Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 07-26-2007, 01:54 AM

It is alleged that on a certain cross the words "King of the Jews" were written.

OK Kings normally have royal families who bicker about succession and definitely make it known who they are.

Where is the clear evidence of the involvement of Jesus' family in early church history? Some of them had to be apostles or equivalent, there should be a clear role. But what do we have? Vague stories, Da Vinci Code.

Methinks the lack of clear references to the royal family is extremely suspicious. I cannot quite believe they put immediately into effect the first shall be last - they had known him all their lives allegedly. Where is the gossip, the palace intrigue, the bits and pieces you get around real people?

Toto · 07-26-2007, 02:15 AM

Look up the Desposynoi.

If Jesus existed and had a family, they were so embarrassing they got written out of history.

Clivedurdle · 07-27-2007, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman
Toto,

Perhaps such arguments are seldom used because arguments re: James the Brother of Jesus, which are much better attested than any others, are already brushed aside by mythicists.

This doesn't make sense. James by himself could be the biological brother of Jesus or have a title of Brother of the Lord, so there is really no better attestation for James as a brother. But a whole host of blood relatives are harder to explain away. You don't usually hold back on a stronger argument when a weaker one is criticized.

From thread above.

I would have thought something from an uncle or aunt or cousin would have survived and be used as hjists as a clincher - because it is.

Very interesting.

Maybe Vork is correct

Quote:

Because, Layman, there is no credible evidence that James was ever the physical brother of Jesus. The whole of early Christian history is polemical and theological, shot through with fiction and forgery, and no document we have about it is reliable. Further, as Eisenman deduced, and from Luke's treatment of John the Baptist, it is clear that one strategy the early Christian writers deployed against their foes was to make them into relatives of Jesus. The Gospels themselves are fictions, and the references to James the Brother of the Lord in the Pauline letters are best explained as titular references, where they are not, as in 1 Cor 15, outright interpolations. Josephus has been extensively worked over by Christian writers.....

Nobody "brushes" these aside. Rather, taking everything into account, the early Christian writings are highly problematic, and are not credible evidence of anything.

Vorkosigan

Toto · 07-27-2007, 02:50 PM

You gave me a shock there - I thought Layman might be back.

We have historical records from after Constantine of some rough guys who claimed to be descended from Joses, the brother of Jesus. The newly sophisticated Roman Church didn't want to have anything to do with such rednecks, and sent them packing.

What does that prove? It does indicate that there were Christians before Constantine, unless you think that Constantine staged the whole thing, hired some actors - for what reason?

But why did these peasants think they were related to Jesus? Could it just have been a power play on their part?

No Robots · 07-27-2007, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

You gave me a shock there - I thought Layman might be back.

We have historical records from after Constantine of some rough guys who claimed to be descended from Joses, the brother of Jesus. The newly sophisticated Roman Church didn't want to have anything to do with such rednecks, and sent them packing.

What does that prove? It does indicate that there were Christians before Constantine, unless you think that Constantine staged the whole thing, hired some actors - for what reason?

But why did these peasants think they were related to Jesus? Could it just have been a power play on their part?

You've garbled this story a bit. Read it here.

Note that Eusebius claims to quote Hegesippus (see the page preceding the one I linked to above).

Toto · 07-27-2007, 03:17 PM

I reported what I remembered from my original research. It's not clear how that relates to Eusebius' story. I don't have time to look into it more now. CCEL notes:

Quote:

It is noticeable that, although Eusebius has the written authority of Hegesippus for this account, he still speaks of it as supported by “ancient tradition.” This is different from his ordinary custom, and serves to make us careful in drawing conclusions as to the nature of Eusebius’ authority for any statement from the expression used in introducing it.

Ben C Smith · 07-27-2007, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I reported what I remembered from my original research. It's not clear how that relates to Eusebius' story.

The line that claimed kinship with the Lord still existed at the time of Constantine, as you mentioned. I think the Conon from the Acts of Conon (apparently not available online) was one such person.

Ben.

No Robots · 07-27-2007, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

The line that claimed kinship with the Lord still existed at the time of Constantine, as you mentioned. I think the Conon from the Acts of Conon (apparently not available online) was one such person.

Conon was reputed to have been martyred during the persecution of Decius c. 250, long before Constantine. According to this site, Conon is the last relative of Christ in recorded history.

andrewcriddle · 07-28-2007, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

You gave me a shock there - I thought Layman might be back.

We have historical records from after Constantine of some rough guys who claimed to be descended from Joses, the brother of Jesus. The newly sophisticated Roman Church didn't want to have anything to do with such rednecks, and sent them packing.

What does that prove? It does indicate that there were Christians before Constantine, unless you think that Constantine staged the whole thing, hired some actors - for what reason?

But why did these peasants think they were related to Jesus? Could it just have been a power play on their part?

This appears to be based on claims by Malachi Martin See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desposyni
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro.../desposyni.htm

I am reluctant to say that Malachi Martin simply invented these statements but I have failed to find any sort of source for them.

Andrew Criddle

Lugubert · 07-28-2007, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Look up the Desposynoi.

If Jesus existed and had a family, they were so embarrassing they got written out of history.

Couldn't it be the other way: the relatives were so embarrassed (or even scared) that they destroyed all links to Jesus.

Another silence on the family: Every now and then, there is a statement that Mary and Joseph were poor. I have found no reference to their financial status. Joseph might, according to the Greek NT word, have been an architect (or a stonemason or anything else in the building business). I recently saw an argument for them travelling to Bethlehem for the alleged taxation was that Joseph owned property there. In that case, it must have been rented out, and perhaps the manger was on that property. (Compared to some Flud explanations, I think this makes wondeful sense.)

07-26-2007, 01:54 AM	#1
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Yet another silence - Jesus' Family It is alleged that on a certain cross the words "King of the Jews" were written. OK Kings normally have royal families who bicker about succession and definitely make it known who they are. Where is the clear evidence of the involvement of Jesus' family in early church history? Some of them had to be apostles or equivalent, there should be a clear role. But what do we have? Vague stories, Da Vinci Code. Methinks the lack of clear references to the royal family is extremely suspicious. I cannot quite believe they put immediately into effect the first shall be last - they had known him all their lives allegedly. Where is the gossip, the palace intrigue, the bits and pieces you get around real people?

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

07-26-2007, 02:15 AM	#2
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Look up the Desposynoi. If Jesus existed and had a family, they were so embarrassing they got written out of history.

07-27-2007, 02:50 PM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	You gave me a shock there - I thought Layman might be back. We have historical records from after Constantine of some rough guys who claimed to be descended from Joses, the brother of Jesus. The newly sophisticated Roman Church didn't want to have anything to do with such rednecks, and sent them packing. What does that prove? It does indicate that there were Christians before Constantine, unless you think that Constantine staged the whole thing, hired some actors - for what reason? But why did these peasants think they were related to Jesus? Could it just have been a power play on their part?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.