*the appendix and notes sections start at page 217.
-
SUMMARY: A historical analysis of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, combining records and a critical analysis of the Bible with the purpose of separating Jesus the man from what was written about Jesus for the purposes of faith.
-
FAVORITE QUOTE: "Except that unlike those other messiahs, this one would not be forgotten." - Part 2, chapter 12, page 159.
-
I first heard about Reza Aslan's new book via the buzz that was generated after his Fox News interview (reference (yes, I'm posting a Buzzfeed article, because that's where I first read about it): http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/is-this-the-most-embarrassing-interview-fox-news-has-ever-do). He was scheduled to make an appearance at my favorite cafe, Busboys and Poets, and I knew that this was an opportunity I had to grasp. Going against my normal book purchasing habits, I bought a copy (and got it signed for my parents!) and started reading it on my way back home from the event. He presented a very intriguing introduction to his book, and his friendly and open personality encouraged me to start reading the book as soon as possible.
-
Things I liked about this book:
- Easy to read and follow, even with my limited knowledge of Christianity. The author presents his case in layman's terms, and the reader can tell he is knowledgeable in his field.
- The author parallels his research findings with stories from the Bible very fluidly. Again, it makes it very easy for a reader like me, whose knowledge of history unfortunately does not go past what was taught in school (much of which has now been forgotten), to follow his points.
- It's a bit of a brain exercise. My favorite quote excellently sums up what I found most intriguing: there were many people who preached the same message as Jesus, so why is it that Jesus is remembered to this day, and not any of the others? It's a question that Aslan attempts to explain, but not fully to my satisfaction. However, I don't fault the author for this; I believe this is the result of not having enough material to work with from that time period. Aslan himself acknowledges that there are decades of holes in the historical evidence he worked with, including in the Bible itself.
- The book is wonderfully balanced. Aslan argues his points from the stance of a historian, and deconstructs certain verses from the Bible as inconsistent and something that cannot be taken as historical fact, but he does so in a very respectful manner. He consistently takes care to explain that, yes, a certain verse could not have possibly happened given what we know of the daily workings of the people during that time, stating that [fill in the blank] would just not have been feasible or practical. However, he is careful to point out that there is a reason for it having been written and why it is included in the bible, mostly revolving around the central theme of faith. He is always very aware to say that, in the end, religion is a matter of faith, and it is the faith that is important rather than the nitty-gritty details. It is the lesson from the story that is important, one of the many virtues of Jesus of Nazareth, and not necessarily the story itself.
- The author's explanation of the word "zealot" and how it didn't always have a negative connotation.
- I read the Bible once in high school, and have a fairly good understanding of the main stories of Christianity, however the fact that many of the characters have the same name (there are a plethora of Johns, Peters, and Marys) made it confusing at times, especially because I had such long breaks in between reading the book.
-
Religion is an interesting topic, and although I'm not Christian, I find Christianity very interesting, mainly because of my amateurish interest in religious art. I can't say that I'm totally convinced of the author's points, but for me to say whether or not I accept them would require conducting my own research, which is something I'll hopefully get to one day. The only evidence that we have from that time are held in a limited number of written documents, and, being the cynic that I am, the authenticity of those documents cannot be correlated unless we figure out a way to go back in time and line it up ourselves. So I believe there is no way to be totally convinced, but as it is for followers of any religion, at the end of the day it is all just a matter of faith.
-
Recommend? Yes.
