Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth

This was an engrossing read, chock full of information about the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth and its historical context. I learned a ton from this book; I actually wish it had been longer and gone into more detail, which is a credit to Aslan's engaging writing style. There were definitely topics in the book that I wanted to know more about; I suppose I'll have to keep reading books about early church history to satiate that

Almost gave this five stars, but for one major shortcoming: the lack of inline discussion of alternative theories or points of view. Aslan wrote a compelling, literary narrative, about Jesus' life, which was quite easy to read. But for a topic which is based so much on speculation, assumption, and interpretation, I would have preferred to see more discussion about competing theories in the narrative, rather than in the footnotes. My issue was not that he didn't cite sources - he does, both historical and biblical - but that he presented the story as “this is the way it was” when there are major points that historians and scholars disagree on.

I was surprised that there were major differences between this book and Bart Ehrman's “How Jesus became God”. Ehrman's book was much more theology and far less historical information - I feel like I learned much more from Aslan. I was surprised that Ehrman never mentioned the major differences of opinion in the early church, between Paul, preaching to the Jewish Diaspora, and Peter, James, and John, leading Jesus' disciples in Jerusalem. Paul's doctrine of Christianity eventually won out after Jerusalem was wiped out by Titus in 70 C.E., but, as far as I remember, Ehrman does not discuss this at all. Ehrman's thesis is that it took ~3 centuries before the majority of Christians thought of Jesus as a pre-existent god, but Paul was preaching that Jesus was God starting just two decades after his death, in the middle of the 1st century. Maybe Ehrman just wanted to devote more space to all the competing theories? Or just pad his book? It was difficult to reconcile these two books. I guess this just underscores how much this entire field is based on limited evidence.

I also really appreciate how Aslan didn't attempt to explain away the resurrection as Ehrman did with his lame “visions of the recently departed” theory. He left it at “a lot of people believed very strongly that Jesus rose from the dead, and that's very interesting”.

These are the topics in the book that were most interesting to me: - The depiction of Galilee and Jerusalem around the turn of the millennium (the historical context which Jesus was born into) - Aslan's theory about the early life of Jesus - that he would have been engaged in rebuilding Sepphoris, a nearby city - Alternate interpretations for many commonly cited gospel verses based on the historical Jesus, including the Beatitudes and the parable of the Good Samaritan - A discussion of what Jesus meant by the terms “Kingdom of God” and “Son of Man”, (i.e. Who did Jesus think that he was?) - The battle between Paul and James/Peter/John for what would be preached about Christ after his death

Wow. What a quick read. I sat down and just plowed through this book in a couple of hours. The main text comes in and right around 215 pages, but there are tons of notes.

I enjoyed the connections between the historical Jesus and the religious Jesus the Christ. I have been, amateur-ly, making and effort at breaking this down myself. For me, it was helpful to have the perspective of another person, an expert, who is looking back as a Christian religious scholar. The contrast between Paul and James was something that I hadn't really understood in other texts. Also, the author's understanding of the Aramaic and the Greek language is helpful for untangling translations.

I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in the historical Jesus. I think that all of those potential readers will have explored other related historical readings already, such as a focus on what the Torah says about the messiah, what the Roman empire looked like around 100 BCE to 100 CE, and what the new testament says about Jesus. Having that foundation, this book connects the dots. The dearth of actual historic text may frustrate some folks, but I don't know what we do about this problem.