Talmud as blog ...

The temptation to be current is very powerful for academics writing for the general public. It is a temptation that should be withstood.

I am reading an interesting book, "How Jesus became Christian" by Barrie Wilson, that presents a striking thesis -- modern Christianity is a religion about Christ but that religion is not the religion of Jesus. It's another book suggesting Paul hijacked Jesus' religion; but it's novel in its approach to the argument. The details of the argument do not matter here -- suffice it to say they are detailed and rely upon some fairly deep readings in the literature of Jews from the turn of the Common Era until say 600.

It is a book that needs to be taken seriously if it is considered at all.

But the author does things like describe the Talmud as a "blog". He uses fictitious headlines to illustrate what individual sects might think of, for example, Roman rule and pagans living in Palestine.

Such devices distract from the text and make the reader wonder if the book is worth considering or just another "Jesus got married, had kids and they are now Freemasons and rule the world secretly from a cave in Spain" book.

A careful review of Wilson's sources suggests his book is worth consideration -- and while I don't accept that Paul hijacked the Jesus Movement (and made Jesus the Christ he never was) his arguments are scholarly. But the Talmud as blog does not give confidence.

Scholarly books should be scholarly.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4

416 225 2777