Thomas Cahill has developed an extended series of books sweeping across the development of Western civilization and religion. In this series, entitled “the Hinges of History”, is a book called “Desire of the Everlasting Hills”. It is focused specifically on the history, background, life and influence of Jesus of Nazareth. Cahill’s perceptive storytelling is one of the most compelling aspects of this book, and he combines it with an obviously studied background in history (and religion) to produce an imaginative retelling of the story of Christianity’s central figure.
The author begins on the slopes of the Roman hill of Janiculum. He explores the idea that hills, and people who traverse them, have stories that can carry us into antiquity and back again, teaching us as we journey. He uses this device to engage the reader into the story of the cultures in which Jesus was born, most specifically, the Greeks, Jews and Romans. In taking the time to explore the cultural backdrop for the world in which Jesus will appear, Cahill explores Alexander the Great, and the Greek conquest and influence which Alexander attended upon the ancient world. He moves, eventually, to the history of the Jews during the millennium before Christ, detailing the Maccabean revolution and its impact in the Jewish mindset and territory. What Cahill does better than any other (that I’ve read) is tie together thoughts from various streams of history and connect the dots for the reader. At times, his efforts seem speculative, bordering on pure fiction to create “history”. But it is from this approach that we get some of his best thoughts- thoughts that are really great questions more than grand statements.
For example, he talks of both Jewish and Greek voices that long for a messianic figure to come to bring hope. This quote is poignant Cahill theorizing:
"Despite the remarkable affinity of these lines with Isaiah’s prophecy of the Peaceable Kingdom, Virgil knew nothing of Isaiah or any of the Jewish holy books. How, then, explain the striking similarity of images—the response of nature, the favor of God that rests upon the child, the “gift of divine life” (ille deum vitam accipiet), even the seeming allusion to a virgin birth? One may chalk it all up to coincidence. Or one may say that, beneath the surface differences of each culture—whether of cynical Romans, theoretical Greeks, fantasizing Jews, cyclical Orientals, or post-Christian Occidentals—there beats in human hearts a hope beyond all hoping, the hope of the hopeless, the hope of those who would disclaim any such longing, the hope of those who like the two tramps in Waiting for Godot seem to be waiting in vain, a hope—not for an emperor, not for an Exalted One—but for a Just One."[1]
Desire of the Everlasting Hills does this type of historical rendition at many turns. The point isn’t that I don’t agree with Cahill. I actually do. I do believe that history and cultures were waiting for a messiah and that it was ingrained in our nature to desire him. But that belief, at least for me, comes from a belief in the Messiah himself. Cahill goes from saying “one may chalk it all up to coincidence” to saying “beneath the surface.. of each culture” is a desire for a messiah. I think his theorizing on such points is wonderful, but he sometimes make the points as though they are fact. This is where I think much of the difficulty comes with taking his books seriously as history.
In any case, the book explores one of the most thoughtful understandings and interpretations of Jesus life, words and ministry. And though it might chafe against “historical” rigor at times, it is Cahill’s speculative nature that gives his story about Jesus such vibrancy as to seem thrilling and alive. He seems to see both the minutia of how the street may have smelled while in the same paragraph understanding the grand themes of Jesus ministry. Here is an example that I found brilliant:
The division points to Jesus’s two audiences: the powerless, who need to be reminded that God loves them and will see to their ultimate triumph, and the powerful, who need to be goaded by the example of those who have abandoned their comfort for the sake of others. The purpose of the Gospel is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.[2]
The recognition of Jesus focus (in the beatitudes) to teach both the powerless and the powerful is beautiful. He restates this theme multiple times in the early section of the book:
JESUS KEEPS TWO AUDIENCES clearly in view: the poor and miserable; and those who, because they are neither poor nor miserable, have a religious obligation to stand in solidarity with those at the bottom of the sociopsychological heap.[3]
Cahill’s respect for the Jews is abundantly clear in this book, as he uses it as the precipice from which he believes Jesus extends his influence into civilization:
Western values of individual destiny, hope for the future, and justice for all began in the world of the Jews, the inventors of the West.[4]
There is far too much excellent content in Desire of the Everlasting Hills to summarize in this short report. Again, the authors insights into so much of the life and context of Jesus world is fascinating, informing and (it seems to me) tethered in some way to an underlying affinity or even belief in Christ and the message he brought. I have just three more things that stood out strongly in my reading of this book.
Reflecting back to my earlier concern that Cahill adds a layer of personal storytelling to his narrative of history, this particularly concerned me when he says of a section of the Gospel of John:
This entire passage sounds like the Synoptics and could easily be slipped into Luke’s Gospel at 21:38, where it would make a perfect fit. It was, in fact, excised from Luke, after which it floated around the Christian churches without a proper home, till some scribe squeezed it into a manuscript of John, where he thought it might best belong.[5]
There is strong evidence that Cahill’s view is correct, but again, his approach to simply stating this as fact without a hint of any other possibility lends an air of presumption to his attitude about history, at least from this readers perspective[6]. Be that as it may, his most powerful points in the book, dwarf such concerns. One major point he uncovers is the counter-narrative that Jesus brings (embedded within the monotheistic foundation of the Jews) to the world of the Greeks and Romans (and all other peoples to that point in history), where he says:
To understand the ancient Greeks and Romans we must be alert to the great gap that separates their views, and those of most people throughout history, from the opinions of our own time. They knew nothing of ideas such as would later be spoken in the Sermon on the Mount, and they would have regarded them as absurd if they had[7]
I won’t cite details for the brilliant point of Cahill’s where he explains that Jesus message was so powerful, that at tepid points of possible obliteration of the Christian faith, great followers of Jesus have self-sacrificed (in the manner of their Christ) to renew and endure the legacy (and community) of Jesus and his message. At its close, Desire of the Everlasting Hills concludes with a blaze of glory, making an assertion that most people will be hard pressed to deny after the wonderful volume that has just been read. All of Cahill’s style, wit, and perceptive genius come to a head in his penultimate statement:
...whether we are Jew or Christian, believer or atheist, the figure of Jesus—as final Jewish prophet, as innocent and redeeming victim, as ideal human being—is threaded through our society and folded into our imagination in such a way that it cannot be excised. He is the mysterious ingredient that laces everything we taste, the standard by which all moral actions are finally judged.[8]
Amazon Book Link: http://amzn.to/ynjhk3
Review by Kim Gentes
[1] Cahill, Thomas, “Desire of the Everlasting Hills: The World Before and After Jesus (Hinges of History)”. (New York, NY: Anchor Books 1999)., Kindle Edition, Location 960
[2] Ibid., Location 1154
[3] Ibid., Location 1242
[4] Ibid., Location 4500
[5] Ibid., Location 4121
[6] More than just my perspective, I contact 3 different scholars/bible teachers and asked them about Cahill’s statement. All agreed that it is reasonably sure that the “pericopae adulterae” was not originally in the John text, though theories on its origination and author were just that- theories. One scholar notes, “I do not think that most scholars have any idea where it came from. It is not unjohannine in style, but it is clearly not original in after John 7:52, for it breaks up a story. I would say that it is a story that God only knows where it came from, and which two groups of folk inserted in two different places.” (Dr. Peter H. Davids/2012). In other words- God only knows, not Cahill.
[7] Ibid., Location 4527
[8] Ibid., Location 4684
cahill,