Customer Reviews

The Last Week: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus's Final Days in Jerusalem

5 star:		(38)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

"Two processions entered Jerusalem on a spring day in the year 30. It was the beginning of the week of Passover." From the East came a peasant procession with Jesus of Nazareth riding on a donkey and cheered by his followers. From the West came the Roman governor of Idumea, Pontius Pilate, who had come up from Caesarea Maritima. That the two processions occurred on the same day is not recorded in the Bible and, in fact, the two processions may not have happened on the same day. However the Roman governor did travel from Caesarea Maritima for festivals such as Passover. Most of all, for Mark, the procession of Jesus was clearly counter to the procession of Pilate.

The inevitable confrontation may be described as the "domination system" which had developed in Jerusalem. Borg and Crossan explain that domination system is a shorthand for political oppression, economic exploitation, and religious legitimation. Jerusalem had become a society where only a few ruled, the monarch, the nobility, and the wealthy. A high percentage of the society's wealth came from agriculture. Structures of laws of land ownership, taxation, and indenture of labor, put between a half and two-thirds of all of the wealth into the coffers of the few. In ancient societies, these structures were legitimized by religious language: the monarch ruled by divine right and the social order was the will of God.

The day after Jesus made his procession into Jerusalem, he drove the moneychangers from the Temple and aroused the severe wrath of the temple priests. The next day, Tuesday, was a day of challenges. Jesus returns to Jerusalem. As he is walking Jesus is challenged by the chief priests, scribes, and elders who want to know the authority he has for committing his prophetic act in the Temple. Jesus parries and asks about the authority of John the Baptist. Most readers know the story and know that the priests lose face. If that were not enough Jesus counterchallenges with the parable about the vineyard. Borg and Crossan emphasize that the priests et al realize that that parable was spoken against them.

So was Jesus destined for execution? From the point of view of the will of God, Borg and Crossan maintain an emphatic negative response: "It is never the will of God that a righteous man be crucified." Judas did not
*have* to betray Jesus. The Temple priests did not *have* to seek execution. (There is a similar story in Josephus of another who preached against the Temple. Interestingly this other man was only flogged.)
Rather it was the inevitability of the domination system that sent Jesus to death. Borg and Crossan wonder what it was about Jesus and his followers that so provoked the authorities.

Certainly the death of Jesus stunned his followers. Borg and Crossan find various ways for the followers of Jesus to come to grips with this within the New Testament and in subsequent centuries. For example, many Christians believe that the real reason (substitutionary atonement) for the death of Jesus was best explained by St Anselm in 1097. But how soon did the followers of Jesus try to begin to explain his death as an atonement? Have a look at 1 John 2.2 and 4.10.

If you are looking for well researched insights, interpretations, and translations of current and historical contexts for the meanings of biblical parables and perhaps more importantly the historical contexts of St. Mark's gospel, read this timely and well researched interpretation of the Passion of Christ and the details related to the 7 days from Palm (Passion) Sunday to Easter Sunday by Borg & Crossan.

Whether you are researching or interested in the fundamental roots of Christianity or curious about the historical context of the Roman and Jewish framework of the times surrounding the events of easter week you will not be disappointed by the scholarly research and interpretations presented regarding the 'cipher' meanings embedded in St. Mark's account.

I truly enjoyed the author's viewpoints expressed and this book is a welcome addition to the bookshelf of those who are interested in the probable nature of how these events transpired.

This book is far more than just two prominent biblical scholars combining to tell us what they think "really" happened during Easter week. Rather, Borg and Crossan focus their skills on what they call a much "simpler" and "humbler" task: retelling and explaining "the last week of Jesus's life as given in the Gospel According to Mark. . . a story everyone thinks they know too well and most do not seem to know at all." Virtually every biblical scholar agrees that Mark's gospel is the first to be written, but anyone who thinks that its author viewed Jesus's passion and death as an atonement for our sins and the way to heaven for those who "accept" that fact simply MUST read this book. It represents a genuine step forward in understanding the New Testament on its own terms, rather than on the terms that we today impose on it.

There are many reasons to read this book, but for the sake of brevity I will emphasize three. The authors rely upon the Gospel of Mark to tell the story of Jesus' journey to Jerusalem, and in the process explain why and how this gospel was written. For a long time I've held the belief that the gospels were simply a collection of orally circulated stories that the authors wished to preserve in writing. In order to provide some type of cohesive logic, they placed the stories within a loose narrative framework. Thanks to Borg and Crossan, I now understand that Mark wrote a carefully crafted, concisely written book that has a specific purpose --- to demonstrate for Christians that to follow Jesus means to follow him on THE WAY. For Jesus, the road to Jerusalem led to death and resurrection. Those who follow Jesus on this path will also be resurrected to new life. In short, this book greatly enhanced my understanding of Mark. Ever wonder why Jesus condemned a fig tree that bore no fruit out of season? Or why Jesus was so impressed with the woman who anoited his head with oil? Who exactly was in "the crowd" that called for Jesus' execution? Read this book to find out. My second reason for reading the book is the most obvious one. You will understand what happened in Jerusalem and why Jesus died. As Christians we are taught to believe that Jesus was somehow mindlessly fulfilling Biblical prophecy by going to Jerusalem, as if he had no say in the matter. The truth is that in an act of tremendous personal courage, Jesus chose to confront the powerful elite of the city --- the Roman imperialists and their temple collaborators --- and demand an end to oppression and injustice. This is why he was crucified. Finally, Christians who take their religion seriously will be challenged by the authors' assertion that Jesus calls us not only to personal transformation, but to political action. Rather than lunching with Presidents, Billy Graham style, or hobnobbing with the rich and famous, we Christians should be speaking up for the poor, the oppressed, and the disadvantaged. We busy ourselves with arranging the flowers around the altar when we should be out there turning over the tables of the money changers.

Borg and Crossan, in this slim readable volume, set out a simple proposition: to understand Jesus and what was important to him, it is vital to understand the week leading up to his crucifixion and resurrection. And the only way to really understand that week is to read what the Gospels actually say, not what we've been told they ought to say.

In some ways Borg and Crossan are biblical literalists. They try to sweep away traditional interpretations that have accrued to the Bible stories and instead try to read them in the context for which they were written. To do this they bring to bear a knowledge of biblical history that makes clear some parts of the Gospel story, which appear opaque to modern readers who don't know the milieu. Especially when Jesus is preaching in the temple, this explication really helps clear up common misunderstandings associated with Christian teaching.

There are times when the authors veer from the strictly literal, however. This is most apparent when they write about the Saturday between Good Friday and Easter. Since the Gospels slide over that day with only a fleeting mention, the authors fall back on legends of the Harrowing of Hell. There's nothing wrong with this in principle, but when the authors bring in references to the Gospel of Peter, which is little more than a late anti-Semitic forgery, they risk descending into silliness.

Also, many readers may object to the strongly political aspect of this book. Though the authors don't blow their noses on the spiritual importance of Jesus and his teachings, their emphasis in this writing lies on his anti-imperial politics. Some readers may balk and think the authors are devaluing the spiritual teachings; I think the authors are just shining a spotlight on a theme they believe has been neglected.

On balance this book is, for the most part, eye-opening. By peeling away later doctrine to couch the Holy Week story in its historical context, this book makes it possible to cast a clear eye on the spiritual and the social importance of Holy Week. For instance, I've never had anybody previously explain that Jesus' peaceful entry into Jerusalem on a donkey was a deliberate contrast to Pilate's military entry on the same day from the other direction. But I have seen many preachers who wrongly think the worshipful crowd on Palm Sunday is the same bloody-minded crowd on Good Friday.

This book is not without its flaws. The authors sometimes get caught up in trivia and lose sight of their central thread. And the authors' liberal politics may put off some potential members of their audience. But this book is definitely worth reading for both clergy and a lay audience. Not only is it a concise overview of Christian theology, it is also helpful to peel back the myth and obfuscation that has fallen over what the Gospels really say about Holy Week.

At first glance, and through much of the first third or so of the book, it appears as if this is a book for the learned and scholarly, much too "academic" for the casual reader seeking a new perspective or new insights....then, as Thursday approaches, the book "takes off," telling once again, the " Old, Old Story" with new insight and different perspectives, all of them reverent and respectful---respectful of those who want to take the Bible literally, but also respectful---and reassuring and challenging--to those who want to see and beleive the Bible in a different manner. Good book, well worth the read...Especially meaningful when read during Holy Week, one day at a time. A good addition to the Easter Literature and Perspective. Good addition.

For me The Last Week is a must read for a preacher who takes seriously the Markan text as it relates to the religious-political setting within which it arose. For too long we Christians have defanged Mark's gospel by ignoring its assault on the power elite of Jesus' day, including the Roman oppressors and their religious-leader collaborators. But Mark wrote of more than what we might warmly encapsulate as spirituality: he excoriated against religious legitimating of the domination system that has shaped and misshaped human lives for millennia... and which shows up in more refined, perhaps thereby more demonic, ways in our Pax Americana world.

Not that any of that is abnormal in human history. To the contrary, that's `how the world works'... which is quite the opposite of how the Reign of God works. In the mind of Borg-Crossan, Mark's Jesus suggested this with his ragtag parade by donkey on Palm Sunday, as he approached from the east. His action posed a dramatic contrast to Pilate's ceremonious, leather-slapping, hoofed clomping, military procession into Jerusalem for Passover, which would have come the west. So, Mark's Jesus puts himself into a collision course with Roman authority (and the collaborating religious institutions), hence, the cross. That's not the Palm Sunday sermon I remember from growing up in Orlando, Florida.

If you wish to keep your religious world as it is, do not open this book. However, if you wish to encounter an understanding of Jesus that will expand your perceptions and possibly transform your Christian experience, you cannot pass it by.

"Two processions entered Jerusalem on a spring day in the year 30. It was the beginning of the week of Passover." From the East came a peasant procession with Jesus of Nazareth riding on a donkey and cheered by his followers. From the West came the Roman governor of Idumea, Pontius Pilate, who had come up from Caesarea Maritima. That the two processions occurred on the same day is not recorded in the Bible and, in fact, the two processions may not have happened on the same day. However the Roman governor did travel from Caesarea Maritima for festivals such as Passover. Most of all, for Mark, the procession of Jesus was clearly counter to the procession of Pilate.

The inevitable confrontation may be described as the "domination system" which had developed in Jerusalem. Borg and Crossan explain that domination system is a shorthand for political oppression, economic exploitation, and religious legitimation. Jerusalem had become a society where only a few ruled, the monarch, the nobility, and the wealthy. A high percentage of the society's wealth came from agriculture. Structures of laws of land ownership, taxation, and indenture of labor, put between a half and two-thirds of all of the wealth into the coffers of the few. In ancient societies, these structures were legitimized by religious language: the monarch ruled by divine right and the social order was the will of God.

The day after Jesus made his procession into Jerusalem, he drove the moneychangers from the Temple and aroused the severe wrath of the temple priests. The next day, Tuesday, was a day of challenges. Jesus returns to Jerusalem. As he is walking Jesus is challenged by the chief priests, scribes, and elders who want to know the authority he has for committing his prophetic act in the Temple. Jesus parries and asks about the authority of John the Baptist. Most readers know the story and know that the priests lose face. If that were not enough Jesus counterchallenges with the parable about the vineyard. Borg and Crossan emphasize that the priests et al realize that that parable was spoken against them.

So was Jesus destined for execution? From the point of view of the will of God, Borg and Crossan maintain an emphatic negative response: "It is never the will of God that a righteous man be crucified." Judas did not *have* to betray Jesus. The Temple priests did not *have* to seek execution. (There is a similar story in Josephus of another who preached against the Temple. Interestingly this other man was only flogged.) Rather it was the inevitability of the domination system that sent Jesus to death. Borg and Crossan wonder what it was about Jesus and his followers that so provoked the authorities.

Certainly the death of Jesus stunned his followers. Borg and Crossan find various ways for the followers of Jesus to come to grips with this within the New Testament and in subsequent centuries. For example, many Christians believe that the real reason (substitutionary atonement) for the death of Jesus was best explained by St Anselm in 1097. But how soon did the followers of Jesus try to begin to explain his death as an atonement? Have a look at 1 John 2.2 and 4.10.

This review refers to the paperback edition.

The Last Week by John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg is a good book on the Gospel of Mark by a couple of Jesus-Seminar scholars. The authors assume many things, which most Christians accept as core doctrines, didn't happen or only happened in ways that can be explained without any miraculous intervention by God. The appearances of the resurrected Jesus are assumed to be visionary experiences of the apostles. The conflicting details reported by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are made clear enough that intellectually honest Christians have to deal with them.

Borg and Crossan describe Jesus as an activist preacher who non-violently challenges both Roman imperialism and the religious authorities among his own people who collaborate with the Romans to keep Jews in subjugation. The Palm Sunday entrance to Jerusalem is explained as a parody of the kind of procession that would have been occurring during Passover by Roman soldiers and governors in a show of force. Amid the Passover throng, Jesus comes into Jerusalem on a donkey, while the Romans process on horseback in a militaristic display. Borg and Crossan describe Palm Sunday as a staged political demonstration, and on this they seem pretty accurate. Jesus primarily gained a following in rural areas. When he goes to Jerusalem in Mark's gospel, it is clear that he expects to die in an inevitable confrontation. The Palm Sunday procession is described as a planned event, non-violent, but meant to attract attention.

Most of the confrontation in Mark's gospel is between Jesus and religious leaders who are doing fine under Roman occupation. The Romans needed local collaborators who understood the people. The Pharisees and Sadducees were upper class Jews who could be accommodated to extract taxes and keep order. In exchange they were treated well enough by the Romans and could benefit financially from their already privileged status among the people. The incident in the temple, in this reading, is another demonstration. Jesus condemns the money changes not for doing their jobs but because of the injustice they represent. A succession of verbal exchanges between Jesus and the religious leaders expose various injustices and hypocrisy.

Jesus very evidently opposes injustice that is always endemic in human society but especially injustice that is legitimated by religion. This historically has been the norm whether in ancient Egypt, pagan Rome, or by implication in the Holy Roman Empire of the Christian era. Borg and Crossan rehearse the indictment of American imperialism that has been fashionable since the 1960s. They seem obtuse to progress that Christian cultures have made against historical injustices, though they do allow that Jesus improved the status of women. They note the occasion when Rome crucified 2000 Jews to make an example for other potential zealots without any apparent awareness that atrocities like this only happen now in places like North Korea or under oppressive regimes explicitly in rejection of human rights as they have been understood in Western civilization.

The thesis of Borg's and Crossan's book is that Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God, both present and yet to come. Their own convictions lie with a political brand of Christianity in which adherents follow Jesus in non-violent social activism against injustice even when this course includes self abnegation or martyrdom. Martin Luther King and Gandhi both are exemplary in this regard and both acknowledged their debt to the Christian gospel. That Borg and Crossan neglect the progress that Christians have made in the West by their activism over centuries seems too characteristic of left-wing ideology. They quote Barbara Ehrenreich: Nickel and Dimed: On Not Getting By in America, who characterizes Jesus as a "wine guzzling socialist".

The lefty ideology is not so odious in this book to make it annoying to read. The authors exegesis is useful in understanding why Jesus became such an inflammatory presence that he was indicted and turned over to the Romans to be crucified. The question we are left to ponder is just how much difference any of this makes. Injustice is still rampant in every society and subculture. It seems that progress is something like the response attributed to Benjamin Franklin at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when asked what we have: "A republic, if you can keep it." That we have this progress in the West and don't have it where Western culture is absent or repudiated is something worth discussing.

Beyond this, Jesus, in the gospels, confronts suffering and death in his miraculous healings and reported resurrections, his own and that of Lazarus. Progress notwithstanding, the quest to eradicate injustice is doomed ultimately by inevitable suffering and death. The Kingdom of God as understood in Christian theology has more pervasively been about liberty to the oppressed under an everlasting jurisdiction.

So, did God let the evil Jews kill Jesus to atone for their
sins? Does that question even make any sense?
Borg and Crossan look at the earliest Gospel record of Holy
Week and put it into historical context. Jesus proclaimed the
coming of The Kingdom of God and challenged the dominant political system: the Romans and their local collaborators.
Mark's text is crystal clear on this. Borg and Crossan go
back to that text and take it seriously. Consider one example:
the cleansing of the temple. The text says "a den of thieves."
We understand this mean the money-changers and bird sellers and
read it to be a condemnation of capitalism. But, the "den" of
thieves refers to the safe haven of the thieves --the Roman collaborators who run the temple. This is no attack on simple
tradesmen.
The book is replete with such small insights and it also looks
at some broad mythopoeic topics like the Harrowing of Hell.
Perhaps it can serve as a corrective to our messed up popular
theology. Frankly, looking to Mel Gibson for theological reasoning is very much like looking to The Road Runner for insights into physics.