The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity

History or Speculation?

James Tabor in The Jesus Dynasty uses his discovery of a 1st century Jewish tomb outside Jerusalem to give credence to his retelling of the story of the life and death of Jesus and the beginnings of Christianity. While careful not to claim that either of the tombs, or the James ossuary, contains the bones of Jesus¿ family, he is less careful about other facts. The most interesting of his speculations is his new twist to the old claim that Jesus¿ body was stolen out of the original tomb. The empty tomb is a well accepted historical fact and Tabor does not dispute this. He claims instead that Jesus¿ family removed the body to another tomb, perhaps even to one of the tombs recently discovered outside Jerusalem. But what about the Roman guards at the tomb? What about the Jewish leaders who needed the presence of a body to squelch the tales of a resurrected Jesus? How was the body hidden from Jesus¿ closest friends who began spreading stories that Jesus was appearing in a resurrected body? Why was there no rumor or tradition of another tomb? Tabor answers that there is a 3rd century story and a 6th Coptic text claiming that the gardener moved the body. 3rd century! We have evidence from much earlier. Even Tabor agrees that the Gospels were all from the 1st Century. But the best evidence comes from at most 25 years after Jesus¿ death and this evidence is accepted as historical by even the most critical scholars. Tabor himself points out the earliest account we have of what he calls the ¿sightings¿ of Jesus is Paul¿s first letter to the Corinthians that Tabor dates to 54 A.D (55 A.D. is more conservative). In this letter Paul is reminding the Corinthians of the gospel he had preached to them when in Corinth 4 years previously. He states that he is repeating what was passed on to him that ¿Christ died for our sins¿was buried, that he was raised on the third day¿and he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time¿Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me.¿ When was this ¿passed on¿ to Paul? Who passed it on to him? In his letter to the Galatians Paul tells of staying 15 days with Peter (Cephas) in Jerusalem and meeting during this time with James, the brother of Jesus. This trip was 3 years after Paul¿s conversion and has been dated to A.D. 38. . So instead of Tabor¿s claim that the resurrection stories come from the late 1st century gospels that ¿witness more to the development of theological beliefs than to what might have happened¿, we have Paul reporting what he heard from eyewitnesses at the most 8 years after the events. And the oral tradition embedded in his letter to the Corinthians (i.e. Christ died for our sins¿was buried, that he was raised of the third day¿and that he appeared¿.) is even earlier. Critical scholars (not evangelicals) point to among other things, stylized wording, non-Pauline words, sentence structure, the use of the Aramaic name Cephas, and hints of a possibility of Aramaic origin as evidence for early oral tradition dating from 32 to 38 A.D. Tabor¿s speculations about ¿the Jesus dynasty¿ are based on his ¿scientific view of reality¿ which denies even the possibility of a resurrection prior to and in spite of good historical evidence. Instead, he ignores the evidence and creates a whole new story of his own. This story has little to do with God and does nothing to answer the question of why the life and death of Jesus matters at all in the 21st century.

2 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

Tabor's conclusion damaged by his presuppositions

In The Jesus Dynasty, James Tabor reaches a conclusion that presents a major challenge to conservative, orthodox Christianity. His claim is that Christ was not divine but part of a movement to establish an earthly kingdom led by his own family based on their Davidic ancestry. This dynasty lasted for a time, in spite of Jesus' death, led by Jesus' brother James, and subsequently by other family members. While Tabor's writing style is excellent, his conclusions are problematic for several reasons. The primary problem is that Tabor's use of the evidence routinely begs the question at hand. His anti-supernatural bias shines through as time and time again, he rejects any aspect of the Bible that doesn't fit his preconceived conclusions, yet still believes that the New Testament offers valid history when the theological or supernatural is stripped away. At no point does he justify this methodology. He simply asserts it and assumes that the reader will follow suit. I think it's fair to ask: If Tabor doesn't want us to accept the theological/supernatural claims of the Bible, why should we accept any of it? Certainly the authors were TRYING to make a theological point, not just tell a story. He frequently writes that the theological/supernatural has been added later, but never supports this assertion. It simply has to be true for his conclusion to make sense. For example, he speculates at length about Jesus' earthly father. His rejection of the virgin birth is not based on the evidence, but because 'historians' aren't allowed to draw such conclusions. He believes that Mary had become pregnant by a Roman soldier, based on substantial speculation. His assumptions demonstrate more about modern presuppositions about sex than they do about the historical record, Jewish sexual ethics, and Mary's character. His rejection of Christ's resurrection is equally lacking in substance. Any scholar who actively denies Christ's resurrection has to supply a plausible theory for a handful of basic facts. In this case, Tabor attempts to deal with three questions: Did Christ die? Was his tomb found empty? Was he seen after his death? Tabor, to his credit, doesn't try to claim that Christ somehow survived the cross. Instead, he acknowledges that the crucifixion process necessarily claimed Jesus' life. At this point, he begins to argue that Christ was buried in a makeshift tomb, because of the untimeliness of his death and the chaos of Passover. Tabor argues that Christ was moved to a second tomb, and that the sightings of Jesus reported in the Gospels are later embellishments, particularly of Matthew, Luke and John. This approach doesn't work for two reasons. First, it requires more textual cherry-picking by Tabor. Later attempts to change the gospels surely would have failed, as the early church took too high of a view of scripture to permit such editing. Also, there is every reason to think that Paul's description of post-resurrection sightings in I Corinthians are very early. Second, it fails to explain the martyr's deaths of so many of the apostles. What else but an ACTUAL sighting of the risen Christ would cause several, let alone one, of the apostles to refuse to renounce their belief in Christ. Surely, commitment to an earthly dynasty could not engender such loyalty. Again, Tabor denies the resurrection not because of the evidence, but because of his unjustified presuppositions. Finally, in order to contradict the traditional view of Jesus, Tabor has to undermine the ministry of Paul as well. Time and time again, Tabor stresses the disharmony between Paul's teachings and that of the other apostles. He does this again by rigging his evidence and ignoring the historical context. First, Paul could not have gotten away with preaching a message that was radically different than the apostles. We see in Acts 17 that at least some of those who heard Paul's message did not simply embrace it uncritically, but scrutinized it against the s

2 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

An Unreliable Indictment of Traditional Christianity

I must admit that The Jesus Dynasty is not the type of book I would normally read and I therefore approached it with great interest. Though much of it is written as a sort of adventurous novel, there is nevertheless much relevant historical information spread throughout the book. I learned much from Tabor¿s extensive Biblical and historical knowledge, yet despite this knowledge I feel that Tabor has, in several key points, provided speculative arguments without providing adequate evidence for his case. Nevertheless, I should have expected as much, for in his Preface, Tabor states that his book, ¿differs considerably, sometimes radically, from the standard portrait of Jesus informed by theological dogma. The Jesus Dynasty proposes an original version of Christianity, long lost and forgotten, but one that can be reliably traced back to the founder, Jesus himself (4).¿ Tabor has certainly presented an original version of Christianity, yet I don¿t believe it can be reliably traced back to Jesus as he claims. While the whole book piqued my interest, I was primarily fascinated by his conclusions regarding Jesus¿ resurrection. Tabor begins his book with a thrilling retelling of the discovery of an ancient tomb that is dated back to the time of Jesus and includes ossuaries that contain the remains of people with such names as Mary, Joseph, Jude son of Jesus, Matthew, and James son of Joseph brother of Jesus. Tabor asks, ¿Was it possible that we had unknowingly stumbled upon the Jesus family tomb (20)?¿ He notes that the names Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were especially common during that period, but nevertheless points out that the discovery of the bones of Christ would be disastrous to Christianity. However, Tabor never reaches a conclusion regarding the tomb that has been found. I believe he simply begins with this account to insert doubt into the reader¿s mind regarding traditional Christianity and provide incentive to consider his forthcoming claims by demonstrating that there is much more to Christianity than has traditionally been told. In Tabor¿s chapter regarding the resurrection (¿Dead but Twice Buried¿), he dismisses the so-called swoon theory outright by stating that Jesus was indisputably dead after his crucifixion and even admits that Jesus¿ tomb was found empty shortly after his death. He then however moves on to point out that Mark, the oldest of the gospels, does not include any appearances of the resurrected Jesus and ends enigmatically with the fear of the women after finding the empty tomb and being told by an angel that Jesus had risen. While it is probably true that Mark¿s gospel does end this way, Tabor fails to see the positive evidence for the resurrection in the Gospel of Mark. First of all, the fact that Mark¿s account (being the earliest of the four canonical gospels) is simple and lacks legendary development, attests to its authenticity. If it had been written latter, as the gospel of Peter was, it would probably be colored by theological motifs (as found in the gospel of Peter). Also, the fact that the empty tomb was first discovered by women is quite remarkable, given that at the time the testimony of women was viewed as so unreliable they were not even allowed to testify in a Jewish court of law. Surely if Mark¿s account was fabricated, the author would have written than men were the first to discover the empty tomb and hear that Jesus had been risen. Yet Tabor concludes, ¿If the tomb was empty the historical conclusion is simple ¿ Jesus¿ body was moved by someone and likely reburied in another location (234).¿ Any other conclusion, Tabor believes, is based upon writings written decades after the fact and influenced more by theology than reality. Thus he believes the most logical explanation to be that Jesus¿ mother Mary, his sister Salome, and some other women came and moved the body (probably to the Mount of Olives where Mary and Martha lived). He evidences this assertion b

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

A real page turner

Having purchased Prof. Tabors book, ¿the Jesus Dynasty¿ I was expecting another dry history book like so many that I have read and that the book would put me to sleep after a few minute of reading it. Instead I found I did not want to put it down, it was a captivating read, a real page turner. Prof. Tabor has successfully done what many others before failed to do. He made History interesting. He made real the possibility of the Royal/Holy family existence with the discovery of a Tomb with ossuaries bearing the very names of the people in Jesus¿ life. This is a must read for anyone interested in the life of Jesus and his family. James von Braun/ Historian.

1 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

Very interesting and eye-opening

I recently developed an interest in historical theology. With this interest I was delighted to happen upon this book. I have listened to the abidged audio version and I liked it to much, I am purchasing the actual book for reference. Dr. Tabor is incredibly knowledgeable and this writing is absolutely amazing.

1 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

A Masterpiece

The Jesus Dynasty has completely changed my perception of religion and the life of Jesus. Raised Pentecostal, for 35 years I¿ve been waiting for the great return and all the joys and fears that come with it. Like many, I¿ve been on a search for either validation of this believe system, or proof of fallacy. Tired of being pulled from one doctrine to another and literally trying to sort out the truth in the midst of a whirlwind of religious beliefs¿I more than welcomed Dr Tabor¿s book. Taking an objective, and historical look at the bible, without the dogma, cleared up every bit of confusion in my mind. I can not thank Dr Tabor enough for all his contributions to this study. I would suggest this book to anyone who wants to set dogma aside and learn the reality about the Bible and the life of Jesus. This book is not only historically accurate, but it is easy reading, engaging, thought provoking, and entertaining¿which is high praise coming from a reader with ADD. I couldn¿t put the book down.

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

Yet another rewrite of history

The fact that Dr. Tabor is the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at U. of N. C. Charlotte doubtlessly gives credibility to his newest work ¿The Jesus Dynasty¿. Considering his position, I too expected a well researched, documented, scholarly tome. Dr. Tabor claims this book is ¿the greatest story never told,¿ which we are rather breathlessly told will ¿excite many, upset and anger others, but also challenge its readers¿to honestly weigh evidence¿¿ From this dramatic preface, I expected that Dr. Tabor had uncovered some heretofore undiscovered new ¿facts¿ about Christ and his family and that he had some new insights of Jesus and his teachings, within the framework of first century Palestine. Reading the preface and introduction I couldn¿t help but get the feeling that rather than reading a non-fiction work, I was reading a novel. Tabor leads the reader into a mysterious world of ancient archeology, replete with conspiracies and cover-ups. While not disqualifying, on page 11 we discover that Tabor, who tells us to ¿honestly weigh the evidence,¿ is presenting biased information. He refers to the ¿Shroud of Turin¿ as a medieval forgery. While the lab did in fact date the tested fragment to the 1300¿s, current scholarship has discredited this dating, leaving the age of the shroud unresolved. If Tabor cherry picks facts, how am I to trust the rest of his writing? What does this say about Tabor¿s opinion of his readership? The rest of the introduction deals with discovered burial artifacts that substantiate the Jewish traditions depicted in the New Testament (burial methods, names, places). Yet Tabor somehow manages to interject a ¿conspiracy element¿ into these discoveries ¿Was there some type of cover-up due to the shocking contents of the tomb?¿ In spite of admitting that Jesus, Joseph and Mary were extremely common names in the 1st century, Tabor makes the quantum leap that one of the ossuaries perhaps contained the bones of Jesus Christ himself! And since one of these ossuaries disappeared from a vast warehouse, surely a cover up has occurred! The ensuing chapters present a similar scholarship of the New Testament, one that is ¿discovered¿ through Tabors own translations of scripture, the use of the ¿Q¿ source and various Dead Sea documentation. The problem with this ¿Q¿ is that there isn¿t a single fragmentary bit of evidence for its existence. Yet Tabor uses this ¿document¿ as well as The Gospel of Thomas, which we are told, ¿is clearly the most precious Christian document discovered in the last two thousand years¿ to show how the Gospel accounts have been ¿edited.¿ Tabors credibility as a scholar is further strained by his interpretation of why Christ was crucified, which Christ somehow orchestrated, as Tabor said much to my amusement ¿His life seemed to be unfolding according to some scriptural plan.¿ As Tabor describes Christ¿s trial, his offense is claiming to be the heir to the Davidic throne the King of the Jews. Any Jewish scholar will tell us that Jesus¿ real crime was saying ¿I Am,¿ which is clearly a claim to be God. By claiming to be God, Christ had committed an unpardonable crime. Considering that Tabor seeks to place Jesus into a Jewish context, it is rather curious that Tabor would make such an elementary error. Or was it an error? On page 233 we finally discover that Tabors true thesis: that God cannot intervene in the world. Now if Tabor assumes that God cannot intervene, well and good, but in a scholarly work one should clearly state ones thesis up front, namely that ¿Women do not get pregnant without a male¿ever¿ and that ¿Dead bodies don¿t rise¿as Jesus surely was¿¿ Why not clearly state his biases and assumptions up-front, that the Gospel as presented is false or ¿theologized¿ and that Tabor will prove it. Perhaps Tabor buries these assumptions so far into the book hoping that we will ignore the weakest part of his ¿reconstruction,¿ namely that

1 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

Well written, yet misguided effort

Let me start by saying that I believe The Jesus Dynasty I a book that should be read by more people within the Christian church today. Coming from a Southern Baptist Youth Pastor, that might seem like an odd statement however I don¿t think enough people in the church are challenged today. Do I think Tabor is accurate? By no means (for reasons I will mention later). Do I feel he achieves his goal of presented an untainted history of Christian teaching? Not at all (again, later). But, what Tabor does do is stick to his point. Unlike other books that deny the historical claims of the Christian faith, Tabor¿s effort is done in a very easy to read style one which obviously did not aim to confuse. I would say that is probably the books largest strength, and what makes it an ideal book for Christians to read in order to challenge their faith Tabor attacks Christianity, but does not rely on confusion or diversion to do so. He is very honest in the argument he presents. With that said, honesty does not make an argument valid nor does it vindicate a thesis. Tabor indicates many times in his book that he wishes ¿¿present the human side of the Jesus story, set in its real historical context and free of any theological agenda (p.308).¿ Tabor¿s desire is very admirable, but he fails to accomplish his task. Tabor¿s main problem is that he assumes having ¿no theological agenda¿ actually means having ¿an antisupernatural bias.¿ In fact, Tabor all but says it is his job to have such a bias, ¿Historians are bound by their discipline to work within the parameters of a scientific view. Women do not get pregnant without a male ¿ ever¿.¿ Therefore Tabor concludes that Jesus was conceived naturally (234). I clearly understand Tabor¿s reasoning, and in other cases I may well have used the same line of thought but not indicate that a miracle could not have happened, but to start building a case that it did not. Regarding both the virgin birth and the resurrection, Tabor supplies no argument to counter the Christian beyond a very politely stated version of ¿miracles do not happen.¿ Tabor would have done better, and been more truthful to his desire for objectivity, had he started with his disbelief in miracles from a scientific stand point, and then built arguments against the resurrection and Immaculate Conception on top of that. One can assume that the reason he did not do that is either that a) he did not think about the fact that ¿Jesus did not rise from the dead¿ is an equally theological claim as ¿Jesus did rise from the dead¿ or b) he had no alternative explanation for the resurrection to present, so he settled for his bias. No matter which on of these is the reason, the fact that Tabor does not combat the resurrection should not be overlooked. The whole of orthodox Christian faith hinges on this doctrine. Even in Tabor could successfully make his case about James really leading the disciples, or someone else having written the gospels, the fact remains that the resurrection would undercut his whole structure of argument. Dr. Tabor has gone to great lengths to attempt to prove that the biblical authors injected theological overtones into Jesus¿ ministry however, if the resurrection is true, all his words are in vain. On pages 234-237, Tabor discusses the empty tomb. He does not supply an alternative to the resurrection. What he instead does, is explain that dead men cannot come back to life, and the tomb was empty, so somehow the body of Jesus was moved. He then admits that the answer to the question ¿What happened to Jesus¿ body?¿ is simply ¿we do not know and anything one might suggest is speculative (234).¿ What Tabor then suggests is that Mary perhaps came to the Tomb very early, and carried Jesus away to another tomb, and eventually buried him in what Tabor calls the Jesus Family Tomb. This hypothesis is based upon the fact that there is a tomb in which many of the names related to Jesus happen to be found. What Tabor does not

1 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

Fascinating must-read

This book is a fascinating, sensitive and thought-provoking culmination-to-date of a life's work devoted to the research and study of the historical Jesus. Dr. Tabor places Jesus in a cultural context, providing an understanding of the world and the people in it that moved and shaped his teachings, and shines light on an early Christianity that seems to have become lost over the years. He also brings Jesus' family back to the forefront, turning our awareness to the important role they played in Jesus' life and in the continuation his teaching. Several assertions made by Dr. Tabor, some of which are no doubt controversial, will at the very least spur great conversation and debate. As with the seeking of all knowledge, the point is to read, learn and question more ¿ with an open mind. I, for one, have been so inspired. The Jesus Dynasty is a must-read for anyone who is interested in early Christian development, who is remotely curious about the man, Jesus, or who is moved in any way simply by the mention of his name -- regardless of faith, belief or persuasion.

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

Eye opening

Eye opening and thought inducer

Dumber than before

A must read

Easy, informative read.

This is an easy book to read, it keeps your attention as it presents an alternative version of Christ's life than what we traditionally find. It is backed up with a lot of archeological and historical assumptions, although there are a few logic holes, it is a very believable book, shedding quite a bit of light on life in the time of Jesus; as well as how the history has changed throughout the ages to support different political and theological positions.

Put on your Sunday best, kids!

I cannot describe the enlightening nature of Dr. Tabor's book with respect to what I was taught as a Catholic versus his archeological evidence and subsequent historical interpretations of Jesus's life and times. The book puts Jesus in his historical context, treating him and his cousin John the Baptist as devout Jews seeking to regain the power over the 12 tribes of Israel and calling for the end to Roman power. Comparing Jesus to previous "kings" who attempted similar overthrows (with the same result) along with his best interpretations as to how Jesus and his whole family lived, Tabor gives the reader a sympathetic look at a man who wanted to improve his world for Jewish brethren, not one who wanted to create a whole new religion.

Subsequently showing how the gospels, though at times providing historical clues to Jesus's life, reinvented the story of Jesus only to be outdone by Paul who essentially created the Christian views as we know it through his own manipulation and dreams, Tabor's book breaks down much of Christian mythology through his rigorous research and piecing together of what's left of the 2000+ year old evidence.

This has sparked more conversation with friends and colleagues than any book I've read in years! I can't recommend it enough!

I really liked it

I says how very human yet spiritual Jesus was and is. I needed to see all the things they have found that show how he was really a teacher and believed in what he was doing. Made all his family very real.

0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

Tabor's problematic historical review

As a student of the Life of Christ I read with great interest Dr. Tabor¿s book. He does make some good points and suggests possibilities in areas where historical evidence might be lacking. The Jesus Dynasty reads like a novel with twists and turns. Declaring that he presents history, where 2000 years of scholarship hasn¿t quite got it right is daring but he errs in areas that Bible scholars both liberal and conservative are currently in agreement. I thought of The Da Vinci Code as I read this because he mixes historical fact with wild conjecture. For example, take the resurrection of Christ. Tabor¿s statements regarding Jesus¿ purported resurrection from the dead will only impress those lacking knowledge of textual criticism. For instance, he comments on the tomb where Jesus was buried not being Joseph of Arimathea¿s because of an editorial gloss found in Matthew 27:60. Most commentaries and translations contradict him. But even if he were right, it still seems odd that Joseph of Arimathea would ask for the body of Jesus and place it in a convenient tomb that was not his own. What possible reason would Joseph be included in the Gospel story if he had no participation in the events? He then launches into the tired discussion of the alleged contradictory resurrection accounts. Many books answer these very questions. If the resurrection accounts were entirely parallel Tabor would accuse them of collusion. Instead, they tell the same story emphasizing different details, or in some cases they are discussing different tomb visits. For example Tabor mentions each Gospel account records a different number of women going to the tomb Sunday morning. If there were three women there then there had to be one. There is no logical inconsistency there unless each author specifically stated there was one woman and no others. Each Gospel writer emphasizes different things in the story he tells without contradiction. Just because the event is not recorded the way Tabor would have done it isn¿t sufficient as a legitimate argument. Each writer chose to focus on one or several of the women who visited the tomb that day. On page 228 Tabor mentions the women at the tomb but doesn¿t mention the astounding fact that women were reported as the first witnesses. In First Century Palestine women were not regarded as good witnesses and this certainly would not have been included in all four Gospels if it wasn¿t true. If Christ¿s resurrection were fiction, it would be odd that the writers would use women as support. This would have been less persuasive to a first century audience as evidence that Jesus rose from the dead. Tabor struggles to explain why the disciples tried to fabricate this new religion when their leader died and he offers no good reasons why the disciple¿s risked their lives for what they say they had witnessed. The unprejudiced interpretation is that the disciples died for what they say they saw, the risen Christ. Otherwise they would be dying for what they knew was a lie. Tabor is also confused by insisting that the bodily resurrection of Jesus was a late addition to the Gospels. I Corinthians 15 contains a creedal statement even recognized by liberal scholars like Rudolf Bultmann yet Tabor ignores Paul¿s statements and instead makes it appear that they don¿t fit with the Gospel accounts at all. Actually Paul¿s statement of this creed points to an oral tradition that was very popular at this time. People would memorize large portions of teachings and beliefs passing them on this way. Paul was simply restating what had been the accepted belief of Jesus followers at that time and this is all less than 20 years after the events happened. This creed equates with the Gospels very well. Paul even emphasizes in I Corinthians 15 that if Christ has not been raised from the dead, your faith is worthless. Why would he say Jesus rose on the third day if in fact this was untrue and contradictory to his

Fascinating history

A fascinating account of early Christianity. I would also recommend the author's audio CD's about the Noahide Movement.

0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

Extremely Thought Provoking!

After reading this book, I have a better understanding of Jesus & his family as well as a new appreciation of archaeologists & many others' passion in their quest for historical Jesus. I highly recommend this book !

0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

A very well-researched book...

I had the good fortune of having met Dr. Tabor in person, when he was doing a presentation in San Antonio on what is now known as the cave of John the Baptist. In his talk, he alluded to several things that he brings out in full in his book i.e. the brothers of Jesus and the Jesus dynasty. He certainly captures your interest immediately in his first two chapters dicussing tombs that could very well be of Jesus' family. The strength of his book is his ability to tie archaelogical finds to the Jesus story in new and more historical ways. His main theme about Jesus' mission is not new, though. A new author, Frank Applin, brought together many of these theories in his book, 'How Far Have We Strayed?' Even though Mr. Applin is not a scholar, he lets the scholars speak for themselves through quotations from their books scholars like, Dr. Schonfield, Professor S.G.F. Branden, and many, many others. Dr. Tabor's view of Jesus' mission seems to follow fairly closely to Dr. Branden's view (which in turn have been written about by Joel Carmichael and lately by Paula Fredrikson). Dr. Tabor's book is definitely worth reading, though, because some of these old theories are probably much closer to the historical Jesus than that of Crossan or others. And, Dr. Tabor has many recent archaelogical finds to support his theories that the earlier scholars didn't have.

The quest OF the historical Jesus

For one who is or was a faithful, traditional Christian-- or otherwise-- The Jesus Dynasty is engaging reading. As a Unitarian, I came to this title predisposed to viewing Jesus as an extraordinary human being, but not divine. However, I was unprepared for the emotional impact of Tabor's book. Combining careful historical reading, archaeological fieldwork, and putting his feet on the ground along Jesus' and John's footpaths, Tabor writes almost like a war correspondent who travelled with the movement. The situation with the Romans in Judea is context most of us did not grow up understanding well. We Americans speak of having a 'Judeo-Christian' culture, but in multi-layered ways ready to afflict the conscience, this book suggested to me that we should call our roots 'Judeo-Greco-Roman'. Although Tabor is an academic, he would probably not be in his field without considerable sympathy for the religious quest. The power of Jesus' quest is vividly rendered in this very readable and relevant book.

Couldn't put it down

I keep a healthy skepticism when I approach books about historical Christ. I found this book to be carefully researched. The author did not insert any dogmatic views, as this is truly a refreshing look at what happened 2,000 years ago. THOSE THAT RATE THIS BOOK 1-STAR, I wonder if they even read the book. Agree or disagree with the content, you can tell that the author's research was conducted carefully and thoroughly. Anybody with an open mind will appreciate this book.