Desire of the Everlasting Hills

Desire of the Everlasting Hills:  The World Before and After Jesus is the third installment in Thomas Cahill’s “hinges of history” series.  And as the title suggests Jesus takes center stage in this one.  A short description of the book would be to say it focuses on the Gospels of the New Testament and the motivations and backgrounds of the Gospels’ authors.  Cahill starts off by describing a little of the world in the years leading up to Jesus arriving on the scene and the political and social climate of that time.  But the main focus is on Jesus’ time on earth as told through the Gospels.  I took a class in college (one of my Theology requirements) comparing the different Gospel accounts, and this book touched on a lot of the same themes.

The Good:  The book contains a lot interesting (I need to find a better word, but whatever) information about the Gospels and their authors.  And I particularly liked the information about the world (the leaders, battles, etc.) in the decades before Jesus.  It always fascinates me to think about the parallel histories occurring in different parts of the world at the same time.  We learn in school about Julius Caesar in Rome and Cleopatra in Egypt and it’s interesting (there’s that word again) to think of those events happening before Jesus.  It’s a fun read at times because Cahill does a decent job of lightening the material in explaining his thoughts on various stories in The Bible.  A subject with the potential to be dry and boring is made into an easy read. 

The Bad:  Cahill’s tendency to write light can be both good and bad.  Occasionally he gets so casual that you wonder if this is really serious research (an example: “ . . . don’t look on a woman with lust?  Earth to Jesus:  Hello!").  He also tends to present opinions as definitive statements on things I don't think he provided proof for.  He would write for example that because no one can prove that Jesus didn’t perform miracles such as curing leprosy that we should just assume that he did.  Huh?  And when describing a similar story appearing in both Matthew’s Gospel and John’s Gospel he says that because John’s includes more detail we are safe to assume it’s more accurate.  Really?  Couldn’t it be that John is just a better storyteller?  So needless to say I take all of this with a grain or two of salt.

The Verdict:  I’d probably recommend it, but it’s not a must read or anything.  It made me appreciate that if you peel back all of the history of various Christian religions and the battles and terrible things that stemmed from it, you do see that Jesus’s message (regardless of whether he was the son of God or just another dude) was a good one.  And that message was ultimately what the Gospel writers were trying to get across to their various audiences.

Next up:  Menmoch The Devil by Anne Rice (what better way to follow up a book about Jesus than one about the devil?  You know, give each side their say.)