Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 05-14-2009, 03:48 PM

The discussion of dating has been split off here.

maryhelena · 05-29-2009, 07:28 AM

Josephus - once again to the rescue.....

Quote:

Prof Vermes, who is Professor Emeritus of Jewish Studies at Oxford University, gave a talk to a packed audience at the Orthodox Synagogue in Bournemouth on the historical Jesus. He has penned several books on the subject.

So how much historical evidence is there for the existence of Jesus?

“There is quite enough both in the Gospels and outside the Gospels to go on. Yes, he was a real figure,” he says.

“It’s pretty clear from the evidence of Josephus, the first century Jewish historian talking about James the brother of Jesus – the Christ.”

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...real____Jesus/

aa5874 · 05-29-2009, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Josephus - once again to the rescue.....

Quote:

Prof Vermes, who is Professor Emeritus of Jewish Studies at Oxford University, gave a talk to a packed audience at the Orthodox Synagogue in Bournemouth on the historical Jesus. He has penned several books on the subject.

So how much historical evidence is there for the existence of Jesus?

“There is quite enough both in the Gospels and outside the Gospels to go on. Yes, he was a real figure,” he says.

“It’s pretty clear from the evidence of Josephus, the first century Jewish historian talking about James the brother of Jesus – the Christ.”

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/new...real____Jesus/

This is most incredible.

An historian is basing the historicity of Jesus on a single phrase.

It is beyond belief that an historian would try to establish the historicity of Jesus by linking Jesus to a character, James, whose own historicity is in doubt.

The Church itself is confused about James, they are not sure if he was the son of Mary the mother of Jesus or the son of the sister of Mary also called Mary. The Church is not really sure that James wrote any epistle.

This is Jerome writing after Josephus' AJ 20.9.1 in "De Viris Illustribus" 2

Quote:

James, who is called the brother of the Lord, surnamed the Just, the son of Joseph by another wife, as some think, but, as appears to me, the son of Mary sister of the mother of our Lord of whom John makes mention in his book, after our Lord's passion at once ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusalem, wrote a single epistle, which is reckoned among the seven Catholic Epistles and even this is claimed by some to have been published by some one else under his name, and gradually, as time went on, to have gained authority.......

But, the Synoptics infer or imply that James was the son of Mary the mother of Jesus.

Matt 13:55 -

Quote:

Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Mark 6:3 -

Quote:

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

The historicity of James is uncertain. The Church cannot confirm the mother of James yet James is supposed to be the Lord's brother, and further, to make matters worse, the father of Jesus is not known to be human or his human father is unknown.

And, there is uncertainity about what James wrote.

Next, there is no information whatsoever about James the Lord's brother in the NT at all, except for a single passage in Galatians 1.19.

Galatians 1.19

Quote:

But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

That is all we know about James the Lord's brother. Absolutely nothing but confusion.

Who is this so-called historian?

Who is James?

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

05-14-2009, 03:48 PM	#381
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The discussion of dating has been split off here.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.