It took nineteen centuries for Christian scholars to embrace the fact that Jesus was fully Jewish. Consciously or unconsciously, some experts still try to minimize the
impact of that realization. But the primary and most certain conclusion about Jesus’ early life must be that his life in the Synagogue was extremely significant.
According to Luke, Jesus, the Jew, grew in favor with his Jewish community. That community, of course, was the Synagogue. It was more than his custom to meet
there on Sabbath days. Not only are we told this distinctly, but logic demands we believe Jesus attended the Synagogue faithfully. He could not have remained in good standing in Nazareth otherwise.
In his sovereignty, God chose for Jesus to grow up learning Torah, every Sabbath, with the Nazarene-Jewish community. The Lord's faith, life and practice all blossomed, however uniquely, in the light and the life of that Nazareth Synagogue. Any Biblical Historiography of the Lord’s life has to deal with those facts, and that context. But with such a realization, can there be any question that established Christendom, in centuries past, would have been less than eager to embrace such a view? And yet, given what little the Gospels reflect of Jesus' early life and hometown experience, there is no other view that can possibly be taken.
If Jesus' early years aren't to be muzzled, our Gospel based conclusion must inevitably be that those years must have been very centered on Synagogue, for Jesus. My own investigation took place two years ago, and remains online, right here. As research based argument, it's a crude treatment, of course. But I'd appreciate very much everyone taking another good look.
On today's point: The past predominance of antisemitism certainly doesn't prove that my reconstruction of Jesus' early years is on track. It does, however, point out at least one reason why scholars ought to be more skeptical of the old, oft repeated mantra, "The Gospels are silent on Jesus' early life." In this amateur historian's opinion, they reflect much... but only to those who are willing to look.
Consider these things...
Recent Posts
Get the NT/History Blog in your Inbox:
Recently Popular
-
On chronology, that is. By me, of course. ;) This post comes because of a paragraph I just read in which James D.G. Dunn provides a nearly ...
-
It takes an awfully good pastor to be better than no pastor at all.
-
Is there a comprehensive list of these, anywhere? I sure can't find one online. Google keeps giving me bad apologetics sites and a Wikip...
-
At least once in his public ministry, somewhere, Jesus said to some people: "Unless you turn around and become like little children, y...
-
My main interest in Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene, began in hopes of finding a comparative case study (however minuscule) to make with Hero...
-
Joseph, Mary and the boys (James, Joseph, Simon & Jude) moved to Capernaum with Jesus after the wedding in Cana. The Lord's sisters...
-
My answer, in 2 paragraphs, an exercise suggested by Brian LePort: After nearly a decade of apostle-ing churches, having founded at leas...
-
Marcus Borg wants to see the New Testament's 27 documents rearranged "based on contemporary mainstream biblical scholarship" a...
-
A famous six word short story makes a quick and easy first test case for my latest ideas. Legend says Ernest Hemingway wrote this to settle ...
-
There are only two things I know of on this earth that are ever lived in or filled by the Spirit of God: our souls, and His Word. Countless ...
4 comments:
I was somewhat taken aback to see a writer in a conservative Baptist publication talk about the governors of "Palestine" while Jesus lived.
Of course, He lived in Israel, and Palestine is nowhere to be found in the Bible.
Hi, Mjazz. While I have certainly seen the term "Palestine" used with exclusive if not racist intentions, it's not necessarily so. Personally, I try to use both terms, in the following sense:
With reference merely to a political and official sense, it's historically accurate to say there was no "Israel" in the 1st century. There was "Judea" and "Galilee", etc.
In the hearts and minds of Jewish and Christian believers, such as Jesus and Paul, and their followers, they would have absolutely told you that their homeland was still called "Israel".
Thanks for the good conversation.
Of course Israel was occupied by the Romans. We do have the instance with Jesus, saying of the centurion, that He hadn't seen such faith in all of Israel.
Post a Comment