Close Up: Stephen Mansfield |
![]() |
![]() |
Written by Leslie Santamaria |
Tuesday, 02 April 2013 04:13 PM America/New_York |
Why did you choose to write Killing Jesus? We can’t allow a gloss to form over the brutality of the crucifixion. It is the central event of our faith. Everything that leads to the death of Jesus was redemptive. I wanted to tell this story beyond what can be said in an Easter sermon or the usual Bible study. Frankly, it is a very gruesome tale, more gruesome in some cases than Mel Gibson’s film [The Passion of The Christ]. Why did you think it important to explain Jesus’ execution in gritty realism? The story demands it. The sacrifice demands it. My gratitude for what Jesus endured demands it. We are told in Scripture that, “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter and the glory of kings to search it out.” I don’t want to be guilty of laziness in searching out anything concealed about the sufferings of Jesus. What research did you conduct? I relied on scholars in Israel, Turkey and at major universities here in the United States. I also used “old school” scholars like Alfred Edersheim and “new school” scholars like Marcus Borg. Of course, any book of this kind has to involve Josephus and Tacitus—all the classical writers who shine light on the pages of Scripture.
How is the material organized? It is chronological with several of what I call “periscope” chapters. These are chapters in which I stick my head out of the historical moment and look back over Jesus’ life in summary fashion. Will you explain your use of present tense and multiple perspectives in the narrative portion? I did it for dramatic effect, certainly, but I also did it so that the reader can better imagine himself on the scene. Some very wise professors of mine taught me to read the Bible “architecturally,” meaning actually inside the story looking around. It has made a profound difference in my orientation to the Bible. You write that the conspiracy to kill Jesus should not be read hastily. |