The Jesus Dynasty

Originally posted on December 09, 2006 – by Andre Piet

The name Dr. James Tabor has been known to me for years. He is one of the men behind The Original Bible Project, a project I follow with great interest. However, when I came across Dr. Tabor’s name this week in a book review, I was nearly knocked off my chair in surprise. Because, although Tabor is making valuable contributions to the research of The Original Bible, it turns out that he distances himself from that same Original Bible whenever it suits him. For example, in an interview he says:

“We will probably never resolve with certainty the question of Jesus’ biological father. As a historian, I work with the sources and with the fact that every human being has a father, including Jesus. This way, Christianity becomes acceptable to rational people as well. After all, they classify stories about deities impregnating women as mythology.”

“Rational people” here means: people who exclude anything that, according to current prevailing views, is considered impossible (i.e., miracles). This, despite the fact that the historical sources (in this case, the New Testament) are unequivocal in their testimony that Mary became pregnant as a virgin.

Anyway, Dr. Tabor is currently attracting quite a bit of attention with his book The Jesus Dynasty. In it, he argues that Jesus did not intend to found a church or religion, but a dynasty. That does not strike me as a good starting point, because according to the unanimous testimony of the New Testament, Jesus did not found a dynasty, but was in fact the promised offspring from the existing dynasty of David.

Tabor extensively analyzes the genealogy to demonstrate that Jesus is a direct descendant of King David. “That is precisely why Herod the Great was so afraid of the rise of a true descendant of David. He himself could not claim that title, even though he was called ‘king of the Jews.’ As the future king of Israel, Jesus made preparations to establish a provisional government, consisting of an internal cabinet or council of twelve.”

Indeed, one of the key points of the New Testament is that Jesus is presented as the “son of David” and thereby as his heir. The entire ministry of Jesus in the gospels takes place within the framework of a forthcoming restoration “of the fallen booth (tabernacle) of David.” And the choice of twelve men around Him is inextricably linked to the prospect of twelve thrones for the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28).

Tabor claims that Mary, besides Jesus, had six other children: four boys and two girls. After the crucifixion of Jesus, His half-brother James—who would later also be put to death by the Romans—would have continued the dynasty of Jesus according to Jewish tradition.

Tabor denies the resurrection of Jesus and thereby misses the point that it is precisely through His resurrection that Jesus became the true (and lasting) heir to the throne of His father David. However, Tabor does have a point in stating that James, as the closest blood relative, functioned as a ‘representative’ during the absence of his older (half-)Brother.

Tabor sees a rift between Paul and Jesus. Paul is said to have opposed the Jewish Messianic movement led by Jesus’ half-brothers and to have ultimately laid the foundation for Christianity as a new religion. “Paul’s message was based on his own visions of a heavenly Christ and had nothing to do with the original group of apostles in Jerusalem, which was led by James.”

Tabor presents an exaggerated view of things. For both James and Paul are united in their testimony of the risen Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 15:6–11).
Nevertheless, Tabor is absolutely right in claiming that Paul and James represent two entirely different directions. James stands as a model for Israel and the expectation of the imminent restoration of David’s dynasty. Paul, on the other hand, represents the interval that arose due to Israel’s unbelief and the focus on Christ Jesus in heaven. Their names also strikingly illustrate this. James obviously refers to the Hebrew name Jacob or Israel, while the name Paul (understood as a Greek name) refers to a ‘stop’ or ‘pause’ (cf. our word “pause,” which is derived from the Greek word for “to stop” or “cease”).

In Galatians 1 and 2, Paul recounts how “the evangel of the Uncircumcision” entrusted to him clashed with James and his associates, who proclaimed “the evangel of the Circumcision.” In these two chapters, Paul explains that his ministry stood completely apart from ‘Jerusalem’ (as the headquarters of the Jewish Messianic movement).

In summary: despite his fatal prejudice toward the New Testament, Dr. James Tabor, through his book, once again brings us face-to-face with extremely significant matters that remain unknown in traditional Christianity. I am thinking of the concrete expectation in the NT of an imminent, literal restoration of David’s throne. But also of the undeniable distinction between James (and the twelve) on the one hand and the apostle Paul on the other.

Sources:
Het Reformatorisch Dagblad
http://www.jesusdynasty.com

Delen: