FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-18-2007, 07:26 AM   #91
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Although Josephus mentions Judah the Essene once and talks about the Essenes a number of times, how many other Essenes does he mention? (Hint: the number of fingers on your left foot.)
You just made his point. Josephus doesn't mention any other Essenes by name, but Paul, if we assume your hypothesis to be correct, mentions other brothers of the lord by name without the appellation.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 07:56 AM   #92
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
You just made his point. Josephus doesn't mention any other Essenes by name, but Paul, if we assume your hypothesis to be correct, mentions other brothers of the lord by name without the appellation.
Actually, mentioning brothers is analogous to mentioning Essenes.
spin is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 11:36 AM   #93
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Actually, mentioning brothers is analogous to mentioning Essenes.
You haven't shown that to be true.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 12:00 PM   #94
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
You haven't shown that to be true.
What? That Judah is the only Essene referred to by name and that James is the only "brother of the lord" in Paul referred to by name?
spin is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 12:30 PM   #95
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

TedM: Which leaves the curious result of Paul ONLY referring to specifically James as "the brother of the Lord", when it seems likely that both Cephas and John also were "brothers of the Lord" if the meaning is of one "believer" and not "biological brother".

The question for spin is why doesn't Cephas or John get the appellation brother of the Lord if brother of the Lord is indeed a general reference to believer.

Spin's reply: Although Josephus mentions Judah the Essene once and talks about the Essenes a number of times, how many other Essenes does he mention? (Hint: the number of fingers on your left foot.)

Here spin cites Josephus as a parallel, namely that Josephus named only one Essene with the appellation Essene, though he talks about Essenes in general yet never mentions any other by name.

My point is that spin's conclusion is non sequitur. If spin's hypothesis is correct, that Cephas and John are brothers of the Lord, why didn't they receive that appellation as well?

Spin, also, can you please clarify your position on "brothers", "brother of the Lord", and also "brothers of the lord"?

Finally, the analogy ultimately fails since Josephus names a number of different Ioudai, but Paul seems to mention only one James. That Paul could refer to different James is ad hoc and lacking in any evidence, save to rescue this sinking hypothesis. I don't think even spin would argue that, though.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 12:58 PM   #96
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
TedM: Which leaves the curious result of Paul ONLY referring to specifically James as "the brother of the Lord", when it seems likely that both Cephas and John also were "brothers of the Lord" if the meaning is of one "believer" and not "biological brother".

The question for spin is why doesn't Cephas or John get the appellation brother of the Lord if brother of the Lord is indeed a general reference to believer.

Spin's reply: Although Josephus mentions Judah the Essene once and talks about the Essenes a number of times, how many other Essenes does he mention? (Hint: the number of fingers on your left foot.)
TedM's question was a restatement of his earlier question to which my response was
Paul had always dealt with Cephas differently and, as to John, we only have Paul talking of him in a few verses in Galatians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Here spin cites Josephus as a parallel, namely that Josephus named only one Essene with the appellation Essene, though he talks about Essenes in general yet never mentions any other by name.

My point is that spin's conclusion is non sequitur. If spin's hypothesis is correct, that Cephas and John are brothers of the Lord, why didn't they receive that appellation as well?
That wasn't my hypothesis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Spin, also, can you please clarify your position on "brothers", "brother of the Lord", and also "brothers of the lord"?
As they are used in similar circumstances I posit that they refer to the same group. You'll note that James is mentioned immediately after the 500 brothers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Finally, the analogy ultimately fails since Josephus names a number of different Ioudai, but Paul seems to mention only one James. That Paul could refer to different James is ad hoc and lacking in any evidence, save to rescue this sinking hypothesis. I don't think even spin would argue that, though.
I don't understand this. I said Josephus named one Essene Judah the Essene. This has nothing to do with any other Judah. I think, Chris, you working so very hard to find fault, you aren't being preceptive in your judgment.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 01:19 PM   #97
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
That wasn't my hypothesis.
Oh? Can you clarify then, please?

Quote:
As they are used in similar circumstances I posit that they refer to the same group. You'll note that James is mentioned immediately after the 500 brothers.
Why would Paul be so confusing that he refers to believers in general as brothers and distinct members of this group as brothers without any linguistic indication that he is doing so? You're doing the exact same thing you charged Ted and me of doing with kurios. You can't have it both ways.

Quote:
I don't understand this. I said Josephus named one Essene Judah the Essene. This has nothing to do with any other Judah. I think, Chris, you working so very hard to find fault, you aren't being preceptive in your judgment.
I think I may have misunderstood your position. If you clarified a bit, perhaps I can clarify myself then. The way you worded it, though, it seemed you were claiming parallelism, that one need not name more than one person with appellation Y of group X to understand that person with appellation Y belongs to group X.

Id est:

James is the brother of the Lord -> Judah is an Essene
Other brothers are mentioned -> Other Essenes are mentioned
Only James is named as a brother -> Only Judah is named as a brother

Therefore, you don't need to name other brothers to understand that James is merely one of the brothers (of the lord).

Am I misunderstanding your position?
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 04-18-2007, 01:55 PM   #98
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Oh? Can you clarify then, please?
I didn't claim that Cephas and John were brothers of the lord. Paul only mentions James once as a brother and once in close proximity to brothers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Why would Paul be so confusing that he refers to believers in general as brothers and distinct members of this group as brothers without any linguistic indication that he is doing so? You're doing the exact same thing you charged Ted and me of doing with kurios. You can't have it both ways.
Paul talks of these brothers in a specific context.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
I think I may have misunderstood your position. If you clarified a bit, perhaps I can clarify myself then. The way you worded it, though, it seemed you were claiming parallelism, that one need not name more than one person with appellation Y of group X to understand that person with appellation Y belongs to group X.

Id est:

James is the brother of the Lord -> Judah is an Essene
Other brothers are mentioned -> Other Essenes are mentioned
Only James is named as a brother -> Only Judah is named as a brother
(Shouldn't that have been "Only Judah is named as an Essene"?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Therefore, you don't need to name other brothers to understand that James is merely one of the brothers (of the lord).

Am I misunderstanding your position?
It's not syllogistic. I was merely giving an analogy regarding the apparently singular naming of James as a brother. It's not a strange thing. Only one Essene gets named by Josephus. The only Pharisee that the bible mentions is Gamaliel and he's not the only Gamaliel in rabbinical literature who was a Pharisee. Sometimes groups don't get even one name mentioned. How many Sadducees are named in the bible?


spin

(How's Quintilian?)
spin is offline  
Old 04-19-2007, 10:07 AM   #99
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
It's not syllogistic. I was merely giving an analogy regarding the apparently singular naming of James as a brother. It's not a strange thing. Only one Essene gets named by Josephus. The only Pharisee that the bible mentions is Gamaliel and he's not the only Gamaliel in rabbinical literature who was a Pharisee. Sometimes groups don't get even one name mentioned. How many Sadducees are named in the bible?
Josephus and the bible both distinguish WHICH Judas and Gamaliel they are referencing by the actions they attribute to him. Not so with Paul in the first chapter of Galations. That's the difference. The only distinguishing factor for James in chapter 1 is that he was also an apostle. Bear with me while I think this through:

1. If all believers were "brothers of the Lord", there is no need for Paul to mention it at all in this context.
2. If all apostles were "brothers of the Lord" there again is no particular reason for Paul to have mentioned it.
3. If there was no other James who was an apostle, there was no reason for Paul to have mentioned it.

Therefore, if Paul was using it to identify James beyond just being an apostle, we can conclude that:

1. "brothers of the Lord" was a subset of believers
2. some apostles were NOT "brothers of the Lord"
3. There was another James who was an apostle.

It may be that Paul threw in "brother of the Lord" for no helpful reason--just as further information: James, the apostle, who also is considered a "brother of the Lord". But, since he had just mentioned Cephas as an apostle in the verse just before James is mentioned and didn't also called him a brother of the Lord, it seems to me to add to the likelihood that Cephas was not a brother of the Lord, which supports #s 1 and 2.



Further, my take is that in 1 Cor Paul is implying that the "brothers of the Lord" are a group that has priviliges that he and his companions don't have. This further implies that they are a select group which doesn't include ALL believers.



Quote:
I didn't claim that Cephas and John were brothers of the lord.
IF they weren't it is consistent with the above conclusions. It seems odd though, that being in Jerusalem and the other 2 pillars Paul mentions besides James that they wouldn't also be considered "brothers of the Lord".


Quote:
Paul only mentions James once as a brother and once in close proximity to brothers.
Proximity means little in this case. You might as well argue that all brothers are apostles also, since they are mentioned next to each other also.


Quote:
Paul talks of these brothers in a specific context.
The only context that appears to be specific to "brothers of the Lord" is one of importance. In 1 Cor they are mentioned along with the apostles as an example of those Paul would like to have equal privileges to. In Galatians James is implied as an apostle, one of the few along with Cephas that Paul spent time with when he first went to Jerusalem after his conversion. The question is why are they a select group of believers that was considered to be important?

We have these main possibilities, assuming that for Paul, "brothers" refers to all male believers:

1. "Brothers of the Lord", which also refers to all believers, despite the way in which Paul refers to them.

2. "Brothers of the Lord" which refers to all believers in Jerusalem, despite the exclusion some apostles, and possibly of even Cephas and John.

3. "Brothers of the Lord", which was a select group within the believers for reasons unknown, but not biological. It likely excluded the apostles John and Cephas despite their prominence and place in Jerusalem. Paul might be expected to explain the group's prominence, as well as to distinguish linguistically between the "brothers" and the "brothers of the Lord" but doesn't. Tradition has lost all traces of them.

4. "Brothers of the Lord", which was a select group within the believers because they were literally biological brothers of Jesus. It excluded John and Cephas because they weren't related to Jesus. We would not expect Paul to explain the group's prominence because there would be no need to. Tradition has preserved their existence, and the tradition was in writing as early as 20-30 years after Paul wrote Galatians.

To me, #4 seems the most likely.

ted
TedM is offline  
Old 04-19-2007, 10:22 AM   #100
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Ted, Chris, and spin, how would you treat Quartus in Romans 16.23?
Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother.
He is identified only as the brother. Does that affect anything in this discussion?

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:49 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.