The Jewish Annotated New Testament (eds. A-J Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler) A Review

Last updated on: April 17, 2012 at 1:31 pm by Nijay Gupta

The Jewish Annotated New Testament (eds. A-J Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler) A Review 2012-04-17T13:31:08-08:00 Nijay Gupta

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Oxford University Press recently published The Jewish Annotated New Testament edited by A-J Levine (Vanderbilt) and Marc Zvi Brettler (Brandeis). As you might suspect, the purpose of this volume is the provide scholarship on the Jewish contexts in which the NT and the community of Jesus followers arose. The book is made up of two parts: the first part is the text of the New Testament (NRSV) with introductory and study notes by Jewish scholars. The second part of the book is a mini-dictionary with a variety of entries on aspects of early Judaism and the Jewish background and contexts of the NT by the same scholars.

What first attracted me to this book was the short dictionary article in the second part by Levine called “Bearing False Witness: Common Errors Made About Early Judaism.” Here Levine exposes misunderstandings and common mistakes made, even by reputable NT scholars, when it comes to perspectives on early Judaism. Here is her “hit list.”
Myth #1: the Jewish law of Jesus’ time was impossible to follow (Acts 15:10). She argues, “In actuality, Jews, then and now, did not find Torah observance any more burdensome than citizens in most countries find their country’s laws today.” She also points to Jesus’ own law-obedience.
Myth #2: Jews follow Torah in order to earn God’s love or a place in heaven. This is the mistake of viewing Judaism as a merit-based religion. She points to the election of God, which was a gift in the eyes of early Jews. She admits some early Jewish texts may have taken a stronger “merits” perspective, but she urges that the majority of Jews did not think like this.
Myth #3: Purity laws were burdensome and unjust. She exposes a number of misconceptions about Jewish purity. For example, Levine points out that, in the situation of Jesus touching the woman with a flow of blood (and accepting contact with a person who is impure), this does not show that Jesus is loving, while most Jews are only concerned with purity. She explains that impurity based on menstruation could not be passed on by hand. I (Nijay) agree that OT purity laws were not burdensome and unjust. However, it could have been that some groups in society intensified the laws and extended them in unjust ways.
Myth #4: early Judaism was cruel towards women. Levine doesn’t think we should view Jesus as a radical egalitarian either. He did not have any women as members of the twelve. She admits that certain parts of Rabbinic texts reflect on women negatively, but we have much reason to believe women were treated quite well in early Judaism.
Myth #5: Jesus forbids divorce because Jewish men sent away their wives “for the flimsiest of reasons.” Levine points out that some strands of Jewish teaching held to very strict standards for divorce.
Myth #6: Jesus ministers to the marginal and outcast. Levine asks: “cast out by whom? Cast out from what?” Sinners and taxcollectors, she argues, “are people who violate the welfare of the community and who have deliberately removed themselves from the common good” (503). Even gentiles are not marginalized by Judaism. The are welcome in the synagogues and temple (to a certain extent).
Myth #7: All Jews wanted a militant messiah. She makes it clear that there was no universal understanding or expectation of the Messiah. Some expected a priest, others a shepherd. She also notes that Jesus was not exactly the pacifist – he commanded his disciples to carry weapons (Luke 22:36-38). I think Levine is wise to express caution, but she downplays the overwhelming number of texts that reveal expectations of a warrior messiah.
Myth #8: Jesus invented the idea of an intimate heavenly “Father.” OT, early Jewish, and Rabbinic texts all employ the title of Father for God sometimes, Levine reminds us.
Myth #9: Jesus condemned the temple institution. Jesus never accuses the temple institution of corruption. She argues, “The vast majority of the Jewish people loved the Temple, visited it on pilgrimage festivals, protected it from Roman profanation, and mourned its destruction” (p. 504).
Myth #10: Early Judaims was narrow, clannish, and exclusivistic and Jesus invented universalism. She admits the Qumranists were sectarian, but other groups were more open and embracing.
Overall, Levine offers much food for thought. Her best points are #1, #2, #6, #9, and #10. I take a bit of an issue with #7 (militant messiah). Yes, true, views of the Messiah were varied. But there are SO many texts that anticipate a warrior that I think we can say that if there was a wider (though not universal) trend, it was the hope of a militant messiah. Even the DSS, which expect a priest like Aaron, still see the Messiah engaging in serious conflict. I think it would be nice to have a longer version of her responses, especially to the matter of Jesus and women (#4) and his relationship with outcasts (#6).
There are many great articles in the second part by scholars like Martin Goodman, Shaye Cohen, and Mark Nanos. I was more disappointed with the NRSV study notes. Most of the time they were too brief. Other times, they had nothing to do with Judaism – they were the kind of notes you would find in any academic study Bible (they just happen to be written by a Jewish scholar). Finally, the biggest concern I had with the book was the casual way that some authors dismissed the NT writers’ views as biased or historically inaccurate. While they are trying to correct anti-semitic views, do they not recognize that they are Jewish scholars correcting (mostly?) Jewish NT writers? For example, one writer declared that Mark was flat-out wrong in his interpretation of Jesus’ words in Mark 7:19 – “Thus he declared all foods clean.” It is one thing if you find Mark’s words perplexing, it is another to accuse him of distortion, sloppiness, or stupidity. I had hoped that the corrective and clarifying aspects of this volume would be more gracious.
That having been said, I am very excited to have this book and especially to read the essays in the second part – most of which are written by leading experts in early Judaism. As for the study notes, I hope to dip into Mark Nanos’ notes on Romans, Shaye Cohen’s on Galatians, and Pamela Eisenbaum’s on Hebrews. Also, the price (Amazon: $23) is not bad for a book from Oxford!

Uncategorized

Previous Post

April 17, 2012

What is Your Favorite Romans Commentary and Why?

Next Post

April 18, 2012 Commending Todd Still's Philippians Commentary (Smyth & Helwys)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category (Mis)Understanding Philippians 10 Things I Can't Live Without 2023 New Books 30 OT HB Scholars to Read and Follow 5 Books Series 50-2-Follow Academia Christian Theologians to Read and Follow Cruciform Scripture: Contributor Reflections Crux Sola TV Editors Behind Great Books in NT Studies Education Gendering the Holy Spirit Gupta FB Live Lectures In Faith and Doubt In Their Own Words Living the King Jesus Gospel My Top 6 OT Commentaries New Testament Resource Guide New Word Biblical Themes Nijay's A Very Library Christmas Shopping Guide Notes from an Editor Notes on New Books NTRG OT in the NT Paul Seminary Now The Bible in God's World The Word Felt Among Us SPENCER Translating Philippians Uncategorized Why I Use Accordance Women in Ministry

Select a Month March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 May 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz