Jesus the Magician: A Renowned Historian Reveals How Jesus was Viewed by People of His Time

“A miracle worker is not necessarily a magician.” So writes Morton Smith on page 198 of his book, Jesus The Magician. While I wholeheartedly agree with that assertion, Smith’s book goes to great pains to portray Jesus as just the opposite, namely a goes, a shaman (sic), a magician. Drawing upon his vast knowledge of ancient magical papyri, Smith conflates ancient magical practices with the healings and miracles of Jesus recorded in the gospels. His birth, the events of his so-called initiation during his 40 days sojourn in the desert, his apparently supernatural feats, his institution of the eucharist, and even his death and resurrection are strikingly similar to the magical operations of the practitioners in ancient (and present) world.While Smith’s scholarship is impressive to say the least, he makes a fundamental error that Jesus’ own opponents made, namely, being unable to discern the difference between magical and spiritual practices. Smith wrote this book at a time in which almost all manifestations of unseen energy could be lumped into magical practices. Some examples might help. It was only in 1997, that the ancient energy healing practice of acupuncture was acknowledged as having legitimate merit for treating a variety of illnesses including psychosomatic disorders. Prior to that, it had a nebulous reputation that was greeted with skepticism by both professional and lay persons alike.Similarly, the energy healing practice of Reiki that came to the western world from Japan has gained slow acceptance by physicians, nurses and even hospitals for the after care following surgery. When it first appeared in the United States, Reiki was greeted as the latest “juju” and even many Christian voices considered it “dark energy” and many still do. When energy is misunderstood, the common recourse is to classify it as “magical” meaning sinister or evil, the work of the devil.In the milieu in which Jesus lived, healing, which is energy work, was not understood in the way healing is being understood today. In that pre-scientific milieu, Jesus healings and miracles would have been received with fear and superstition by his opponents. “Jesus was just another magus who had an evil spirit.” Smith’s inability to understand the nature of energy and how quantum physics has altered even our Newtonian world view is the underlying liability of this book. What Smith’s book does is to make the same argument of Jesus opponents while bypassing the kerygma or the proclamation of Jesus of the Gospels. I recommend the book, however, for its historical scholarship and insights, but the conclusion that Jesus was a magician cannot be sustained.

Morton Smith has always approached things from a different perspective, interesting, although I didn't find his arguments entirely convincing, yet some were plausible.

Although considered controversial at the time, Jesus the Magician, published in 1978 by R. Morton Smith, a professor at Columbia University, is old news. Smith's basic claim--that Jesus was known both by his Jewish contemporaries and pagan critics as a magician--had been preceded by articles in scholarly journals dating back to the 1930's and at least one book-length treatment (Hull, Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition, 1974) that made essentially the same claim. In the years following the release of Jesus the Magician, scores of articles and books have appeared that note the close similarities between Jesus' exorcisms, healing, and other miracles and the spells of the Greek magical papyri as well as the reported wonders of such figures as Apollonius of Tyana. Hostile Jewish and Roman sources (Julian, Celsus, Porphyry, etc) openly accused Jesus and early Christians of sorcery. At this late date only a stranger to the scholarly writing on Jesus and early Christianity or a biblical literalist would find the claim that Jesus practiced magic surprising, much less scandalous. In short, Smith's analysis of Jesus' miracle working has received extensive support from many scholars in the years that followed the publication of Jesus the Magician and additional articles, essays and books in Hebrew and the major European languages that link early Jewish and Christian practices with magic continue to appear.That said, the choice of Dr. Ehrman to write an introduction seems somewhat...well, odd. Smith was also the discoverer of the "Secret" gospel of Mark, actually an excerpt of a putative letter of Clement of Alexandria, a 2nd century theologian, that quotes two passages from a variant edition of the gospel of Mark. The gospel fragments, or rather Smith's interpretation of them, provoked a firestorm of invective from Catholic and evangelical quarters including accusations that Smith had forged the letter of Clement to discredit Christianity. Dr. Ehrman, who I respect as a serious and productive New Testament scholar, has argued that Smith had the ability and presumably a motive to forge the Clement letter although he has never actually claimed that Smith did it. Although I believe the Clement letter and gospel fragments it quotes are almost certainly genuine, as far as I know, Dr. Ehrman is still of the opinion that Morton Smith had the ability, motive and opportunity to produce one of the 20th century's greatest forgeries.

With regard to the Eucharist as "an unmistakably magical rite," Morton Smith, a lover of puns, failed to notice the one most obvious to his thesis: hocus pocus (magic, deception, trickery, sleight of hand, etc.) come from a perversion of Hoc est corpus - "This is my Body," the centerpiece of the Mass. The bottom line for Smith is that miracles and "deities and demons do not exist." This assumption today is open to question, but was certainly not true for the people at the time of Jesus, either for his followers or his opponents. This book is not the final word on the "Jesus of history." Read with caution. There may be some hocus pocus, deception, in this book's conclusions.

I bought this book because Erdman wrote the foreword, I enjoy his writing,and it appeared to be a book that might shed historical light on how people atJesus' time saw him. However, I was disappointed in this book. Recommendyou look it over yourself before buying it.

I first read this book over 30 years ago and was delighted when it became available again in print. It is a must read for all research into the analogies between Christian stories and the contemporary cultures

Er -reading?

As a post graduate qualified academic theologian and historian, I have to say this is a very interesting and well researched book. It is written in a very readable style which will have appeal to those who struggle with academic reading. My only slight criticism about the new edition is there have been developments that may have been included in this book, for example discussion of earliest Christian artwork found in the catacombs, which depict Jesus holding a magic wand / baton, but also styled like a philosopher. Aside from the lack of update, this book presents a credible argument and evidence to suggest that Jesus may not have been regarded as being a God by early Christians before the doctrine of the trinity was established.

Fantastic from the first to the last page, the only word I could say is: it’s amazing!