007
Christian Origins: From Messianic Movement to Christian Religion
Christopher Rowland
(Minneapolis, MN/Augsburg/London: SPCK, 1985) 448 pp., $16.95, paperback
Christopher Rowland is known for his wide-ranging study of the apocalyptic literature— the visionary literature from the period 200 B.C. to 100 A.D., exemplified by Daniel in the Old Testament, Revelation in the New Testament and non-canonical books such as 1 Enoch. He has now produced an even more wide-ranging study of Christian origins. This book is intended for students, but it is meant to be more substantial than standard general introductions. Rowland does not engage in detailed technical argument, but neither does he restrict himself to presenting consensus views. Rather, he proffers a definite thesis and develops it in a distinctive way. This thesis, that Christianity began as a Jewish eschatological sect, is neither novel nor especially controversial. Rowland goes further than most, however, in attempting to draw the lines of continuity between the early Church and its Jewish background.
The book may be divided into three main sections of approximately 100 pages each. (The final 100 pages are taken up with a helpful sketch of the sources, footnotes and extensive bibliography and index.)
The first part of the book is devoted to Judaism. Rowland packs an amazing amount of material into a short space. His distinctive emphasis is on the importance of belief in angels and the heavenly world, but he also does justice to other aspects of Jewish life—temple, synagogue, Torah, etc. He distinguishes sharply between “apocalyptic” (as the disclosure of heavenly secrets) and “eschatology” (as future expectation), although he grants that the two may be combined. On the whole, this is an exceptionally good overview of Palestinian Judaism in the first century. The picture Rowland paints is far richer and more variegated than that of E. P. Sanders, although Sanders’s basic insights on the understanding of the covenant are also incorporated.
As background to early Christianity, Rowland’s book has two limitations. Diaspora Judaism does not receive attention in proportion to its importance (only seven pages), and there is no discussion of the broader Hellenistic world. These omissions do not detract from the value of what Rowland has written, but they are significant for the perspective of the book as a whole.
The heart of Rowland’s book—the second part—is his discussion of Jesus (pp. 122–193), and this is also its most controversial part. Rowland acknowledges the methodological difficulty of writing on the historical Jesus, but he does not deal with it directly or offer any clear criteria for recognizing the authentic Jesus material. In practice he accepts the accounts of the Synoptic Gospels—Matthew, Mark and Luke—as substantially reliable (even where the formulation is admittedly the work of the early Church); he cautions against hasty dismissal of the authenticity of the account of Jesus in John, the Fourth Gospel. Rowland accepts the authenticity of at least some eschatological Son of Man sayings (for example, Mark 14:62) and affirms Jesus’ messianic consciousness (as shown in the entry to Jerusalem and the trial scene in Mark). He also entertains the possible authenticity of such disputed passages as the promise to Peter in Matthew 16:17–19 and the incident involving Barabbas in the passion story. He finds the evidence for the empty tomb irresistible (p. 190), not only in the Gospels, but also in 1 Corinthians 15.
Many scholars will feel that Rowland has accepted the authenticity of much of this material too easily. At the least, his interpretation requires more detailed arguments and more refutation of opposing views than is possible in this introductory book. The overall picture that emerges is one of Jesus as an eschatological Jewish prophet. In this Rowland agrees with the recent work of E. P. Sanders, but he goes much further in 008interpreting the parables and miracles in this light. He does not, however, deal with the apocryphal (non-canonical) Gospel material that has figured prominently in the work of Helmut Koester and others.
The discussion of Paul and the early Church is largely concerned with Paul’s relation to Judaism. In Rowland’s view the Pauline communities still fall within the category of Jewish sects. Problems occurred after 70 A.D. when a more monolithic Judaism rejected the validity of the Christian interpretation of the Scriptures. We may question here whether Rowland has paid enough attention to the expansion of Christianity in the gentile world and the way in which that expansion affected the relationship of Christianity to Judaism. (See the various reflections on this problem in To See Ourselves as Others See Us.) Rowland has some useful reflections on the importance of the delay of the Parousia, or Second Coming of Christ, which has been overrated as a factor in the development of Christianity. He rightly points out that apocalypticism always had a vertical dimension, that is, a concern with present relations to the heavenly world, as well as a horizontal dimension that considered the heavenly world at the end of days. Documents such as Hebrews or the Gospel of John, Rowland observes, which focus on present relations to heaven, had not necessarily abandoned eschatology.
In his preface Rowland expresses the hope that this book will serve not as an authoritative source book, but as a stimulus to disagreement and further research (p. xiv). That hope should be fulfilled. We await more detailed corroboration of Rowland’s views on the New Testament, but he has certainly highlighted the importance of the immediate Jewish background for early Christianity and the need for a reconsideration of the New Testament in that context.
The Other Bible
Edited by Willis Barnstone
(San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984) 765 pp., $24.95
This is a collection of ancient esoteric texts primarily from the Judeo-Christian tradition. They are divided into the following ten categories: 1. creation myths, 2. histories and narratives, 3. wisdom literature and poetry, 4. gospels, 5. infancy gospels, 6. apocryphal acts of the apostles, 7. apocalypses, 8. diverse Gnostic texts, 9. Manichaean and Mandaean Gnostic texts, and 10. mystical documents. A section from Plotinus, a third century A.D. philosopher, appears in an appendix. Most of the writings are taken from standard translations such as those found in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament; Robert Haardt, Gnosis; R. M. Grant, Gnosticism; J. M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library; Hennecke and Schneemelcher, eds., New Testament Apocrypha; and several others. It is an interesting and commendable selection. From it one can glean a fairly good panoramic view of esoteric writings dating from the Intertestamental period into the first several centuries of the Christian era.
With some exceptions, notably the gnostic writings (for which the editor has an obvious predilection), the editor is a novice with regard to these texts and their historical significance. The general introduction to the book and some specific introductions to the individual writings, composed by the editor, are unfortunately replete with misunderstandings and misleading statements. He states “categorically” that the Bible lacks sacred texts from the entire Intertestamental period (p. xviii). (One wonders about Daniel, which is usually dated to the middle of the second century B.C.) Of major eschatological themes in the New Testament, he claims the Son of Man and the notion of salvation through the messiah, among others, “are all the preoccupation of the Intertestamental literature” (p. xix). The fact is that neither of these is the preoccupation of the Intertestamental literature.
Errors continue. For the significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls, he cites from the old work of Edmund Wilson, itself full of misunderstandings. The editor argues that the author of the Fourth Gospel gets his word logos from Philo, and that Philo “invented” allegorical exegesis of the Bible (p. xxi). The word logos was freely exchanged in Greek and Jewish-Greek 009thought long before Philo. Allegorical exegesis of the Bible goes back at least to the time of the second-century A.D. Letter of Aristeas. He infers that Eleazer of 4 Maccabees is the father of the seven brothers and the husband of their mother (pp. 154ff). Eleazer, the seven brothers and their mother were martyrs during the persecution of Antiochus IV. There is no indication in 4 Maccabees, or 2 Maccabees, that the mother and brothers are the wife and sons of Eleazer.
Barnstone thinks the Old Testament contains a doctrine of hell in terms of a place of torment (p. 4). He argues “the Septuagint … was done over a period of centuries, at first for the Greek-reading Jews of Egypt and later, as more scriptures were added (emphasis mine), for the Eastern Christian Church” (p. 243).
The Septuagint was apparently finished in pre-Christian times, beginning with the Torah (the five books of Moses), as recorded in the Letter of Aristeas, and extending eventually to include the remainder of the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible and the Apocrypha, with the exception of 2 Esdras. It was revised in Christian times, but no evidence exists that a revision was done later for the Eastern Christian Church “as more scriptures were added.”
The editor’s glossary at the end of the book has several inexact, incomplete or otherwise dubious definitions. Thus, for Apocrypha he gives the definition: “Writings not admitted to the canon of sacred scriptures and of doubtful authority.” A better definition is (1) Old Testament Apocrypha: those writings appearing in the Latin Vulgate either as part of the Old Testament or as an appendix to it, but not in the Hebrew Bible; (2) New Testament Apocrypha: some early writings, sometimes similar in form to the New Testament documents, used by various Christian groups (often heretical) but not included in the New Testament. Gemarah is defined as “the Aramaic commentary in the Talmud.” A better definition is the Aramaic commentary on the Mishnah included in the Talmud. The Mishnah is defined as the “Hebrew text of the Talmud.” A better definition is the codification of Jewish law by Rabbi Judah the Prince, c. 200 A.D., written in Hebrew and later included in the Talmud.
In spite of these shortcomings, the lay person interested simply in reading ancient writings without concern for scholarly issues should profit from this book.
Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus
Edited by Michael E. Stone
(Assen, Netherlands/Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 721 pp., $35.95
In this volume, leading specialists offer their insights into the various types of non-biblical writings that appeared before the emergence of rabbinic literature. Many of these literary types, particularly those usually lumped together as “Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha,” defy easy characterization. Nevertheless, this work, edited by Michael E. Stone of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, is a first-rate consolidation of recent research on the subject.
After a lucid historical overview by Isaiah Gafni, the following subjects are treated: biblical expansions and themes (George W. E. Nickelsburg), historiography, Josephus (Harold W. Attridge), Philo (Peder Borgen), wisdom literature (M. Gilbert), testaments, sibylline oracles (J. J. Collins), apocalyptic literature (Michael E. Stone), Jewish Gnostic sources (Birger A. Pearson), Qumran literature (Devorah Dimant), liturgy (David Flusser) and epistles (P. S. Alexander).
Each chapter abounds in skillful analysis. For example: Attridge clearly examines the motivations and tendencies that characterize Josephus’s writings. Flusser’s evaluation of early Jewish tahanunim (supplications) and apotropaic prayers raises many questions about the formulation of early rabbinic liturgy. Alexander’s comparison of epistles found embedded in ancient Jewish writings with those that have actually been discovered as separate manuscripts is especially provocative.
This work would have been enhanced by a final chapter summarizing the richness of literary efforts during the Second Temple period. The book does succeed, however, in conveying “a perception of the variety, creativity, complexity and wealth of this era of Jewish religious life and of the literary production that issued from it,” as the editor claims. This volume is sure to become a standard reference work for scholars and serious students who need to become acquainted with the latest research on pre-rabbinic writings. Two more volumes in this section of Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum will be devoted to the Bible and rabbinic literature.
007
From Christian Origins …
“In discussing Christian origins, we must always bear in mind that we should not be concerned to contrast Christianity with Judaism, as if the latter were a uniform body of doctrine and practice. Christianity never conflicted with Judaism as such until well into the second century A.D. For the whole of its formative period the hostility which existed between Jews (and others), who believed that Jesus was the Messiah, and those who did not, was spasmodic and lacking in any uniformity. What we can speak of in the first century is a conflict between groups of Jews who rejected Jesus’ messiahship and groups which accepted it.” (p. 7)
008
From The Other Bible…
“After the closing of the Old Testament and during the first centuries of the Common Era, inspired authors continued to write sacred scriptures. They were written by Jews, Christians, Gnostics, and Pagans. Many of these texts were of amazing beauty and religious importance and competed with books within the canon. The Jewish texts are in large part called pseudepigrapha, which includes the Dead Sea Scrolls; the Christian texts are called Christian Apocrypha; the Gnostic scriptures, today so fascinating and even modish, were called by their orthodox rivals heretical …. Had events been otherwise and certain of these inspired texts incorporated in our Bible, our understanding of the tradition of religious thought would have been radically altered.” (p. xvii)
