I got interested in the “historical Jesus” movement about 10 years ago, which was a number of years after the whole thing started getting public attention (given the Jesus Seminar and the best-seller books put out by Dominic Crossan and Robert Funk, arguing that Jesus was really a whole lot like a modern liberal social reformer). I’m always a little behind the curve. Well, about five years ago, after reading several books covering a wide range of positions about who Jesus really was and what he intended, I burned-out on the whole subject. But not before the apocalyptic crowd convinced me that Jesus is better explained by historical factors than by divine salvation. I could no longer go into a Christian church, not even an Episcopal church (the last kind of church that I affiliated with), and proclaim Jesus as the Son of God, true God and true man. From then on, I would still regard Jesus as a key figure in my life, a man from history deserving of much veneration and attention; but I could never again pray to him as a divine being.

So that’s pretty much where things have stood between me and Jesus for the past 4 or 5 years. But I had one more book about Jesus sitting on my shelves that I wanted to get to, by the highly regarded scholar E.P. Sanders (“The Historical Figure of Jesus”). I finally got around to starting that book in late winter, and I finished it not too long ago (it was my lunch-hour read). And I need to say, I found it extremely gratifying. After going thru about 6 or 7 big tomes sifting through the writings about Jesus and the historical / social context of his life, I was forming my own picture of him. It turned out that Sanders’ picture of Jesus was quite a bit like my own. We agreed on one very important point: that Jesus indeed foresaw an immediate “God revolution” in Palestine, the coming of the Kingdom of God in a very literal sense.

Even more important, Jesus did not see himself as a mere observer and prophet of a revolutionary event whose arrival could not be accurately predicted. No, Jesus felt that he was on a mission from God, that he was responsible to get people ready for the revolution of God’s Kingdom, and once he had done enough in that regard, God would “push the button” and make it happen. And Jesus would be God’s “master of ceremonies”, God’s earthly representative overseeing the institution of a just world and the expulsion of the wicked from Palestine (mostly the Roman overseers, although a few of them would be allowed into the “new community”, which would consist mostly of Jews; and conversely, a few Jews would be cast out amidst the wicked Gentiles).

I see Jesus as a man, a human. Period. He died after his Crucifixion, for good. There was no literal resurrection. He was a darn good man, a loving man, a man who thought he had a formula for Israel’s redemption and maybe for the ultimate salvation for the entire world. He rejected war and violent strife as the means to attain that. He intensely believed in the God that his Jewish parents and teachers taught, but felt so close to that God that he made a deal, a new deal with certain unique features not all anticipated by his religious heritage, for the attainment of justice and harmony and a world of goodness and peace. But in the end, his deal was an illusion.

That’s where I will end this mini-retelling of the Life of Jesus; although it is NOT where the story ends. Obviously, Jesus changed the world, although in ways that would surely surprise him. However, I do believe that on the whole, those changes were good changes.

But back to Jesus dying in the midst of a grand illusion. I found one scholar, and a very eminent one, who more-or-less agrees with me on that (Dr. Sanders). Are there others? I took out some of my Jesus tomes, and took another look at some of the many turgid paragraphs that I plowed thru back in the late 1990s and early 2000’s. Who got it right? Geza Vermes? No, too wimpy on eschatology and apocalyptics, too ready to call Jesus’s approach to “the end time” an “individual-centered” approach. How about John P. Meiers? Nope, after some promising words about apocalyptic themes, Meiers ultimately grinds an axe for spiritual realization, protecting the notion of true Resurrection (as his bosses in the Roman Catholic Church would want him to do). Ditto for the late, otherwise great Raymond Brown. Bart Ehrman? Quite close, but he thinks that Jesus believed in a separate cosmic “Son of Man” who would judge whether each person could stay or be banished from “the Kingdom” on the big day; and that Jesus would subsequently fulfill the “viceroy of the Kingdom” role (as E.P. Sanders termed it). Seems rather convoluted.

Richard Horseley? Still stuck on all that revolutionary stuff. Ben Withington? Definitely defending Protestant salvific viewpoints. The late Robert Funk? Never got unstuck from the Jesus Seminar. So, who got thru to the core, besides Sanders (and almost Ehrman)?

I did a bit of Google searching on that topic over the past few days, and I’m happy to say that I found two more scholars, very honorable scholars, who wind up very close to where I am with Jesus. Those would be Paula Fredriksen and Gerd Theissen. I have a cheap used copy of Fredriksen’s book on order (“Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews”), and I made a quick perusal of Theissen’s master work (The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide) via Google books. Ah, it’s very good to drink-in the worlds of those who are thinking on one’s own wavelength.

Yes, I know that we shouldn’t surround ourselves with similar thinkers, that opposing viewpoints can be enlightening. But after years and year of wandering amidst opposing viewpoints, amidst writings and thoughts that just didn’t sound ultimately true, I feel I’m entitled to an intellectual oasis regarding Jesus. The Jesus that was forced on me as a child, the Jesus that I started seeing some value in as a contrarian teenager (willing to question not just the mores and values of my parents and teachers, but of my own peers too), and the Jesus that I feel much closer to now as I grow old. Given all that, and the help of some venerable scholars including Professors Sanders, Fredriksen and Theissen (and maybe Bart), I have found a Jesus that I, for one, can get close to.