My 3 star rating mainly comes from my interest fading in and out depending on the topic covered or point being made in this book. If I were 100% interested I think I’d give it 4 stars because it’s pretty accessible (at least for someone raised Christian) and well organized. I’d still dock a star for a couple complaints I have.

Thought provoking stuff/highlights:
1. Overall this is the first time I’ve read something that comes at Jesus’ life from a completely agnostic perspective. I was introduced to many new ways to view what did or didn’t happen and why this gospel says one thing and this one another. Examples: the idea that later writers felt the need to explain Jesus’ baptism, the potential competition between John the Baptist and Jesus, and the idea that Jesus was speaking of an earthly kingdom.
2. Jesus put in the context of the time was helpful. Millenarianism was a broadly popular view, especially among peasants at the time. Jesus was part of a Jewish insurrectionist history that also continued after him. I wish we got more information (it’s unclear if there just isn’t any) about what the expected supernatural intervention would look like in the minds of Jesus and his followers.
3. The unique part of Jesus’ movement was the strategic nonviolence which was connected to the also unique “mission to the rich” pillar of the movement.

Bothersome stuff:
1. Sometimes the authors said that a position they held was “clearly” the case when it was not clear to me. I needed more evidence than they gave me. I might still agree with them, but I just felt they didn’t do enough to make the case. One example is the importance of maintaining the image of masculinity even though their movement was nonviolent.
2. The thread of “class conflict” did not feel consistently present. There were chapters that felt tangentially connected to that theme if at all, which is odd when it’s the subtitle of the book. Sometimes the authors were more wrapped up in expounding on what did or didn’t really happen in Jesus’ life.