Bo Reicke
The New Testament Era: The World of the Bible from 500 B.C. to A.D. 100
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1964. Pp. 317. Paperback.
Abstract of The New Testament Era
In The New Testament Era, Bo Reicke provides a concise yet detailed account of the centuries surrounding the ministry of our Lord and the beginning of the church. This book is extremely profitable for knowledge of the background of the New Testament, for though the bulk of the book consists of the details of the first century A. D., it does not neglect the often obscure intertestamental period. As stated in the introduction (p. 1), this book deliberately avoids “theological questions,” choosing rather to focus on the historical background of the times that led to the “fullness of time” (Galatians 4:4). Though the New Testament is not the basis of Reicke’s historical introduction, it is his “goal” (p. 4) in that he seeks to lead a student to position where he is able to study the New Testament with a better foundational knowledge.
Focusing on the political, social, and religious factors of the period of discussion, The New Testament Era uses a chronological framework. First, Reicke begins with “Judah Under Persian Rule,” spending nearly thirty pages detailing the last part of the Exile and focusing on the relationship of Persia to Judah and its influence thereon. From here, the author continues by introducing Alexander the Great and his conquest of the Persian Empire, ushering in the Hellenistic Age, which may have had a greater influence on the Hebrew people than the former age. The greater portion of the book, however, is dedicated to the New Testament era itself, the first century A. D., detailing the Roman rule of Palestine from the Herods to the sub-apostolic period.
Strengths of The New Testament Era
Reicke’s balance between brevity and detail is one of the most notable aspects of this book. Though 317 pages may seem like a large amount of reading, such a viewpoint is reduced when one considers the time span the book covers (500 B.C. to A.D. 100), as well as the author’s ability to note to the general story of this historical period while providing details where elaboration is necessary. A reader with a general understanding of names and nations in the Exile and New Testament periods will come away from this reading with a huge supplement of information.
Though it begins with the Persians, this was the root of the New Testament time. 500 B.C. may seem like a stretch in an introduction to the New Testament era, but it is an essential part of the development of history, as Reicke well shows. Without this time period included, a reader of John 4 and Luke 9 will be left in the dark regarding the mutual animosity of the Jews and Samaritans, the latter group gaining their own distinction in the Persian period of power. Further, the situation of the Jews after the Exile did not experience drastic changes with the conquests of Alexander the Great who “left the Oriental rugs where they were, so to speak, only making sure that he had his feet firmly planted on them” (p. 36). For the Jews, this meant that the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah continued, which began under Persian rule, continued to progress uninterrupted by the new Hellenistic domination.
Another strength of The New Testament Era is the understanding Reicke provides to his readers regarding the political tension that filled Judaism in the first century. There are subtle hints of this tension in the Gospels and epistles, but Reicke does a good job bringing them together in light of history. Reicke traces the Zealot movement (not the party) from Palestine to Rome, theorizing that Zealots and even simply anti-Gentile Judaism would have “found especially fertile soil among those Jewish or Gentile Chrsitians who belonged to the lower classes (slaves, freedman, the poor, non-citizens), of whom there were not a few (Gal. 3:28; 1 Cor. 1:28)” (p. 246). Reicke’s conclusion is that since the Gospel was received largely among the lower classes the political turmoil and materialistic eschatology of the Jewish world played a large part in many Christians’ thinking. For proof, he refers to the rebellion of Onesimus (Philemon 11, 15) and Paul’s warning of Jewish propaganda (Titus 1:10, 14) (p. 246). He also cites 1 Thess. 4:11 and 2 Thess. 3:10ff, both of which note the lack of desire to work among the Thessalonians, as proof that the Jews and Gentiles in the church were struggling with either Hellenism or fanaticism. This planted new seeds of thought in my mind for I have always seen the “busybodies” in 1 & 2 Thessalonians as mere sponges who did not want to work because they thought the Lord would return immediately, but Reicke opened the possibility that these Christians who would not mind their own business could have been motivated by a Jewish political and materialistic interpretation of the Gospel.
A third strong aspect of Reicke’s book is his description of the transition of power from the Hasmonean dynasty to Antipater and Herod, creating the Herodian dynasty. I saw this as a strong point because it was a portion of history in which I was very curious and very ignorant. Many see “Herod” in the New Testament and assume that it refers only to Herod the Great or Herod Antipas, but the author not only distinguishes the many key players in this family, but also their rise to power, division of power among Herod’s sons, and their later fall from power. Reicke was very methodical in arranging this transfer right along with the Roman influence that made it happen, pointing out Pompey’s involvement in Antipater being made procurator and forerunner of the Herodian dynasty. Thankfully, the author gave much space to this intriguing family.
Another delightfully informative section was Reicke’s treatment of church growth and martyrdom during the sub-apostolic period. One fascinating detail was the author’s estimation of the number of Christians that existed in this period. He estimates that after A.D. 100, there could have been 320,000 Christians in the Roman Empire (p. 304). Even he admits that his estimation is “hypothetical and approximate” (p. 304), these statistics cooperate with Pliny’s treatment of Christians in Bithynia/Pontus in the early second century, for he likely would not have seen Christians as a problem had they not been as large a group as they were (Reicke estimates 80,000 in Asia Minor). Further, if the church grew to such numbers at this time, then conflict with the sovereignty of the emperor cult was inevitable.
Finally, Reicke’s use of primary sources made the book as informative as it is. He was very conversant with the Old Testament canon, the Pseudipigrapha, the Apocrypha, the Qumran documents, the works of Josephus, the writings of the “Church Fathers,” as well as the writings of Roman leaders and historians, such as Pliny and Suetonius.
Weaknesses of The New Testament Era
Reicke was not clear regarding Persian influence on Jewish religious practices and beliefs. In one paragraph, he says, “the Jews never encountered ancient Iranian religion or any true Zoroastrianism” and that any connection made between Judaism and Zoroastrianism is not a matter of “influence” but of “convergence” (p. 32). However, in the next paragraph he lists several “religious motifs” than “may well have developed out of earlier conceptions through convergence with Persian syncretism” (p. 33), namely, a heavenly “royal court,” dualism, a conception of angels and demons, a divine mediator, and the expectation of resurrection and retribution. It should be granted to the author that this is a rather unclear historical relationship and that his “middle of the road” approach is to be preferred to a full-fledged Jewish replication of Zoroastrianism, but he does not mention the possibility that Judaism (and even Christianity) could have influenced Zoroastrianism, whose key texts were compiled in the 6th-9th centuries A.D.
Reicke’s description of Domitian’s reforms, though enlightening, seemed too detailed (p. 271-278). The author’s assessment of Domitian “sees beyond the damnatio memoriae and his tragic end” and examines “the major part of his life and works,” which Reicke sees as a time of courageous promotion of the interests of Rome, aiding the middle and lower classes though he was “stern and sometimes cruel toward the upper class” (p. 282). At the end of the section, Reicke notes the Domitian appeared to be a religious tyrant in A.D. 93-96, the last three years of his power.
The author is very convincing regarding the social aspect of Domitian’s rule, but he seems to have overstated his case. Perhaps my lack of knowledge in this side of Roman affairs (i.e. social reforms) has soured my taste on this part of the reading, but it seemed that Reicke put much more effort on this point than he did on other points of history throughout the book, apparently having a bone to pick with historians who paint the entire reign of Domitian as a horrible tyranny. While informative, the author’s corrective zeal was a little too much.
Last, Reicke dates the Pastoral and General epistles quite late, requiring them to be written by someone other than Peter, Paul, or James. The author sees the sicarii actions in Cyrene in the early A.D. 70s as evidence that the letter to Titus, which includes anti-anarchistic teachings (Titus 1:10), must have been “about this same time.” If his conclusion is true, it requires an author other than Paul (who died in the mid-60’s) to have written the letter. On the whole, Reicke sees the sub-apostolic Christians taking over many features of Hellenism, “giving rise to a series of social and moral problems such as the Pastoral and Catholic Epistles discuss.” This conclusion, however, ignores the possibility of the inspired authors seeing these situations coming before they actually arrived and preparing their readers for them.
Posts
