Book report analysis and summary

Bandits, Prophets, And Messiahs

The scholars Richard a. Horsley and John S. Hansen entitled their book on ancient, Roman-occupied Israel Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs. and, one could add as a kind of 'punch line' to the apparent extremity of these roles in the Wild, Wild Ancient Near East -- those figures are just the good guys in Horsley and Hansen's portrayal of the Romans in Israel! But all humor aside, Horsley and Hansen suggest that the world of ancient Israel was a considerably more socially complex society than is portrayed in the texts of the Bible. It was more than a world of rich and poor, of faithless and faithful, as is often portrayed, even in the work of Biblical scholars of this period of ancient history. (Horsley & Hansen, p.1)

Although Jesus may speak often of the common people of his land, the authors' fundamental hypothesis or thesis is that these common supporters of preachers such as Jesus have received short shrift when history has been written until this time. Textual analysis has held sway in the literature, rather than historical analysis. But although the populace occupies a peripheral position as authors in what texts remain, as historical actors the masses had great influence in the religious politics of the ancient land in turmoil. The authors attempt to redress a common bias in historical Biblical scholarship of focus, and present a more fully fleshed out version of what life was really like in ancient times.

True, most of the common middle-class men and women of Israel have left no written texts and testimonies in their wake. But they proved to be a vital, mass force in their support of the bandits that roamed the Wild, Wild, West environment of the ancient land. Beset on all sides by Romans, by aligning themselves with different groups, everyone struggled to live and eke out an existence as best he or she could -- sometimes with robbers, others with wandering prophets, and still others with the Messianic groups led by prophets like Jesus. The individuals one aligned one's self with became synonymous with one's social and religious identity. Religion was more than a personal statement. The individual or philosophy one aligned one's fate with was a social and a political statement of rebellion or conformity to Roman authority, given the level of debate and discord at the time.

The author paints a mostly heroic picture, albeit a checkered one, of the ancient Israeli people in terms of their faith and their political fervor. The enslaving yoke of the Roman occupation in the eyes of most Jewish people made rebellion a religious duty because of the stress upon the need to escape slavery in the Pentateuch. Achieving one's status as a religious Jew was synonymous with maintaining an independent Israel. However, cooperating religious authorities like the ruling Sanhedrin did not agree with this religious interpretation of the books of Moses. Many members of the ruling elites of Israel were constantly attempting to negotiate a tenuous peace with the Romans, because of Israel's weak military position. Hence the guerilla presence of the bandits of the title, and the religious preachers and messiahs who spoke against the ruling authority's compliance in apocalyptic terms.

This was why the teachings of Jesus were so controversial. Pharisees, Sadducees, Scribes and Essenes all fought for the allegiance of the masses and for the legitimacy of the nation, in a nation that was occupied, yet where nationhood and religious authority were synonymous in the minds of many. And yet, these well-known names of groups such as the Pharisees only comprised very small segment of the population -- many of the religious contemporary rivals of Jesus and the ruler ship of the Romans have been lost to the ages.

Although the focus of the book is historical and theological, it also shows the powerful influence of economics on human life. The Roman populace was heavily taxing the peasantry. This made them angry with their own rulers, for not taking strides to lessen this burden upon farmers and land owners, particularly subsistence farmers. They could easily lose their vital lands, if they could not pay their debts because of a bad harvest or a new tax, or simply because the authorities did not like them. Horsley and Hansen suggest that peasants and leaders often exist in a kind of dialectic of fear, as rulers fear rebellion from the peasants because of their oppression of these classes, while peasants fear being taxed by the ruling authorities and retribution if they cannot pay -- a Marxist analysis of conditions that produced revolutionary religious fervor. (Horsley & Hanson, p.2)