Reza AslanReseñas

Howard Baskerville is an obscure figure today, but for a brief period at the very beginning of the 20th century he was the subject of global newspaper headlines. A recent college graduate who'd studied under future U.S. president Woodrow Wilson, Baskerville became a Christian missionary in what is now Iran. After a while he gets caught up in the constitutionalist movement then sweeping the country, ends up taking up arms and renouncing his American citizenship, and is shot and killed during the siege of Tabriz. In death, he becomes even more a figurehead for those advocating for reform, though after the Iranian revolution of the 70s, Baskerville's prominence declines thanks to his awkward American origin.

Reza Aslan clearly admires Baskerville, or certainly admires what he thinks Baskerville represents: a kind of general, humane pursuit of freedom and peace that transcends personal and group differences. He also is drawn to Baskerville's ability to link two countries for which Aslan clearly has great affection. But one major reservation I had with this book is that Aslan's framing of Baskerville and his behaviour seems to be, if not entirely cynical, then certainly almost wilfully selective. Aslan seems to not want to really grapple with the implications of the fact that, as he himself acknowledges, Baskerville acts not in spite of or in transcendence of his goals as an evangelical Christian missionary, but to fulfil them. I didn't find myself admiring Baskerville the way that Aslan did—I thought he was a fairly naive guy who, if asked, probably thought Manifest Destiny was a great thing to pursue.

What, in other words, did Baskerville think he was being martyred for? (If indeed that's the term we should use.)

Not that we can know what Baskerville thought on that topic since he left almost no written accounts behind him and much of his life is poorly documented—even when it comes to the great transatlantic voyage which took Baskerville from the U.S. to Europe and on to Tabriz, Aslan can only make a best guess as to which ports he arrived at.

By the end of the book I found myself thinking that Baskerville could have—should have—been confined to a single chapter. But then, would Aslan have been able to appeal to and to flatter American sensibilities so readily? (Because this not a book intended for any other audience, I don't think.)½

In this rather short book Reza Aslan takes us through the history lane to show how did religion exactly become so important to human species.

As this is rather short book note it is useful as starting point for further readings and exploration on the topic. If you seek more detailed answers in it you might be disappointed.

Author starts with the overview of the first societies where religion took hold (which seems to be very early societies like gatherer-hunters), then moves to the way human beings generally reflect human-like attributes on everything around them - thus giving birth to first super-being and myths (I especially liked explanation how minimal exaggerations can make strange phenomena closer to the human observer, psychology is truly marvelous and practical science) - followed by rise of various pantheons and finally culminating in monotheism from Echnaton's and Zaratustra's attempts to Israelites' first successful monotheistic state religion that was followed by Christians and Muslims.

We can follow the religion develop from rather inclusive traditions to more and more closed/exclusive ones (as I read once in other book, old civilizations could recognize their gods in other pantheons - monotheism or simpler form known as monolatry become more and more exclusive because of their very nature; these are religions made to distinguish people, nations and states and as a result we come to division of society on believers and unbelievers).

Author asks good questions regarding the usefulness of religion for species evolution. As such religion has no merit but when coupled with other sociological changes - e.g. move to stationary way of life, creation of citizen classes and separation of populace on ordinary people and those privileged that can speak to gods (priests and kings) - it becomes more clear how religion rose and became dominant force in human history.

But to say that religion's sole role is to shackle people is also wrong. Like any force in human history it can be misused. And lets not fool ourselves, human's need to believe - be it in religion of any kind or in science - seems to be a fundamental one. It seems we are incapable of dealing with unknowns. We need to fill them either with facts or myths/free interpretations no matter how implausible they might be - future generations will have to work them out.

Book raises interesting questions and is great as a starting point for further research. It is truly excellent popular science book, author writes in a clear and concise way and I recommend it wholeheartedly.

Fascinating.

A very interesting, surprisingly fast read, Aslan presents an incredibly concise yet readable synthesis of his original research. My knowledge of this period in history was deepened and extended, a few misconceptions picked up in high school and that had crept in from common culture were corrected, which is no small matter to be grateful for. It was fascinating to learn about the historical Jesus through what is known about how the people of Nazareth lived at the time and the complex political relationship between Rome and the tolerated, multi-faceted and conflicted Jewish society in the surrounding area.

I struggled over whether or not to give this book a 3 or a 4, just because I got a bit confused with some time frames and background context until the second part of the book. But, the illuminating juxtaposition of biblical passages and historical facts about society at that time bumped it up for me.

In this book, the author explains Islam in all its beauty and complexity. Beginning with a vivid account of the social and religious milieu in which the Prophet Muhammad forged his message, the author paints a portrait of the first Muslim community as a radical experiment in religious pluralism and social egalitarianism. He demonstrates how, after the Prophet's death, his successors attempted to interpret his message for future generations – an overwhelming task that fractured the Muslim community into competing sects. Finally, he examines how, in the shadow of European colonialism, Muslims developed conflicting strategies to reconcile traditional Islamic values with the realities of the modern world, thus launching what he terms the Islamic Reformation.

Fascinating read.

'No God but God' deals with Islam's roots, the tumultuous period after the Prophet's death, the movements that sprung up as Islam spread across continents, the various sects of Islam and the conflicts between them, schools of thought like Traditionalism and Rationalism, the rise of fundamentalism and so forth.

It compresses 1500 years of history into 300 pages and yet, manages to be highly readable and engaging. Historical context is perhaps the most important factor in understanding any religion and in particular, Islam. That is seemingly lost on most Muslims these days so Aslan getting that message across without rubbing any side the wrong way is an achievement.

It's a non-fiction account if that wasn't already obvious and the material is reliably cited. Most books on Islam have a tendency to either become an apology or paint an apocalyptic scenario where it's the believers versus the heretics so the balanced and well sourced approach to the religion's history is well appreciated.

That being said, there were some contentious points. Aslan comes down particularly hard on the Caliphs (Uthman in particular). The Ulama get a lot of stick as well but many, including me, would argue that's well warranted.

Nevertheless, I'll give it five stars. This book is an accessible starting point for non-Muslims and Muslims alike. After reading a few books on Islam and its history, I can't believe how laughably naive my views were about my own religion so I appreciate anything that fosters interfaith and intrafaith understanding and dialogue while remaining neutral.

A must read for anyone interested in understanding Islam rather than painting it with broad brushstrokes.

Reza Aslan claims early in this book that the sacrifices in the first century Temple in Jerusalem smelled horrible. It turns out that animal sacrifice - which was practiced by most of the ancient religions and was not one of the things about ancient Judaism that seemed strange to pagans - always was meant to smell good. There would be the smell of cooked meat and when it burned, heavy incense was added to ensure that the smoke smelled good. After all, it was meant for God to enjoy, and one does not send stinky smoke to God.

Much of what Aslan says is just plain factually wrong. As R.B. Sheridan said: 1CThe honorable gentleman relies upon his imagination for his facts. 1D The book 19s Introduction starts with Jesus of Nazareth 19s arrival in first century Palestine: 1CThe itinerant preacher wandering from village to village clamoring about the end of the world 26 was a common sight in Jesus 19s time 26. 1D And 1Ccountless prophets, preachers, and messiahs tramped through the Holy Land delivering messages of God 19s imminent judgment. 1D

Aslan says that the sight of these itinerant preachers was so common 1Cthat it had become a kind of caricature among the Roman elite. In a farcical passage about just such a figure, the Greek philosopher Celsus imagines a Jewish holy man roaming the Galilean countryside, shouting to no one in particular: 18I am God, or the servant of God, or a divine spirit. But I am coming, for the world is already in the throes of destruction. And you will soon see me coming with the power of heaven 19. 1D

This passage fails to support the contention that first century 1CRoman elites 1D were contemptuous of messianism because it quotes a the late second century Greek named Celsus who lived well after Christianity had become a wide-spread and influential movement. Celsus while given to attacking Christianity in particular, was in this instance attacking all prophet-types and not necessarily Jewish ones and certainly not specifically Galileans! Trying to imply that Celsus was a sort of contemporary of Jesus rather than someone who knew of (and hotly opposed) the Christian faith as it was constituted in the second century after Jesus is plain intellectual dishonesty on the author 19s part. The material in Aslan 19s quotation marks was not actually a quote from Celsus; rather it is more of Aslan 19s creative writing, as if to say: this is sort of what Celsus said.

Aslan 19s contention that the kind of claim for divinity that was made on Jesus 19s behalf by his followers during the century after his crucifixion was commonplace in Jesus 19s time and place is untrue. Aslan is trying to muddy the waters by suggesting that others within the Jewish tradition made such claims of divinity for themselves. No, they often claimed messiahship and/or prophethood, but identification with God, no.

One doesn 19t get far into this book without finding other problems. Aslan says that Josephus 19s phrase 1Cthe one they call messiah 1D was 1Cclearly meant to express derision 1D except that not all scholars would agree that this is 1Cclear 1D; in fact, Aslan contradicts himself by suggesting that 1Ca specific appellation 1D was simply necessary in the context so that Josephus 19s readers would know whom he was talking about.

The meaning of 1Cmessiah 1D was originally that of a king chosen by God, like David who is always the model of the Messiah. (The gospels of Matthew and Luke take pains to link Jesus to David genealogically.) But the term 1Cmessiah 1D has gotten stretched to mean many different things from earthly king to spiritual leader/priest to only begotten son of God. Aslan does not let his readers understand this range of meaning so much as he confuses these different meanings.

Add to dishonesty the author 19s scholarly sloppiness, for example, in saying that the word 1Cgospel 1D is 1CGreek for 18good news 19. 1D Actually, 1Cgospel 1D is ENGLISH for 1Cgood news 1D (a wonderful example of how speakers of Old English translated Christian terms into Anglo-Saxon ones). The Greek for 1Cgood news 1D is 1CEuangelion, 1D which is the basis of the English word 1Cevangelist. 1D

Unlike other critics of Aslan, who come from more of a position of Christian apologetics, I have less disagreement with many the author 19s specific contentions such as that Jesus probably did not consider himself to be God and that he had what might be called a radical agenda, but I think that Aslan 19s notion that Jesus was a zealot or violent revolutionary does not fit the historical record. Rather, like most scholars and laymen who have studied Jesus over the past two thousand years, Aslan has remade Jesus in Aslan 19s own image. To understand Aslan 19s Jesus, one must look to Aslan 19s relationship with Islam (renewed) in general and jihad in particular. He has made it a theme of his work to downplay the role of violent jihad in Islam, but in this book he suggests that an analogue to violent jihad can be seen in first century Palestine and Jesus can be seen as one of its advocates.

Aslan seems not to be up on the latest research. He goes along with the myth, recently debunked by Prof. Bart Ehrman, that 1Cpseudepigrapha 1D or writings that are attributed to someone who was not the real author are not to be considered forgeries and that the practice was an accepted convention in ancient times. Ehrman has shown that falsely attributed works were always considered 1Cbastards 1D if it could be proven that they were not really authored by the name on the title page, and argues persuasively that the point of the pseudepigraphical writings in the New Testament was precisely to fool readers into thinking that the real author 19s views were endorsed by the putative author. (For example, the epistles attributed to Peter were obviously written by two different authors with conflicting points of view.) Indeed, contrary to Aslan 19s subsequent claim that crucifixion was reserved for crimes against the state, crucifixion could sometimes be the punishment for other crimes including forgery 14a crime that must have been recognized to have deserved such an extreme punishment.

Much of what Aslan has to say, though he has his own spin and admits that other scholars would disagree with this or that argument he makes, has already been said, and said much more carefully and credibly, by other scholars such as Ehrman (who actually does have a doctorate in New Testament studies instead of just claiming to have one). The difference seems to be that Ehrman only has to make his case fit his reconstruction of history as it was, while Aslan must make history fit not only the past but the present history of the Middle East, as Aslan sees it, through present day ideological spectacles.

Really loved this book, but have to admit I was really shocked by the ending ; turns out Joan Osborne was right all along https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4CRkpBGQzU

This book provides a fresh perspective on one of the greatest stories ever told: Jesus, within the context of the times in which he lived.

CUPRINS

1. Introducere. Dupa chipul nostru - pag. 9

SUFLETUL INTRUPAT

2. Adam si Eva in Eden - pag. 19
3. Stapanul fiarelor - pag. 35
4. Chipul din copac - pag. 53

DUMNEZEUL UMANIZAT

5. De la sulite la pluguri - pag. 67
6. Cei inalti - pag. 84
7. Marele Zeu - pag. 105

CE ESTE DUMNEZEU ?

8. Dumnezeu este unul - pag. 127
9. Dumnezeu este trei - pag. 146
10. Dumnezeu este totul - pag. 164
11. Concluzii. Unul - pag. 183

12. Multumiri - pag. 191
13. Note - pag. 193
14. Bibliografie - pag. 271
15. Indice - pag. 297

Reza Aslan takes on a pretty much impossible task in trying to write an account of the “historical Jesus”. At the outset, he acknowledges that there is pretty much only one historical source that even refers to Jesus - Josephus - and even then only parenthetically. This forces him to rely on the Gospels and Acts for much of his source material.

The problem is that he repeatedly acknowledges that these sources are contradictory, known to have been massaged for political purposes and frequently contain errors of fact. And he doesn’t tend to rely on them in the instances where this is the case. However, in other cases, he pretty much accepts whatever the canonical sources have to say as fact, despite their unreliability; he doesn’t really have much choice.

I sense that this is compounded by Aslan’s own religious beliefs; he treats events like Jesus’ miracles and Paul’s vision on the road to Damascus in a fashion that is far too credulous for any real historian. This extends further into his discussion of other events in Judea. Referring to earlier “messiahs”, on one occasion he writes “he even raised a girl from the dead”. Not “he is said to have raised”; Aslan states this as fact.

Aslan sometimes confuses matters by losing what I would call the chain of evidence. At one point he says that Paul contradicts Jesus. Paul never met Jesus. What really happened is that whomever wrote Paul’s letter contradicts what whomever wrote Matthew’s gospel says Jesus said. This is very shaky history.

In the end the book founders on its own internal contradictions. Aslan wants to write a history, but he is forced to rely on ahistorical sources. The book is very interesting in terms of the “and Times” part of it; events leading up to and following Jesus’ life are really well covered. Unfortunately the kernel of what Aslan seeks to write - the “Life” of the “historical Jesus” is a chimera lost in time, a fact that he acknowledges at the end.

If Aslan had stuck to writing a historical account of the early days of Christianity, he would have had a much better book, because the sources are better. In this case, he has bitten off more than he can chew.




(P.S. Am I the only person who couldn’t stop thinking about Narnia when reading this book?)

The title of God: A Human History is quite correct. While at the end of the book, religious scholar Reza Aslan speculates on the nature of God. Instead, this book is more about how humans may have perceived divinity from their earliest days.

In examining evidence from prehistoric cultures, we see how ideas of divinity may have first developed and how they shaped cultures for hundreds of thousands of years. But, surprisingly, scholars now believe it was religion that caused the Agricultural Revolution. Aslan explains how findings at Göbekli Tepe led to that startling conclusion.

While he touches on the Hindu, Buddhist, and Taoist beliefs, the book focuses on how our concept of one God--the monotheistic deity of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, developed. He shows, step-by-step, how these lines of thought developed. Rather than being a natural outcome of revelation, many decisions that shape our current conception of God were of political origin.

I was surprised to learn how the minor Canaanite God Yahweh became the one God of the Hebrew people. It was interesting to see how a concept from a small and relatively insignificant tribe grew to influence many people’s conception of God today.

The book was an enjoyable foray into the religious thought of these past half a million years. I’ve always wanted to know what motivated our ancestors and how they lived. While this book doesn’t provide concrete answers because they don’t exist, it does give a sweeping view of the possibilities.

A fascinating look at the social and political ground that Jesus of Nazareth walked on. Jesus almost does a cameo as we know so little about the actual man, but Aslan did his homework—20 years of it—and pieces together the life and times of a real revolutionary. Just as interesting is how the church grew and morphed into something completely separate from its roots in Judaism. Bonus take away: Romans really were a bunch of dicks.

I was excited when I started, but then it got confusing and my interest waned.

Reza Aslan has sadly become a target for right wingers to bash and attack, after his incredible book on Jesus. It just so happens that one right wing commentator had also published a book on Jesus and wanted sales for it, even though it was vastly inferior to Aslan’s book. Aslan is a scholar and has studied world religions and comes with a pedigree.

Enter his book on the history of God. This is not the first history on God written, but my guess is it becomes on of the more “controversial” books simply due to Aslan’s name being attached to it. My guess is the group that regularly attacks him, will gear up because he has published a history of God from cave period to Mohammed.

Again, this is not the first book of its kind, but I found it to be insightful, straight to the point, and well researched, which is what I like about Aslan’s books. He keeps the history of God moving while lifting up how some aspects of how people viewed God influenced some writings about God (my guess as to what will make people angry, even though most scholars know this stuff).

Aslan knows his stuff and it shows. This isn’t a comprehensive book, as that would be gigantic, but takes a look at the major movements in history including Jesus and Allah. I quite enjoyed it.

I'm glad I read it, but I was left wanting. The middle was mostly enjoyable and informative but the beginning and ending lost a lot of credibility for me.

Aslan showed a clumsy but all-too-familiar understanding of the evolution of the human brain by ignoring the role of sexual selection. It's not all about survival. Please read the Mating Mind!

If you believe the middle of the book, logic cannot get you to this book's end.

for student

history about Islam

For believers and non-believers. Incredibly informative. Just an amazing read.

Not an expert in this field, so my perspective might be a bit off, but it seems well historically grounded. It is also undeniably compelling in its writing. Read it, believe it or don't, but use it as a starting point for historical context of a religious figure; it's worth it. If you are a Christian (as I am), you owe it to yourself to be informed about the basis for your faith.

I like his conclusion(s). After reading Spong, Borg, Crossan, etal., Reza puts the information in words I can understand and agree with. Good!

A quick review of the evolution of religion according to Rena Aslan. Rena Aslan is an Iranian/American author, born in Tehran but having dual citizenship. It also the story of the authors own religious journey to Pantheism. His belief that God is everything that exist and that you don’t have to fear God—you are God. It is easy to read though I don’t think one should read it as factual as it is only his opinion. The author has some good points. Man is prone to make himself God. Because we cannot envision a Spirit such as God, timeless and not limited as ourselves, we create God in our image. This book should be read with caution as it is not scientific it is one man’s spiritual journey.

La versione originale inglese di questo libro lo definisce “zealot”, quella italiana lo chiama “ribelle”. Il dizionario inglese, a dire il vero, offre una lunga sfilza di sinonimi del tipo “fanatico, entusiasta, estremista, radicale, attivista, militante, bigotto, dommatico, settario, partigiano, infido, maniaco”. Non mi pare che facciano giustizia a quella importante “figura storica” che si chiama Gesù. Una “giustizia” di tipo, ovviamente, terreno e poco religiosa.

Il libro l’ho letto in inglese, mi propongo di trovare l’edizione italiana per meglio contestualizzare le cose di cui parla. E’ costato all’autore due decenni di lavoro, un autorevole e rispettabile esperto studioso arabo iraniano di storia delle religioni. Il libro è stato pubblicato negli Usa e in Inghilterra nel 2013. Me lo sono trovato tra le mani in questi giorni prenatalizi di fine anno, non ricordo bene cosa mi spinse a comprarlo da Amazon.

L’ho ritrovato dietro una siepe di altri libri, mi è parso opportuno affrontare la lettura in questo contesto quanto mai appropriato. Diviso in tre parti, quindici capitoli, tre prologhi ed una introduzione, con oltre cento pagine di note ed una ricca bibliografia, il lavoro è ineccepibile da un punto di vista strettamente documentario. Risponde in maniera egregia alle canoniche domande che cerco sempre di assegnare alla affidabilità di un libro.

Reza Aslan si propone di dare una risposta a “chi” era l’uomo chiamato Gesù, “cosa” si proponeva, “quando” apparve sulla scena del mondo del suo tempo, “dove” fece sentire la sua presenza, e “perchè” la sua vita ebbe un senso. Un impegno molto forte quello di Aslan. Sono migliaia le recensioni disponibili su GoodReads e altri siti di libri, punti di vista che aiutano chi vuole dare un senso alle sue letture. Aslan ha dato alla sua ricerca uno stile quanto mai contestualizzato. Il suo sistema di lavoro ha un approccio molto diverso al problema interpretativo dei canonici testi sacri biblici. Per lui ha poco interesse la storia dell’individuo chiamato Gesù ed i suoi attributi teologici.

Ciò che conta per Aslan è il contesto: la politica, la sociologia, l’amministrazione governativa e la cultura dei tempi, prima, durante e dopo la breve vita di Gesù. Mettendo insieme ciò che sappiamo di questo contesto, con la conoscenza storica molto limitata di Gesù e le prime interpretazioni teologiche della sua vita, Aslan crea una storia molto leggibile, molto moderna e coerente sull’Uomo e la sua missione.

Chi crede, ovviamente, può non accettare questo sistema di lavoro. L’esegesi di Aslan è professionale, sempre rispettosa ed inoffensiva da riuscire a spiegare tanto, sia della teologia che della storia di Gesù, facendo riferimento a eventi, condizioni e motivi che sono del tutto indipendente da lui, dai suoi seguaci e dai suoi avversari. La storia raccontata da Aslan incorpora contraddizioni bibliche, non-sequitur e anche molto spesso l’impossibilità assoluta di una narrazione coerente.

Una minaccia questa per la quale chi crede e legge fideisticamente può provare irritazione. Sulla vera identità dell’uomo Gesù continua a cadere il velo del mistero, che rimane tale e che solo la fede può disvelare. In un mondo tanto diverso oggi dai tempi in cui visse Gesù detto il Nazareno, pensare a un Dio Creatore che manda suo figlio su un pianeta chiamato Terra per una missione che rimane (im)possibile, (dipende dai punti di vista), collocato in un universo fatto da tanti infiniti universi, rimane un racconto quanto mai avvincente. Ecco come Reza Aslan conclude il suo libro:

Duemila anni dopo, la creazione del Cristo di Paolo ha completamente assorbito il Gesù della storia. Il ricordo del fanatico rivoluzionario che attraversò la Galilea radunando un esercito di discepoli con l’obiettivo di stabilire il Regno di Dio sulla terra, il predicatore magnetico che sfidò l’autorità dei sacerdoti del Tempio a Gerusalemme, il nazionalista ebreo radicale che sfidò l’occupazione romana e perse, è stato quasi completamente perduto nella storia. Peccato. Perché l’unica cosa che ogni studio completo del Gesù storico dovrebbe rivelare, io credo, è che Gesù di Nazareth, Gesù l’uomo, è altrettanto avvincente, carismatico e degno di lode come Gesù il Cristo. In breve, è qualcuno in cui vale la pena credere.

La versione originale inglese di questo libro lo definisce “zealot”, quella italiana lo chiama “ribelle”. Il dizionario inglese, a dire il vero, offre una lunga sfilza di sinonimi del tipo “fanatico, entusiasta, estremista, radicale, attivista, militante, bigotto, dommatico, settario, partigiano, infido, maniaco”. Non mi pare che facciano giustizia a quella importante “figura storica” che si chiama Gesù. Una “giustizia” di tipo, ovviamente, terreno e poco religiosa.

Il libro l’ho letto in inglese, mi propongo di trovare l’edizione italiana per meglio contestualizzare le cose di cui parla. E’ costato all’autore due decenni di lavoro, un autorevole e rispettabile esperto studioso arabo iraniano di storia delle religioni. Il libro è stato pubblicato negli Usa e in Inghilterra nel 2013. Me lo sono trovato tra le mani in questi giorni prenatalizi di fine anno, non ricordo bene cosa mi spinse a comprarlo da Amazon.

L’ho ritrovato dietro una siepe di altri libri, mi è parso opportuno affrontare la lettura in questo contesto quanto mai appropriato. Diviso in tre parti, quindici capitoli, tre prologhi ed una introduzione, con oltre cento pagine di note ed una ricca bibliografia, il lavoro è ineccepibile da un punto di vista strettamente documentario. Risponde in maniera egregia alle canoniche domande che cerco sempre di assegnare alla affidabilità di un libro.

Reza Aslan si propone di dare una risposta a “chi” era l’uomo chiamato Gesù, “cosa” si proponeva, “quando” apparve sulla scena del mondo del suo tempo, “dove” fece sentire la sua presenza, e “perchè” la sua vita ebbe un senso. Un impegno molto forte quello di Aslan. Sono migliaia le recensioni disponibili su GoodReads e altri siti di libri, punti di vista che aiutano chi vuole dare un senso alle sue letture. Aslan ha dato alla sua ricerca uno stile quanto mai contestualizzato. Il suo sistema di lavoro ha un approccio molto diverso al problema interpretativo dei canonici testi sacri biblici. Per lui ha poco interesse la storia dell’individuo chiamato Gesù ed i suoi attributi teologici.

Ciò che conta per Aslan è il contesto: la politica, la sociologia, l’amministrazione governativa e la cultura dei tempi, prima, durante e dopo la breve vita di Gesù. Mettendo insieme ciò che sappiamo di questo contesto, con la conoscenza storica molto limitata di Gesù e le prime interpretazioni teologiche della sua vita, Aslan crea una storia molto leggibile, molto moderna e coerente sull’Uomo e la sua missione.

Chi crede, ovviamente, può non accettare questo sistema di lavoro. L’esegesi di Aslan è professionale, sempre rispettosa ed inoffensiva da riuscire a spiegare tanto, sia della teologia che della storia di Gesù, facendo riferimento a eventi, condizioni e motivi che sono del tutto indipendente da lui, dai suoi seguaci e dai suoi avversari. La storia raccontata da Aslan incorpora contraddizioni bibliche, non-sequitur e anche molto spesso l’impossibilità assoluta di una narrazione coerente.

Una minaccia questa per la quale chi crede e legge fideisticamente può provare irritazione. Sulla vera identità dell’uomo Gesù continua a cadere il velo del mistero, che rimane tale e che solo la fede può disvelare. In un mondo tanto diverso oggi dai tempi in cui visse Gesù detto il Nazareno, pensare a un Dio Creatore che manda suo figlio su un pianeta chiamato Terra per una missione che rimane (im)possibile, (dipende dai punti di vista), collocato in un universo fatto da tanti infiniti universi, rimane un racconto quanto mai avvincente. Ecco come Reza Aslan conclude il suo libro:

Duemila anni dopo, la creazione del Cristo di Paolo ha completamente assorbito il Gesù della storia. Il ricordo del fanatico rivoluzionario che attraversò la Galilea radunando un esercito di discepoli con l’obiettivo di stabilire il Regno di Dio sulla terra, il predicatore magnetico che sfidò l’autorità dei sacerdoti del Tempio a Gerusalemme, il nazionalista ebreo radicale che sfidò l’occupazione romana e perse, è stato quasi completamente perduto nella storia. Peccato. Perché l’unica cosa che ogni studio completo del Gesù storico dovrebbe rivelare, io credo, è che Gesù di Nazareth, Gesù l’uomo, è altrettanto avvincente, carismatico e degno di lode come Gesù il Cristo. In breve, è qualcuno in cui vale la pena credere.

I was hoping for something scholarly and based more in fact. However, it is definitely interesting and food for thought. I enjoyed reading about the world that Jesus lived in.