Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§ 12.6 The Kingdom of God
living in the land at the time of Jesus, who attended the Temple regularly or in
pilgrimage, thought of themselves as still in exile. 431
Second, it should be evident from the outline of Jewish expectation in
§ 12.2c above that there was no single comprehensive grand narrative shaping the
thought of Jesus' contemporaries. Return of the scattered outcasts to the land was
certainly a prominent feature, but did not itself constitute the grand narrative of
which all other elements of expectation were only a part. A major weakness of
Wright's 'major hypothesis' therefore is his assumption that 'return from exile'
(and Yahweh's return to Zion) were in effect the only 'controlling stories' which
need to be considered as the framework for Jesus' kingdom preaching. But our
analysis above (§§12.4-5) provided plenty evidence that other motifs of Jewish
expectation were very much in play in Jesus' teaching as recalled by his disciples.
I list them in the order of § 12.2c:
2. the removal of disabilities and defects (§ 12.5c),
3. the imagery of a great feast (§12.4f, § 12.5b),
7. probably an eschatological pilgrimage of the nations (§ 12.4c),
8. the meek inheriting the land (§ 12.4c),
9. suffering (§12.4d),
11. the defeat of Satan (§12.5d), and
12. (final) judgment (§12.4e).
Consequently, the question posed in § 12.3a returns with renewed force: whether
the evidence justifies the major hypothesis of a single, coherent grand narrative
'controlling' the range of Jewish expectation at the time of Jesus. 432
Third, the most serious weakness of Wright's grand hypothesis is his inability
to demonstrate that the narrative of return from exile was a controlling
factor in Jesus' own teaching. It will not do simply to insert passages into the assumed
narrative framework or to read tradition such as we have assembled above
(§§12.4-5) through spectacles provided by the controlling story, as though by invocation
of the mantra 'end of exile', 'return from exile' the interpretation of
these traditions becomes clear. 433 'Serious verification' requires demonstration
of at least a fair number of plausible echoes and allusions to return from exile
431. See further F. G. Downing, 'Exile in Formative Judaism', Making Sense in (and of)
the First Christian Century (JSNTS 197; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000) 148-68.
432. Cf. Borg's criticism of Sanders (using different imagery): 'the lens of "Jesus as
prophet of restoration eschatology" enables us to see too limited a range of data and forces us to
set aside too much data. Its explanatory power is inadequate' {Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship
81).
433. A disturbing feature of Wright's treatment is his willingness simply to cite texts
without any supporting analysis (e.g., Jesus 166, 179-80).
475