The Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research is a consortium of Jewish and Christian scholars that study the Synoptic Gospels in light of the historic, linguistic and cultural milieu of Jesus. The beginnings of the collegial relationships that formed the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research can be traced back to a Jewish scholar and a Christian scholar, respectively David Flusser and Robert L. Lindsey in the 1960s. For the past 50 years, ‘Christian scholars fluent in Hebrew and living in the land of Israel have collaborated with Jewish scholars to examine Jesus’ sayings from a Judaic and Hebraic perspective’.
Viewpoints
The consortium's own website states three assumptions, shared by its members, namely, "1) the importance of Hebrew language, 2) the relevance of Jewish culture", and 3) the significance of Semitisms underneath sections of the Synoptic Gospels that in turn often yield results to the interconnection between the Synoptic Gospels. The first two assumptions are perhaps not shared by the majority of New Testament scholars, but are neither considered to be fringe positions. Today, the common view is that Jesus and His milieu spoke Aramaic, however that Hebrew was spoken and even important is not unique to the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research. Many more New Testament Scholars worldwide have increasingly affirmed the importance of Jewish culture for the understanding of Jesus. John P. Meier is exemplary of this significant trend when he poignantly criticizes scholarship in the twentieth century that has paid lip service to the 'Jewish Jesus' but has not really fleshed this out, stating that if we do not have a halachic Jesus, we don't have an historical Jesus.
The third assumption of the Jerusalem School basically seems to be concerned with not holding to an assumed-default position of Markan priority. It is especially the third assumption in more individually pronounced forms that has invited a response of the academic community. Some scholars have perceived the Jerusalem School as a group that holds to :Jerusalem_school_hypothesis#Lukan_Priority_Theory|Lukan Priority. But this perception is incomplete since it is only Robert Lindsey and David Bivin who have argued strongly for Lukan priority. The third methodological assumption of the Jerusalem School is much broader and open, without any one theory being affirmed: Many scholars affirm Semitic quality of the Synoptic Gospel material as indicative of earlier material, but how to determine Semitic quality has been hotly debated. Recently this subject of a Hebrew Gospel and Semitic material has been discussed by James R. Edwards. The most extensive Jerusalem School publication on Semitic material and types of Semitic interference can be found in an extended essay and appendix in Jesus' Last Week.
Publications
Apart from extensive individual publications of the school's members that often reflect the Jerusalem School's approach, some members have bundled some of their efforts in a joint effort. This combined effort from members of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research resulted in thus far two volumes. The first volume is Jesus' Last Week: Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels — Volume One, edited by R. Steven Notley, Marc Turnage, and Brian Becker. The second volume is The language environment of first century Judaea : Jerusalem studies in the Synoptic Gospels — Volume Two, edited by Buth, R. and Notley.
Reactions and criticism
Both affirmation and strong criticism has come because of a lay-oriented co-authored book Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus by David Bivin and Roy B. Blizzard Jr. which was reviewed by Michael L. Brown. The book itself is not published by the Jerusalem School, and only one of the co-authors is of the Jerusalem School. Yet, Brown not only questioned the work of individual school member David Bivin and co-author Roy Blizzard Jr., but by association also the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research as a whole. Yet, even in his criticism of reconstructing a Hebrew Gospel, he affirms three significant points, which dovetail with the methodology—the three assumptions—of the Jerusalem School: Since the Jerusalem School has not devoted itself primarily to the hypothetical work of REtranslation and reconstruction, the latter criticism is muted. A further academic description of the Jerusalem School and its methodology and dissemination in the lay and academic field is found in Hebräisches Evangelium und synoptische Überlieferung: Untersuchungen zum hebräischen Hintergrund der Evangelien.
Jesus' Last Week The recent combined effort of Jerusalem School members in Jesus' Last Week: Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels - Volume One, a work clearly catered toward the academic community has received positive reviews, for example by Nina L. Collins in the journal Novum Testamentum. She closed her review by stating that: Other reactions have also been positive, as exemplified by Robert L. Webb's review in the : A mixed review found the overall discussion in the volume to be "stimulating, even provocative from the perspective of current critical Synoptic studies." However, the review contained also some concerns:
