Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion

Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion 378 Review of Books / Journal for the Study of Judaism 41 (2010) 366-438 Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion. By David W. Chapman. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 244). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. Pp. xi, 321. Paperback. €59.00. ISBN 978-3-16-149579-3. In this Cambridge (UK) dissertation, C. presents a comprehensive investigation of early Jewish views of crucifixion and their relevance for the study of early Christianity. Ch. 1 contains a survey of Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic ter- minology for crucifixion. C. concludes that none of these languages has a term that designates exclusively what we now call crucifixion because most of the terms also designate other forms of “hanging.” In chs. 2-5, the Jewish sources are dealt with at length. First, texts that mention actual crucifixions (whether histori- cal or not) are discussed and C. concludes that crucifixion was usually regarded as a horrible punishment of innocents (martyrs) but sometimes also as a just punishment of rebels. Then follows a discussion of texts in which biblical pas- sages about “hanging” of persons are interpreted by postbiblical Jewish exegetes in light of their own horizon of experience and actualized as if they all are about crucifixion. The important implication is that crucifixion could also be seen as a punishment ordained by God, but some Jewish authors are not willing to go that far. After two short chapters about the role of the cross in Jewish magic and about crucifixion in metaphors, proverbs, allegorical exegesis, and halakah, C. presents the results of his investigation, but now ordered according to author (or docu- ment) and topic. He concludes that, “although ancient Jewish views often over- lapped with those of the world about them, there were also distinctly Jewish perceptions of the cross in antiquity” (219). The final chapter deals with the con- sequences of this investigation for the study of the message of Jesus’ crucifixion in early Christianity. C. shows how the varying Jewish perceptions were adopted or rejected by early Christians. For instance, the obvious association of crucifix- ion with banditry and rebellion was played off by Jews against Christians, with the Christian reaction to be expected, e.g. Matt 26:51-55; Mark 14:48; Luke 22:52 (cf. also Origenes, Contra Celsum 2:44). Also the parallelism between Haman and Jesus in Jewish eyes played a role in anti-Christian polemics (see, e.g., the decree in Codex Theodosianus 16.8.18 [anno 408] where the emperor Theodosius I forbids Jews to burn an effigy of a crucified Haman on Purim). On the other hand, the positive Jewish image of the crucified martyr was thankfully adopted by the early Christians. And of course also the correct interpretation of Deut 21:22-3 played an important role in the debate between Jews and Christians since Gal 3. Extensive bibliography and indexes conclude this fine book. Although the author does not present us with completely new ideas, his carefully researched and well written book is a very welcome study that deserves to be read by many scholars. Pieter W. van der Horst University of Utrecht © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/157006310X503694 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal for the Study of Judaism Brill

Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion

Journal for the Study of Judaism , Volume 41 (3): 378 – Jan 1, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/ancient-jewish-and-christian-perceptions-of-crucifixion-wpAFObdiZz

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2010 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0047-2212
eISSN
1570-0631
DOI
10.1163/157006310X503694
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

378 Review of Books / Journal for the Study of Judaism 41 (2010) 366-438 Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion. By David W. Chapman. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 244). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. Pp. xi, 321. Paperback. €59.00. ISBN 978-3-16-149579-3. In this Cambridge (UK) dissertation, C. presents a comprehensive investigation of early Jewish views of crucifixion and their relevance for the study of early Christianity. Ch. 1 contains a survey of Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic ter- minology for crucifixion. C. concludes that none of these languages has a term that designates exclusively what we now call crucifixion because most of the terms also designate other forms of “hanging.” In chs. 2-5, the Jewish sources are dealt with at length. First, texts that mention actual crucifixions (whether histori- cal or not) are discussed and C. concludes that crucifixion was usually regarded as a horrible punishment of innocents (martyrs) but sometimes also as a just punishment of rebels. Then follows a discussion of texts in which biblical pas- sages about “hanging” of persons are interpreted by postbiblical Jewish exegetes in light of their own horizon of experience and actualized as if they all are about crucifixion. The important implication is that crucifixion could also be seen as a punishment ordained by God, but some Jewish authors are not willing to go that far. After two short chapters about the role of the cross in Jewish magic and about crucifixion in metaphors, proverbs, allegorical exegesis, and halakah, C. presents the results of his investigation, but now ordered according to author (or docu- ment) and topic. He concludes that, “although ancient Jewish views often over- lapped with those of the world about them, there were also distinctly Jewish perceptions of the cross in antiquity” (219). The final chapter deals with the con- sequences of this investigation for the study of the message of Jesus’ crucifixion in early Christianity. C. shows how the varying Jewish perceptions were adopted or rejected by early Christians. For instance, the obvious association of crucifix- ion with banditry and rebellion was played off by Jews against Christians, with the Christian reaction to be expected, e.g. Matt 26:51-55; Mark 14:48; Luke 22:52 (cf. also Origenes, Contra Celsum 2:44). Also the parallelism between Haman and Jesus in Jewish eyes played a role in anti-Christian polemics (see, e.g., the decree in Codex Theodosianus 16.8.18 [anno 408] where the emperor Theodosius I forbids Jews to burn an effigy of a crucified Haman on Purim). On the other hand, the positive Jewish image of the crucified martyr was thankfully adopted by the early Christians. And of course also the correct interpretation of Deut 21:22-3 played an important role in the debate between Jews and Christians since Gal 3. Extensive bibliography and indexes conclude this fine book. Although the author does not present us with completely new ideas, his carefully researched and well written book is a very welcome study that deserves to be read by many scholars. Pieter W. van der Horst University of Utrecht © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/157006310X503694

Journal

Journal for the Study of JudaismBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2010

There are no references for this article.