Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Vorkosigan · 12-04-2004, 11:06 PM

They stand or fall together. And that one is very easy to dismiss. Just read the entire passage carefully. When you get to the bottom, you'll notice the name Jesus there. Then you'll understand whose brother "James" really was, and how the threatened stoning could result in Jesus Damnaeus becoming High Priest.

Amaleq13 · 12-04-2004, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

There's also the James reference, though. That one's a bit harder to categorically dismiss as a forgery.

IMO, it is easier when you learn that the "lost reference" that Origen mentions, in which the fall of Jerusalem is attributed to the murder of James, also apparently contained the same phrase.

andrewcriddle · 12-05-2004, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

They stand or fall together. And that one is very easy to dismiss. Just read the entire passage carefully. When you get to the bottom, you'll notice the name Jesus there. Then you'll understand whose brother "James" really was, and how the threatened stoning could result in Jesus Damnaeus becoming High Priest.

That's an interesting idea although one problem with a Christian scribe replacing a reference to Jesus Damnaeus with a reference to Jesus the so-called Christ, unless it happened very early indeed is the reluctance of most Christians by the time of Origen say to regard James and Jesus as real brothers, which is what the passage in Josephus seems to mean.

Andrew Criddle

spin · 12-05-2004, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

That's an interesting idea although one problem with a Christian scribe replacing a reference to Jesus Damnaeus with a reference to Jesus the so-called Christ, unless it happened very early indeed is the reluctance of most Christians by the time of Origen say to regard James and Jesus as real brothers, which is what the passage in Josephus seems to mean.

Andrew,

You should stop supporting the apologetic use of "so-called" in the phrase. It would be more honest to use the simpler "called", which reflects the gospel usage of legomenos

Mt 4:18, Simon (the) called Peter + 10:2
Mt 9:9, the man called Matthew
Mt 26:3 the high priest (the) called Caiaphas
Mt 26:14 one of the twelve (the) called Judas Iscariot
Mt 27:16 prisoner called Barabbas

and numerous others, so please cut the "so-called" crap.

"Jesus the called Christ" is pretty gospel. The only reason to use "Jesus the so-called Christ" is to attempt to say that it wasn't written by a xian, yet the usage of legomenos in this phrase is very xian. At least there are thirty or forty examples in the nt where "so-called" is inappropriate.

spin

Diogenes the Cynic · 12-05-2004, 08:12 AM

Don't forget Mt. 1:16 which uses the exact construction, "Iesous ho legomenos Christos."

However, the word is also used in other Greek literature (including Josephus) to imply doubt or skepticism. I think the word had too broad a range to say definitively that the Josephus passage must be a Christian interpolation.

diana · 12-05-2004, 08:35 AM

Since Bede has been brought up and isn't here to answer at the moment, here's his essay on the Testimonium Flavianum.

Where exactly is the James reference? Better yet, has someone got a quick link?

Thanks.

d

Diogenes the Cynic · 12-05-2004, 09:04 AM

Josephus- Jewish Antiquities
Book XX: Chapter 9

Quote:

AND now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, (23) who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. (24) Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.

andrewcriddle · 12-05-2004, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diana

Since Bede has been brought up and isn't here to answer at the moment, here's his essay on the Testimonium Flavianum.

Where exactly is the James reference? Better yet, has someone got a quick link?

Thanks.

d

Antiquities book 20 chapter 9 See http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-20.htm

Quote:

AND now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest

I've given a quote of the whole passage because evaluating Vorkosigan's suggestion requires the whole context

Andrew Criddle

Diogenes the Cynic · 12-05-2004, 09:27 AM

Ha. Beat you by one minute.

andrewcriddle · 12-05-2004, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Andrew,

You should stop supporting the apologetic use of "so-called" in the phrase. It would be more honest to use the simpler "called", which reflects the gospel usage of legomenos

.................................................. ...................

"Jesus the called Christ" is pretty gospel. The only reason to use "Jesus the so-called Christ" is to attempt to say that it wasn't written by a xian, yet the usage of legomenos in this phrase is very xian. At least there are thirty or forty examples in the nt where "so-called" is inappropriate.

spin

I agree that called is more neutral and objective than so-called here, in the sense that 'the so-called x' implies that although he is called x he is definitely not entitled to be, which is not what is meant.

However I don't think it implies that the title is necessarily justified either.
When in Matthew 27:17, 22 Pilate is made to refer to 'Jesus who is called Christ' I don't think the implication is that Pilate necessarily regards the title as justified.

Assuming Josephus wanted to refer to 'the brother of the Jesus who is commonly called Christ' then I think he could well have written the passage as it stands.

Is 'Jesus known as Christ' OK or is it still too apologetic in your opinion ?

Andrew Criddle

12-05-2004, 08:12 AM	#15
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Legomenos Don't forget Mt. 1:16 which uses the exact construction, "Iesous ho legomenos Christos." However, the word is also used in other Greek literature (including Josephus) to imply doubt or skepticism. I think the word had too broad a range to say definitively that the Josephus passage must be a Christian interpolation.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-04-2004, 11:06 PM	#11
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	They stand or fall together. And that one is very easy to dismiss. Just read the entire passage carefully. When you get to the bottom, you'll notice the name Jesus there. Then you'll understand whose brother "James" really was, and how the threatened stoning could result in Jesus Damnaeus becoming High Priest.

12-05-2004, 08:35 AM	#16
diana Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Colorado Springs Posts: 6,471	Since Bede has been brought up and isn't here to answer at the moment, here's his essay on the Testimonium Flavianum. Where exactly is the James reference? Better yet, has someone got a quick link? Thanks. d

12-05-2004, 09:27 AM	#19
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Ha. Beat you by one minute.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.