John R. Levison, The Spirit in First-Century Judaism (Brill: Boston, 2002). (Amazon.com)
In The Spirit in First-Century Judaism John R. Levison invites his readers to explore Jewish Pneumatologies as he juxtaposes them with those of the broader Graeco-Roman world. The book is not exhaustive (his 2009 Filled with the Spirit arguably covers more ground), but it does help the reader envision what Levison calls the “exegetical movements” of various ancient authors as they attempt to interpret Scripture in dialogue with the predominate ideologies of their day. Levison’s three primary dialogue partners are Philo Judaeus, Flavius Josephus, and the author of Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, known also as “Pseudo-Philo”. He engages their writings across three primary categories: Part One, “An Anomalous Prophet”; Part Two, “The Eclectic Era”; Part Three, “The Extraordinary Mind”.
Part One is divided into two parts: (1) The Spirit as an Invading Angel; (2) The Spirit as Life Itself. In this section Levison examines places where spirit is depicted as an angelic being who comes from outside the human in order to influence him/her. The interpretive traditions around Numbers 22-24—the story of Balaam—play a predominate role as we see how Philo and Josephus reinterpret this story. There is much emphasis placed on the ecstatic, the possession, where humans lose control of their own thought to become conduits of spirit. In the second part of the section the role of spirit as sustaining force is highlighted, especially places like Genesis 2 where God breathes into the man or the interpretive tradition surrounding Genesis 6:3 wherein the role of God’s spirit to determine life spans in central.
Part Two is divided into three parts: (1) The Spirit and Human Transformation: Palestinian and Diaspora Perspectives; (2) The Spirit and Prophetic Transformation: Palestinian Perspectives; and (3) The Spirit and Philosophical Transformation: Diaspora Perspectives. This entire section focuses primarily on how spirit takes a human from one point to another, whether it be changing someone fearful into a military leader, or altering one’s appearance or rhetorical skills in order to accomplish something important. In gist, when spirit comes upon or arises from within a person they can look different, or become prophets, or even disperse philosophical wisdom and insight.
Part Three is divided into two parts: (1) The Spirit and Extraordinary Insight; (2) The Spirit and Inspired Exegesis. This section discusses figures like Daniel, Joseph, Moses, the Messianic Servant, and even Socrates. When spirit comes upon these people they can foresee important events. They are given insight into matters that cannot be understood by others. In the latter part of this section Levison investigates the tradition of expired exegesis. Whether it be Philo claiming that a spirit within helps him understand the deeper aspects of Scripture, the scribe Ben Sira, or the Teacher of Righteousness discusses in some of the Dead Sea Scrolls, there are those who argued that spirit is needed in a special way to truly understand sacred texts.
While Levison has three primary dialogue partners that does not mean the study is a narrow one. He interacts with Plato and Plutarch, Cicero and Stoicism, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint. Levison has a strong grasp on a wide array of literature which will help the reader gain a more thorough and informed understanding of how spirit was understood in early Judaism. The book contains a Preface to guide and a Retrospect and Prospect to help the reader summarize what was said and consider other avenues of Pneumatology worth exploring.
For anyone seeking an entry point into early Jewish Pneumatology, or even the broader Pneumatolgies of the first century, this is an excellent place to start. The book is readable, thorough, informative, and organized with discipline which allows the reader to keep pace and follow Levison’s discussion both when he is introducing new ideas or building off of something presented earlier in the book. It is a book I know I’ll be consulting often.
the archives near Emmaus 
If we believe Yehshua’s wit, sarcasm and criticism, 1st Century Judaism exemplified in 1st Century Sadducees, Pharasees, and Herodians was corrupt, and a defective understanding of the ‘faith’ handed down by Moses.
Non-corrupt views of the Holy Spirit by Yehshua’s contemporaries, we can reasonably believe, are documented in the Bible. I will likely read Levison’s book, but the real gold is not in mining the corrupt views of 1st Century Jews, but the non-corrupt views of Israelite prophets 4 to 7 centuries before.
One can have whatever view one wants regarding the enduring legacy of early Judaism, but your comment is distracting and off-topic. The book is a historical survey of particular beliefs from a particular period. Not sure why you said what you said.
Thanks for this review. I briefly met Jack Levison a few years back at SBL: not only does he write interesting work, but he is the embodiment of collegiality.
Jared: Absolutely, he is one of the kindest and sincere people I’ve ever met as well. Very approachable and fun to talk to about scholarship and life.
I said what I said because there is a certain nostalgia about 1st century Judaism in current academia (thank you very much E.P. Saunders).
If “The book is a historical survey of particular beliefs from a particular period.” there is this underlying question about whether or not anything of value can be gleaned about Judaism’s view of the Spirit, if during this period Judaism’s views were corrupt.
From a historian’s perspective then, the above comments are hardly a distraction but at the core of good historiography. One doesn’t look for good history in bad sources – generally.
That said, your uncritical favour of Levison is obvious to all who read your frequent reviews of his work, so I likely should have known that a lament for Levison to research Judaism’s views from some earlier period (rather than the currently favoured period) might have touched a chord.
@Andrew: You are aware that my complaint against you is quite consistent: you derail the comments section by inserting your own pet-peeve or agenda. You never respect the blog author’s decision to discuss this or that. If you can even loosely connect one of your schticks with the subject you’ll do it. That does touch a chord, indeed.
Obviously, I have great respect for Jack, yes. And his work is influencing my thought and it will continue to do so. Sorry that this bothers you, but it wasn’t the subject at hand nonetheless. Have you considered starting your own blog where you can guarantee that each discussion begins with the topics that excite you?
Brian, of all of Levison’s work this one interests me the most. With respect to your admiration for Levison, I respect that he works with the Holy Spirit (too few do), and I have no grudge against him.
I wasn’t meaning to push any particular schtick in this comment other than to wish this line of research reached further back into history. That wish is purely innocent (though for the sake of better historical acuity).
Is there harm in that?
Later this week I’ll review Levison’s Inspired which does deal with modern Pneumatology. That would be a good place to debate the merits of how ancient Pneumatology applies to modern.
Respecting your comments, I will be fair to Levison and see what he gleans from the pneumatology of the DSS.
My view of 1st century Judaism is not entirely unfavourable. I mostly respect the Essenes and/or Qumran community, seeing them as a Judaic group with a relatively uncorrupted biblical outlook (at least compared to their contemporary peers who they, themselves critiqued).
I look forward to your post on modern pneumatology and apologize for causing ripples.