Our Man In Judea: Jesus

I could not put this book down. Light years better than The Da Vinci Code, THIS is the book that the Vatican should be worried about. I can see why Janet Tyson is no longer a Catholic. If her findings are right, Jesus himself would not recognize the Church that was born out of the early First Century. In fact, if she is right, Jesus' mission had nothing to do with what we Christians believe as the central tenets of the faith. Rather, in Tyson's analysis and reconstruction of the Gospel of John, Jesus is on a mission from God the Father to restore the ancient kingdom of Israel. A few months ago I read hstorian & poet Robert (I Claudius) Graves' novel King Jesus which was a persuasive and hypnotic page-turner that pictured Jesus as the rightful heir to the kingship of Israel. Tyson's thesis is not so far from Graves' except that, while Graves wrote a fictional account, Tyson has put forth a meticulously detailed yet highly readable non-fiction. In November, Tyson has another book coming out which looks like a sequel. I hope it is because when you get to the end of Our Man in Judea, you are ready for more!

Our Man In Judea-Jesus is an intense study of the Gospel of St. John by Janet Tyson, who has spent seven years researching this subject in order to find the historical Jesus. Many authors have ventured on this road in the last ten to fifteen years, however, unlike most Biblical researchers, this author has gone where very few have dared to venture before her. Author Tyson has put Jesus back where he belongs, in a Semitic setting. A Hebrew entrenched in Hebrew beliefs and where, throughout the Gospel of John, most, if not all of the incidents in his life take place during Hebrew festivals as advocated by Moses. These include Passover, The Feast of Tabernacles, The Day of Atonement and the Sabbath, feasts and festivals which later Greek and Roman Christian converts did not adhere to due to the teachings of Peter and Paul, and to which Christians throughout most of the last 2,000 years have been ignorant. In order to be fully conversant with the identity of Jesus, one has to have a good knowledge of the Old Testament and not study the New Testament in isolation, a situation which was advocated by the teachings of Paul and encouraged by later church doctrine as laid down by the Emperor Constantine just over three hundred years later. This led to Jesus being viewed as more of an Adonis figure rather than the Hebrew that he was. Tyson's premise, backed up by the Gospel of St John and complementary quotes from Isaiah et el, is that Jesus wanted to return Israel to the purity of belief as held by Moses and as carried out by Joshua who he blessed in order to bring about the New Kingdom.And herein lies the crux of Tyson's argument, a crux and conclusion that I fully agree with, due to having gone on my own search for over fourteen years. Our Man In Judea-Jesus is not for the feint hearted, but for those who wish to bend the edge of the envelope. Orthodox Judaic/Christianity will find it very difficult to come to terms with these conclusions. The name Jesus, is Greek, the Hebrew translation is Joshua. And it was from Joshua that Jesus was descended and Joshua's vision of the Kingdom of Israel that Jesus wanted to re-instate. The evidence presented by Janet Tyson in Our Man In Judea-Jesus convincingly proves this point time and time again and is difficult to refute. I would strongly recommend that the reader keep a copy of the Gospel of St John beside them, as this makes it easier to follow the line that the author is taking. Also take note that when this Gospel does refer to Jesus as a king, it is always in the context of a King of Israel.Gail Evans. Author of "The Firstborn of God. Resolving the Contradictions in the Bible."

This is a "must read" for anyone interested in the historical Jesus. The book is obviously written by a scholar in the field, but with such a relaxed style, it makes the entire 368-page journey both fascinating and 'reader-friendly'! (I read the earlier version before I read this one - but the changes are minimal - mostly to the Introduction).The main argument seems to be that Jesus was the character previously recorded in the biblical book 2 Esdras - SALATHIEL - and that he was a middle-aged Samaritan, or Samaritan sympathizer. He returned from many years abroad, with a 'calling' to unite the Remnant of the original Israel and depose the 'illigitimate' monarchy and priesthood of Judah.Jesus' first attempts fail, so he is forced to change his tactics. He adopts the very young Lazarus, Nicodemus' son, as his heir/deputy, and also adopts the young Samaritan Woman, as his future daughter-in-law.Mary, Lazarus, and a child make up what later became known as the Holy Family. The child is Jesus', but Lazarus, Jesus' right-hand-man, given the commission name "Joseph of Arimathea," becomes the "Joseph" who agrees to marry an already pregnant "Mary"...the child, then becoming the first heir to the new priestly kingdom - the "sang royale" - not of the line of David, but of the line of Jospeh...the true King of Israel.A vivid and captivating read, Our Man in Judea is worthy of attention - though mainstram scholars, as the author hints at, will find the rejection of 'method' daunting at first. Even so, if you suspend your knee-jerk reaction, and get into the detection work that ensues, you will find rich rewards!It is, indeed, "time" for a paradigm shift...I think this work will have ramifications for other NT study, the debate concerning John and Qumran, and especially the priestly/northern interests in the Gospel of John.