Abraham Geiger and the Jewish Jesus (review)

138 SHOFAR Summer 2000 Vol. 18, No.4 form is more than a substitute for personal conversation with specific persons at a specific time. In "Miindliche Tradition, soziale Kontrolle und Literatur als theologischer Protest: Die Wahrheit des Evangeliums nach Paulus und Markus," Franyois Vouga argues that Paul's written letters were an attack on an oral tradition that required a consensus to be valid, a point then taken over by the individual who was the author of the Gospel of Mark. In both instances, these writings represent not oral tradition, which is the expression of a group and represents their current interests, but the written expressions ofindividuals. Such written expressions require notthe acceptance ofa social consensus as does oral tradition, but rather a decision about, and faith in, the validity of the individual's expression of the tradition. In the final essay ("Miindlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Christentum des 2. Jahrhunderts"), Wimich A. Lahr points out that Papias was already part ofa developing written form of interpretation of the gospel, that Marcion rejected not only oral but much written tradition, that the Gnostics by contrast emphasized oral tradition as did Clement ofAlexandria, who revived the idea ofa secret apostolic oral tradition, and that Irenaeus solved the problem by identifying the oral with the written gospel. The book concludes with an "Epilog" in which the editors list four "convergences" they find in the articles, and with a bibliography on the general topic of "oral and written." The articles are ofhigh quality, and they will reward the careful reader with a broad acquaintance with the evidence and some rather penetrating observations. Paul 1. Achtemeier Professor Emeritus Union Theological Seminary in Virginia Abraham Geiger and the Jewish Jesus, by Susannah Heschel. Chicago Studies in the History ofJudaism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. 332 pp. $19.00. Susannah Heschel's elegant and discerning study has filled a significant gap in the history ofthe quest ofthe historical Jesus. One looks in vain for any reference to Geiger in Albert Schweitzer's quasi-canonical account of The Quest ofthe Historical Jesus (English translation, 1910). The same can be said of my own account of Jesus in European Protestant Thought, 1778-1860 (1985), which sought to analyze the early part of the quest from the perspective of changing trends in methodology. Although well-known in Jewish scholarship, Geiger has been neglected by default in modern Christian scholarship. Abraham Geiger (1810-74) was the theological leader of Reform Judaism in Germany. His University of Bonn prize essay, "Was hat Muhammed aus dem Judenthurn aufgenommen? (What Did Mohammad Borrow from Judaism?)" earned him Book Reviews 139 a doctorate from the University of Marburg. When published in book form (1833), it established his reputation in oriental studies. Unable to obtain a position as a university professor, Geiger was forced to pursue his scholarship while serving as rabbi in Wiesbaden, Breslau, Frankfurt, and Berlin. His efforts at reform earned him enemies from both the left and the right. Geiger's prayer book (1854) omits reference to angels, resurrection ofthe dead, the restoration ofthe Temple, and the return to Zion. He was opposed to the doctrine of election and to Jewish particularism in the interests of establishing Judaism as a world religion which would replace Christianity. At Breslau Geiger's lectures led to the establishment of a theological faculty, but Geiger was passed over as a member. The pain was somewhat assuaged when in 1871 Geigerjoined the newly formed Berlin Hochschule fur die Wissenschaft des Judentums as professor of the history of Judaism and its literature. Geiger's early work on Muhammed established the methodology that would later be applied to Christianity. Islam was an outgrowth of Judaism, and the Qur'an a repository of midrashic and talmudic stories and teaching. Similarly Christianity was a branch of Judaism, specifically Pharisaic Judaism. Already in the 1830s Geiger was impressed by the critical methods ofthe Tiibingen School under F. C. Baur and by D. F. Strauss's Life ofJesus Critically Examined (1835). Like Baur and Strauss, Geiger was a revisionist who practiced Tendenzkritik and Sachkritik, setting aside the self-image projected by the New Testament writers in favor of what Geiger considered to be...