinking my own personal position tends towards secondary-apocalyptic (Crossan was fantastic as always), but Allison has convinced me to do more research on his own beliefs. He might just convert me...

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

http://thatjeffcarterwashere.blogspot...