Customer Reviews

Christian Origins: A People's History Of Christianity, Vol. 1

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was really looking forward to getting this book. It is volume one of a seven volume series on the history of Christianity written from the perspective of the common peasants of the time rather than the usual history written from the viewpoints of kings and famous writers and theologians.

But whenever you teach history from only one side, you are bound to have distortions, and this book is a clear example. Richard Horsley's introductory chapter lays the groundwork for the rest of the volume, as he discusses the peasant revolts of Theudas and Judas and the factors that led some of the common people to go along with them.

But Herzog's chapter on how peasants would have responded to Jesus was where things really got interesting. He contends that Jesus taught in parables to give peasant people encouragement to interpret their world.

But the Bible says just the opposite. It says that Jesus taught in parables "so that they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding" (Mark 4:12). In other words, the parables were a way for Jesus to deliberately teach so that those who were missing the point would continue to miss the point (both peasants and teachers of the law), and by logical extension, those who were alive to the truth would get it (the disciples).

Herzog also states that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus was to encourage the peasants about how there could be a great reversal in fortunes for the poor and the rich.

But Jesus is alluding to eternity beyond this life whereas Herzog seems to think that Jesus was painting a dream of something that could happen on earth. Herzog completely misses the otherworldliness of the context.

Then Herzog somehow interprets the parable of the workers as an example where the boss is the bad guy instead of the good guy who gives everyone a denarius for a day's work.

Then Antoinette Clark Wire has an interesting chapter about the 26 birth stories of Bible heroes told in early Jewish literature from a woman's perspective in the decades leading up to the births of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. She contends that these stories were told because this is the way the women experienced them, and that they saw the potential and the possibilities for pesant people of faith to overcome obstacles in life. She argues that the stories were just as political as they were theological, in fact, more so.

That may be true for some of the literature she discusses, but this doesn't seem to be true for the infancy narratives in the Gospel of Luke. In fact, the primary message of Luke is explicitly theological and only political in a smaller sense, that Jesus is a Savior for all people (Luke 2:10-11; 32). Having said this, I still thought that this was one of the more exciting chapters in the book, very well done.

Next, Jorunn Jacobsen Buckley contributes a chapter about the Mandaens, a group that descended from the early Christian movement. They practice baptism by immersion as a form of purification, and there are about 100,000 of them in Iraq and Iran today. They have a long series of traditions about John the Baptist, yet they do not accept Jesus as a prophet. They believe that somewhere down the line, Jesus rejected Jewish and Judaic practices. They also reject Pauline and Gentile Christianity. Buckley considers it probable that the Mandaens were in Palestine around 30 AD, and would have witnessed a rivalry between Jesus and His followers and John the Baptist and his followers. (The question I'm sure you're dying to ask is "What rivalry?" Buckley simply assumes one, without elaborating or trying to prove it.

Buckley also believes that Mandaens may well have become the inventors of or at least contributors to Gnosticism.

Next, there is a section of the book about the cities and texts of the common people. Ray Pickett contributes a chapter about the conflicts in the Corinthian church. He is interested in how Paul's letters to this church can tell us more about the beliefs and practices of the people.

The article about Matthew's community was really interesting. Warren Carter talks about how Matthew's Gospel was probably composed in Antioch, and how most of the people there were poor, and how their taxes were orbitant, and that there would have been a lot of anti-Roman sentiment in the city (which had about 150,000-200,000 people). Jesus's battle with the devil reveals the devil as the power behind the Roman government.

Moreover, the section on whether or not the sons of the kingdom should pay taxes to Caesar (Matt 17:24-27) is directly relevant to the questions Antiochan Christians would have been asking in 85 AD.

Carter also points out that the material in Matthew 5:38-48 was a reminder to the believers to give freely to those who are in need.

He also points out that there is a contrast in the gospel between people in need (Matthew 5), praying for their Daily Bread (6:11, 7:11), and the rich and powerful like Herod who can have lavish feasts in a moment's notice (Matt 14:1-12). In contrast to this, Jesus challenges people to have a wider table of fellowship (Matthew 9:9-14), and to not seek positions of status.

Carter also notes that Matthew points forward to the end of the age when God would settle all issues of disparity in society. This was a great chapter by Carter.

There is also a chapter called The Gospel of John as People's History, by Allen Dwight Callahan. He may be overreaching a bit when he contends that there are romantic innuendos in the story of Jesus and the woman at the well in John 4, mainly because the story takes place at a well and Jacob met his future wife Rachel at a well. Nevertheless, the social implications of Jesus saving a Samaritan village that has suffered long and hard under harsh leadership is significant for a people's history of Christianity.

Callahan tremendously misinterprets Jesus' words in John 2:19 as an overt challenge to the Judean authorities to destroy the Temple, when the writer of the 4th gospel makes it clear in verse 21 that Jesus was talking about the temple of His body. I couldn't believe my eyes until I read it again for myself. I kept asking, "How could an accomplished scholar miss the fundamental play on words Jesus is making?"

Not only that, but Callahan somehow sees Mary of Bethany's act of worship in pouring the perfume on Jesus (John 12) as a political act whereby she is anointing Him as King Messiah. But is that the significance of her act? Callahan also says that this is when Jesus becomes Messiah, which cannot be accurate, because Jesus has declared Himself to be the Messiah as far back as John 4:26, and a case can be made from other salient texts that Jesus was always the Messiah (Hebrews 13:8, John 1:1-18).

Moreover, in the chapter about Judeans in the Roman Empire (Disciplining the Poor), Neil Elliot thinks that Paul is being ironic in Romans 13, and (as a result) is not really advocating submission to the governing authorities. Holy cow, what was Elliot thinking?

The next chapter was a real eye opener. Carolyn Osiek discusses the living conditions of the Greco-Roman world at the time of Christ. Disease was widespread, conditions were filthy and unsanitary, there was no knowledge of basic hygiene, girls were often married and barefoot and pregnant before they were old enough for their first menstruation, and urination and defacation were not considered private functions. Most people were poor and didn't live past the age of 40. Women especially were plagued with health problems due to constantly being pregnant (and from such a young age). Child labor laws were nonexistent, and they were harshly disciplined. This chapter knocked me on my duff.

There are also chapters on slavery at the time of Christ and prophets at the time of Christ, the prophet like Moses.

I really enjoyed this book, and I learned a lot, and I am looking forward to reading the next volume in the series. Yet it is numerous misreadings of the scripture such as those noted above that prevents me from giving this book 5 stars. I really wanted to give it 5 stars, because it was provocative and interesting and so different from the usual history books that are written from the perspectives of the powerful.

But such terrible and irresponsible mishandlings of scripture need to be factored in when evaluating books like this. I almost gave the book three stars because the misinterpretations of scripture were so ridiculous. In retrospect, it's hard to believe that you had Ivy League scholars in on this book, the biblical interpretations are that bad! I guess the bottom line is that the book is good history, bad Bible. Order this book from the library or add it to your library, but read with careful discrimination.

The people are the most important part of history...

Fortress Press' A Peoples History of Christianity series understands one fundamental premise. There is no real history if the people are forgotten. In the first volume, Chrsitian Origins, Richard Horsley and those who contribute essays present an intriguing view of the thoughts, practices and beliefs of those in the Judean community who were affected by Jesus' sojourn. These people, historically invisible, are the faces in the crowds; those who gathered and hoped for deliverance from their circumstances. Horsley et al, give a riveting view of the lives of these persons and the impact of the ministry of Jesus on their lifestyles and their political views. Horsley is particularly engaging as he articulates the importance of the "Jesus movement" and the people's expectation of its renewal of Israel. These essays not only give light to the well known biblical accounts, but present a fresh outlook through the lens of the people who were apart of the communities affected by the spread of Christianity throughout the places that the apostles traveled.

One of the most notable chapters is William Herzog's essay "Why Peasants Responded to Jesus." This chapter looks at "doing history from below" exploring the use of parables as a means of expressing the pain associated with the oppression felt by those who were poor citizens under Roman rule. The distress of the poor and peasants reflected the socio-economic climate of the day, and the words of Jesus, especially in the parables that illuminated the disparity between the rich and the poor, helped to empower and give hope to those who were apart of the community. Herzog, utilizing the liberation oriented "pedagogy of the oppressed" by Paulo Freire, contends with masterful juxtaposition that Jesus, in the parables, used what Freire would label "verbal codifications" to instruct the people and to empower them to "interpret their world differently" (55-58).

The text provides insight into the lives of people in the places where texts were written or addressed. The two essays Conflict at Corinth, by Ray Pickett, and Matthew's People, by Warren Carter, give candid exposition into the lives of the Gentiles at Corinth and the Jews to whom Matthew primarily writes. Notable is the influence of the Roman Empire on both, as they sought to establish Christian focused lives and to especially in the case of Matthew's people, maintain a connection with tradition. The influence of Greco-Roman philosophy and the economic views of the Roman Empire on Corinth is illustrated with candor and clarity providing new light to the biblical letters to the church at Corinth.

The text is quite eclectic as it goes beyond the lifestyles of those who were followers but also shedding light on the lives of slaves and the imperial rule that persecuted those who were apart of the movement. This text gives great insight into the feelings and struggles of those who were oppressed and martyred for the faith that many are able to experience unencumbered. As Stephen Friesen states in his essay Injustice or God's Will, "A people's history cannot ignore issues related to the uneven distribution of economic resources...throughout Christianity's existence" (240). This text does what many other historical accounts fail to do, it remembers that history is not history without the people, and it does this wonderfully.

Haven't they dominated center stage long enough?
By Kevin Hrebik, MAR, MDiv (in process)

Having been significantly impressed with the book as a whole, it came as a surprise to read other basically negative reviews, especially to claim insufficient premise support. Granted, no book will ever please everyone, but what book claims to? By the same token, what perspective is all-encompassing? Even the Bible is criticized for not being a science book or a history book, but neither of these is its purpose (although it contradicts no real science or real history, i.e., micro-evolution portending macro-evolution and thus being junk science, putting theory ahead of fact). That the authors chose to explore the relatively young and still undeveloped social and literary science of a "people's perspective" is to make an a priori case for their not being able to speak simultaneously and with equal weight to all standard perspectives, or to possess incontestable evidence.

It seemed the critics were somewhat patronizing and arguably illustrated the thesis of the commendably creative seven-volume series, that the vast preponderance of history has been written from the "top down", from the perspective and perpetuation of the elite view, assiduously capturing only the key people, events and "major tradition". A "bottom up" view of history, thus the subtitle, "A People's History..." written from the "minor tradition" and encompassing much harder to find nuances, requiring incomparably greater research and analysis, and some necessary speculation, is not only welcome but sorely needed. Most average scholars can access and comment on the public record, but reading "across the grain" and between the lines, adducing the reasons behind the great proclamations, discerning the purposes of the documented material, and interpolating the causes of the official records requires an applaudable, even heroic drilling into the silenced, forgotten and often unnamed masses.

Other than what we glean from occasional, dramatic Hollywood efforts, who among us ever thinks about what life really was like in 1st century Greco-Roman times for the commoners, peasants, main streeters and average Joe's who shadowed Jesus like groupies? Or in the 2nd and 3rd centuries following his death and resurrection, when they labored to gain converts in a world more hostile than any of us will ever know? Are the non-elite and non-status masses really irrelevant to a comprehensive awareness and education of the history of Christianity--or is the top down view sufficient? What rare person analyzes parables from the vantage point of the "least among them"--or is only one historical perspective germane? One critic appealed to Rowan Williams, current Archbishop of Canterbury, as having a legitimate grasp on the genre of history, yet in his "Why Study the Past?" (2005, Grand Rapids: Eardman's), Williams is hardly a stranger to invention. His essential premise is to see all of history cast in a shroud of "strangeness," from which too many take too much certainty. His view is that only with the eyes of faith can we hope to clear the fog, and that only true believers can hope to peer through the unknowable into the lives of other believers experiencing the same Christ. If Williams' interpretive license, an "insider's view" so to speak, at once creative, novel and fresh, is wholly legitimate, why not a serious, multi-volume contribution to the relatively new "bottom up" view?

Regarding ancient history, the mass of the preserved and unearthed record that has been passed down through the centuries has been critical for the normal, established top-down view--one that also is as old and as tired as the hills. Not to say this is necessarily bad, because it is still both informative and instructive, but when others have uncovered something intrinsically valuable, a new tradition, a breath of fresh air, perhaps the fledgling genre should be given a little room to develop, and not immediately pounced on as not fulfilling all the established, normalized requirements of suitable historical documentation. Surely, as more join the effort, the new "bottom up" historical tradition will continue to be explored by the gamut of professions and generations of new thinkers. In this set alone, more than 100 contributed to the cause. Perhaps those well educated in old school history could lend a helping hand in weak areas instead of arms length, aristocratic-like condescension.

The critics complain of theories not being sufficiently well founded but the authors freely admit that obstacles abound, and supporting material is problematic in many ways (see especially Chapter Six, Warren Carter's "Matthew's People"), thus reinforcing the thesis that it is long overdue to make a credible and concerted effort to imagine and discover what went on behind the great elite historical tradition.

This writer for one was inspired by the upside down from normal interpretation of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus from Luke 16:19-31 (pp. 58-62). It was not a stretch at all to buy into the theory that virtually all of the peasants and poor, comprising 95% of the population, simply were sick and tired of being harshly dominated and unable to get ahead from triple taxation (Rome, Herod, Priests), and cheered at the idea of a just reversal of fortunes for a piggish rich man, now at the mercy of a poor man. A people's view of Jesus' parables offers previously hidden insights, and is not a threat to the standard interpretation (justice will prevail). Is there anything new to learn from it? And if yes, have not the authors succeeded at their task? Moreover, if we either cannot or do not learn anything new from the past, indeed as per Williams, why study it? Changing our vantage point for Jesus' parables is not only good Bible but great application--Jesus deliberately chose his words for specific reasons, in this case to help the poor masses relate and "get it", and his ultimate point is hardly the only lesson.

At the same time, much "big tradition" fact is incorporated in the view that oppressed peasants birthed the impetus of the various grassroots rebellions (pp. 24-30), which mushroomed into actual revolts, for these well-documented revolts did not materialize overnite. Non-status peasants simply do not rise up against a crushing, infinitely more powerful hierarchy for no reason--thus, "What pervasive, inherent, cumulative social/cultural/political factors contributed to their actions?" is as valid a question to investigate as any other; and more interesting reading than who led the revolt, what year it was crushed, how many were killed, and Rome's follow-up punishments. As well, to put readers in the well-worn sandals of the oppressed who heard Jesus' language like accessing the "kingdom of heaven" and becoming "children of the King" as immensely appealing--is not to rewrite eschatology or theology but to make the point of how and why the throngs followed him, how and why they dared to populate rebellions, and ultimately how and why they willingly faced death for their new faith. This is a view neither as empathetically nor as eloquently captured in standard history books.

If all you want is another top-down historical series hitting all the proper notes with all the proper documentation (perhaps even romanticizing Rome's brutish emperors), then by all means stay with the safe and predictable--there are certainly plenty of them. But if you want to step outside the box, are willing to be stretched a little, and can be obliged to see some new sights and new terrain, even if you don't agree with everything the tour guide suggests, consider this fresh, creative and for this reader at least, highly inspirational book. Who knows, you might even find--gasp!--some humor in history (for just one prime example, there is much remarkable and subtle humor in "The Cult of the Martyrs" by Vasiliki Limberis in the 3rd volume of the series, Byzantine Christianity). The elite and imperial aristocrats of the ancient world, both secular and Christian, have never been quite as important in the eyes of the populace and laity as they have been in their own, and neither have their best fans, their historians. Haven't the lot of them dominated center stage long enough?

The English-Speaking world has badly needed a wide-ranging history of Christianity that focuses on the lives of ordinary Christians. Unfortunately, this need still goes unmet. The contributors to the first two volumes of this series (the only ones I've looked at so far) often have mastered an impressive amount of factual material about earliest Christianity, mined from a variety of literary and non-literary sources. Unfortunately, they interpret this mass of data through the distorting lens of a couple of highly questionable theories - theories which they accept without examination, or even question. The result is that little of what they say about the topic is reliable or useful.

The older of these unquestioned theories is the famous 'Bauer Hypothesis', developed by the German historian Walter Bauer way back in the early 19th century. Bauer argued that originally there were a multiplicity of competing "Christianities" - no one more correct or authentic than any other - and that it wasn't until after several centuries of struggle that what we know as "orthodox Christianity" finally triumphed, and then attempted to destroy all trace of its vanquished rivals. This theory has become almost unquestioned "orthodoxy" (forgive the pun) in most academic circles, but few scholars have bothered to make a serious examination of its assumptions to see if they fits the facts. Some scholars have, however, and one of them is the current Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who wrote an essay called "Does It Make Sense to Speak of pre-Nicene Orthodoxy" as his contribution to 'The Making of Orthodoxy: Essays in Honor of Henry Chadwick'. He seriously undermines Bauer's assumptions and makes a convincing case for a profound and intentional unity in faith and practice in earliest Christianity. I recommend you check it out.

The second theory governing this series is much more recent, but no more scrutinized. This is "Foucauldianism" - developed by late 20th century French deconstructionists, particularly Michel Foucault. It was Foucault's belief that all discourse (religious, political, philosophic, whatever) has one purpose - to help one person/group to exercise power and control over another. Applying this attitude to Christianity, for example, has obvious results. One will look at any theological statement about the Trinity, Christ, salvation or ascetical practice and wonder, "Who is trying to control and manipulate whom by teaching this." For most of the contributing scholars, this plays out in perceived issues of class and gender. The Church fathers, who have been revered for centuries as teachers of Christian truth, are now seen as 'The Elite' who created "discourses" to maintain their power and exercise "discipline" on the masses. The masses, for their part, may have pretended to go along, but (these historians assure us) they were always creating "subversive interpretations" of the Elite's discourses, in an effort to undermine power structures and liberate themselves. As you can tell, this sort of rhetoric gets awfully tiresome after a while.

It is obvious to me that it will be impossible to make a fair or useful evaluation of orthodox Christian faith and life when all the evidence is selected and distorted so as to fit agendas such as these. I'm still waiting for that good social history of early Christianity.

This is a great introduction to the New Testament and questions the faithful student and reader should raise. Well written and informative. The offereings by different researchers and commentators adds perspective to the people and times of the New Testament origins.

The bookstore guru at our church showed this title to me a few months ago, and we decided to do a summer study of the book at our church. As a researcher and professor (in education and addiction) I thoroughly enjoy reading decently supported hypotheses and points of view, rather than the dry research standard of the "nearly proven" and "facts." The book has made for fascinating reading, lively discussion, and a great deal of outside research on materials that we were not finding to our liking! Fun, exciting, fresh, interesting, and yes, quite inaccurate from time to time, but we didn't pick it as a research based memorization project, but rather for the provocative points of view within. If you want to learn a great deal about early christianies (yes, plural and small "c"), this is the place to go. As there are 7 books in the series, this will probably be the first of a set of 7 reading clubs spread out over seven summers. I cannot recommend this highly enough for discussion groups. If your background is strictly fundamentalist, this may not be to your liking at all, definitely not material for someone with the King James only point of view, if this is where you are coming from, you would be best served by reading some of the content online before making a purchase decision.

Arrived within 5 days of ordering and was in perfect condition. Could not have done better at a book store!

An excellent cross-reference to another view of diffeent areas of Christianity especially in the early church.

Many times in studying and preaching the Gospels I like to make sure I am true to the text. As a pastor I always want to make sure I am approaching the text as the writer did when he wrote the text. I have always approach the text from the perspective of the writer as he dealt with his audience, as to why he wrote this text, what was going on at the time, and what the atmosphere and the political environment that motivated the writer to approach the text as he did. In my preparation and bible study time these have always been the questions I have asked myself. Until now I have not had much information and historical data to gather enough information on the complete thought process of the people that were being written about.

Richard Horsley in his book Christians Origins A People's History Of Christianity Volume 1 has given me additional resources that I may find the true atmosphere of the people in which the Gospel writers wrote about. In his book Horsley covers the culture climate between the elite and the peasants, and how the peasants constantly Felt threaten to have their land taken away with heavy taxes put upon them by the authorities and the elite members of society. He talks about where the early Jesus movements or the Christ- believers came from and how that basic foundation helped established what later Christianity became. He talks about who were the majority followers of Jesus and what were the things and events that motivated them to get behind this movement

In Horsley section that covers Women's History He covers it from the women perspectives and not the usual male dominated society perspective, which I find extremely refreshing. Form my perspective most of the people in church today are women, and since they are the majority I think its ideal to here the women's point of view, as to what either pushed or move them into taking the necessary steps that placed them in the historical books of our time. Horsley also give the readers great inside to the struggles that the Apostle Paul had with the church at Corinth. There are many time that we read the Apostle's Paul writings and walk away feeling that everything he said to the church they accepted it with a smile. However this theory is extremely misleading, The leaders that Paul was over may have accepted it, but the people as a whole in Corinth flat out rejected him and his teachings. They question who gave him the authority to speak to them in a corrective manor.

Horsley talks about the difference between Matthew's people who thought of themselves as belonging to the tradition of Israel and Israel's God. From this perspective he looks at the people in Antioch and their imperial context and how they interacted with the powerful political, economic, societal, and religious forces of the Roman Empire. In the Gospel of John Horsley talks about how the division of Israel was divided into two kingdoms, the kingdom of Israel in the north and the kingdom of Judah in the south and what authoring they came under. He covers the controversial issue of slaves and why it was an acceptable behavior, and the justification that was used in the communities of Christ-Believers.

I believe Horsley makes allot of good points form the people perspective. The reality is if there were no people involved in the stories than we would not have a story to tell. I believe Horsley approach is very fresh and new and it takes the reader deeper into the text that will allow him, or her to expound on the text more from an application point of view as well as from the theological point of view. There are a few times I think he may cover too much detail about the everyday people, but that would be like saying the Gospel is not about Jesus. The purpose of this is to give the everyday person a name and a meaning and their proper place in history, and I believe Horsley does an excellent job in that area and I would recommend this book to any pastor or teacher who would like to know about the people involved in the writings of the New Testament.

Christian Origins edited by Richard Horsley is a good book explaining the acceptance of Christianity in the first century by the common person. It takes a fresh look of the Christian, Roman, and Jewish world view from the bottom up. Horsley and his contributors are concerned with the daily lives of the people in the Roman world and why Christianity was widely accepted by the common person and at the same time vehemently opposed by the powers that were in the Jewish and Roman worlds. Horsley spends great effort describing the extreme poverty experienced by most people in the Roman Empire. This is coupled with the extremist oppression over the longest period of time that the world has ever seen. This book deals with individual communities such as the Jew in Judea, Samaritans, slaves in Corinth, or the working poor in Rome. It deals with the Jews displaced in Antioch in Matthews Gospel and the subculture of women and the poor in John's gospel. Horsley's group recognizes that not only the Jews found hope in Jesus as the long expectant Messiah but the gentiles found hope in him as the Christ. The book reveals a message of hope that the least last and lost of the world were considered to have value in the Kingdom of God. This was in contrast against to the landscape of a world view that considered human life to be a cheap commodity and social status and power commodities of great value.
It also deals with the harsh realities for the choice to become a first century Christian. A choice that carried with it more liabilities than assets this included the social rejection of family, friends, and society as whole for the Roman as well as the label of heretic for the Jew. The literal application of Paul's declaration the Cross is a stumbling block for the Jew and folly to the Greek.
Christian Origins is not a deeply theological pursuit. However, it is an in depth sociological and historical work that reveals a bottom up perspective of the common person in the first century. For the seminary student and pastor this is a book that can be used to understand the sociological mind set of the common man in the first century and rediscover how these problems are relevant in today's world. This is true not only in the third world but in the western world. It provides a possible explanation of why the Christian message has the effect of a wild fire on a dry plain of grass in societies that are impoverished and oppressed and difficulty in societies of wealth and privilege. It is a reminder to the minister of an obligation to carry the Christian message to those neighborhoods where the least, last, and lost live. It is an aid to the scholar to examine the people's circumstances in the first century and the material reason for broad acceptance of the faith in the first century. Finally this is a book for the avid reader and enthusiastic Christian to understand their faith from a material and sociological perspective. This is an understanding that can be used as a complement to the spiritual aspect of the Christian faith for the edification of the new found believer or the maturity of a life long Christian.