FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Philosophy & Religious Studies > History of Abrahamic Religions & Related Texts
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 01:23 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-29-2013, 07:20 PM   #61
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenorikuma View Post
@Grog: This is my suspicion as well. The James (ben Damneus) we read of in Josephus was merged with Paul's acquaintance James and speculation by Hegesippus to create the fictive character James the Just. Others variously tried equating him with James the brother of Jesus, James son of Zebedee, etc.
The evidence does suggest James the Just was a Pauline invention using Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1.

Galatians 1.19 specifically refers to an APOSTLE called James.

There was a tradition in the Jesus cult that there TWO Jameses who were Apostles.

James the Just was the Son of Alphaeus and the other was James the son of Zebedee who was killed by Herod.

It is specifically stated in Church History.

Church History 2.1
Quote:
But there were two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and was beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded.” Paul also makes mention of the same James the Just, where he writes, “Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.”
The apostle James in Galatians 1.19 is the character called the apostle James the son of Alphaeus.

James the son of Zebedee was killed by the sword according to Acts.

In Jerome's De Viris Illustribus it is specifically stated that James the Just who is called the Lord's brother was the son of the sister of Mary so could NOT be an actual brother of Jesus even if his father was Joseph.

Joseph was NOT the father of Jesus according to tradition.

Jerome's De Viris Illustribus
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...
Again, the Pauline Corpus is not corroborated--NONE of the Gospel authors wrote about an apostle called James the Lord's brother.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 07-29-2013, 08:03 PM   #62
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
There was a tradition in the Jesus cult that there TWO Jameses who were Apostles.

James the Just was the Son of Alphaeus and the other was James the son of Zebedee who was killed by Herod.
There are 2 James's listed in the disciple lists found in the gospels and Acts. However, the Son of Alphaeus is not also identified as James the Just. He may be, if Jerome's opinion is correct since Alphaeus is identified as Clopas, who by combining the crucifixion accounts of Matthew and John would have been Jesus' uncle., but it isn't 100% clear. The absence of any identification of James the Just in the Gospels and Acts is the source of confusion.

Jerome does quote the Gospel of Hebrews as saying James the Just was at the Last Supper, so it may be that he was one of the Twelve, but that isn't required, as surely more than 12 people journeyed with Jesus to Passover, and his cousins/family likely would have been among them (his mother and other relatives were at the cross).

Quote:
Also the Gospel according to the Hebrews, lately translated by me into Greek and Latin speech, which Origen often uses, tells, after the resurrection of the Saviour: 'Now the Lord, when he had given the linen cloth unto the servant of the priest, went unto James and appeared to him (for James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour wherein he had drunk the Lord's cup until he should see him risen again from among them that sleep)', and again after a little, 'Bring ye, saith the Lord, a table and bread', and immediately it is added, 'He took bread and blessed and brake and gave it unto James the Just and said unto him: My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son of Man is risen from among them that sleep'.
So there may have been 3 prominent James': 2 disciples and a 'brother' or 'cousin'.


Quote:
The apostle James in Galatians 1.19 is the character called the apostle James the son of Alphaeus.
This not established. See above.


Quote:
In Jerome's De Viris Illustribus it is specifically stated that James the Just who is called the Lord's brother was the son of the sister of Mary so could NOT be an actual brother of Jesus even if his father was Joseph.
This was Jerome's opinion, and as your quote shows he indicates that others had a different opinion. This shows that by Jerome's time it wasn't clear, though there appears to be agreement that he was related by blood to Jesus.

Quote:
Again, the Pauline Corpus is not corroborated--NONE of the Gospel authors wrote about an apostle called James the Lord's brother.
But neither did they identify by title an apostle called James the Just. What the Gospels DO corroborate is that Jesus had a brother (or cousin) named James (Matthew and Mark). As does Josephus. As does Heggesippus, who as a Nazarene himself (per Eusebius) should have known whether James the Just was Jesus' relative or not (He says he was).
TedM is offline  
Old 07-29-2013, 08:36 PM   #63
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
There was a tradition in the Jesus cult that there TWO Jameses who were Apostles.

James the Just was the Son of Alphaeus and the other was James the son of Zebedee who was killed by Herod.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
There are 2 James's listed in the disciple lists found in the gospels and Acts. However, the Son of Alphaeus is not also identified as James the Just. He may be, if Jerome's opinion is correct since Alphaeus is identified as Clopas, who by combining the crucifixion accounts of Matthew and John would have been Jesus' uncle., but it isn't 100% clear. The absence of any identification of James the Just in the Gospels and Acts is the source of confusion.
Writers of the Jesus cult claimed James the Just was the Son of the sister of Mary wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus.

There can be no confusion when there is ADDITIONAL details.

That is the specific purpose of ADDITIONAL details to resolve ambiguity.

Again, examine the fragments of Papias.

Quote:
Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphæus, who was the mother of James the bishop and apostle, and of Simon and Thaddeus, and of one Joseph
In the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles an apostle James is also listed as the SON of ALPHAEUS.

In Church History 2.1, James the Just is ONE of the TWO Jameses--the other was beheaded.

Acts 12:1-2 KJV
Quote:
1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
James the brother of John is apostle James the Son of Zebedee.

James the Just is apostle James son of Alphaeus.

Essentially, the Pauline Corpus is NOT corroborated and there is NO support in or out the Canon.

Galatians 1.19 is a source of fiction.

The Lord Jesus of the NT had NO human brother called apostle James.

In fact, in Josephus, there is NO character called an apostle or apostle James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 07-29-2013, 10:35 PM   #64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
In the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles an apostle James is also listed as the SON of ALPHAEUS.
There was more than one Alphaeus walking around. In fact, Matthew/Levi's father was also an Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), yet he isn't listed as James' brother.

Nevertheless, I am somewhat comfortable with your conclusion that:

Quote:
James the Just is apostle James son of Alphaeus.

However, I don't think your conclusion here follows, and I'll tell you why below it:

Quote:
Essentially, the Pauline Corpus is NOT corroborated and there is NO support in or out the Canon.

Galatians 1.19 is a source of fiction.

The Lord Jesus of the NT had NO human brother called apostle James.
Two reasons: First, as I understand it, the term "brother" back in those days was applied to cousins. As such, 1:19 is strongly corroborated by the gospels (since his aunt had a son named James - ie = Jesus' cousin) and Jerome says that James the Just was James the son of Alphaeus, who was both an apostle and the cousin (="brother") of Jesus.

Second, Josephus corroborates that Jesus Christ had a brother named James who was likely was in a prominent position in Jerusalem. Josephus didn't have to indicate that he was bishop of Christians or called James the Just to corroborate, in great part, Gal 1:19.
TedM is offline  
Old 07-29-2013, 11:18 PM   #65
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
In the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles an apostle James is also listed as the SON of ALPHAEUS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
There was more than one Alphaeus walking around. In fact, Matthew/Levi's father was also an Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), yet he isn't listed as James' brother.
Galatians 1.18-19 deals SPECIFICALLY with Apostles called Peter and James.

Galatians 1. 18-19
Quote:
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. 19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
It is now an extremely simple matter to resolve--a piece of cake. James is claimed to be an Apostle.

There are at least FOUR lists of the Apostles in the Canon.

1. Matthew 10.
Quote:
2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
2. Mark 3
Quote:
16 And Simon he surnamed Peter; 17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder: 18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite, 19 And Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed him...
3. Luke 6
Quote:
13 And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; 14 Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, 15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, 16 And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor.
4. Acts 1
Quote:
13 And when they were come in , they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
There is NO apostle that is called the Lord's brother in the FOUR lists of Apostles.

As soon as it was claimed that the Pauline writer saw an APOSTLE called James it was either the Son of Zebedee or the Son of Alphaeus.

The Pauline Corpus is a source of fiction based on the FOUR lists in the Canon and the writings attributed to Eusebius, Papias and Jerome.

In and out the Canon, the character Jesus had NO human brother called Apostle James.

Galatians was most likely composed AFTER the writings of Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 and AFTER the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 01:45 AM   #66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grog View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMacSon View Post
That's partly the point - as a co-leader just before the fall of the Temple, it is more than possible stories of him, or elaborated stories started around him, have been incorporated in the later stories -

"Both made speeches to try to bring the people to reason"

I do think this is a plausible explanation for the evolving stories around "James the Just." I think it is possible that these stories stem from a misreading of Josephus' related passage.
Which stories are you proposing "stem from a misreading of Josephus' related passage"?
  1. Hegesippus's?
  2. Eusebius'?
  3. some of the NT stories??
  4. a combination? or
  5. all?
MrMacSon is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 06:18 AM   #67
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
There is NO apostle that is called the Lord's brother in the FOUR lists of Apostles.
You apparently didn't read or follow what I said about that. There is a decent case to be made for saying that Clopas and Alphaeus are the same person based on the Aramaic and Greek. The gospels mention a Mary, the sister of Jesus' mother had a son named James, and was married to Clopas. That James then could be the Apostle James, son of Alphaeus. That would make this James a cousin to Jesus. Since there was no Aramaic word for 'cousin' the translation to Greek would have been 'brother', it appears. Therefore James the son of Alphaeus in the Gospels would have been stated to have been Jesus' brother. That's the line of reasoning. Jerome specifically corroborates all of this, as you pointed out.

Secondly Josephus corroborates that James and Jesus Christ were considered 'brothers', and it is likely (since he bothered to even mention James) that James was prominent in Jerusalem.

Plus 2 gospels mention a James being the Lord's brother, without specifically stating he was an apostle. However, one could be an 'apostle' without being in the list of Twelve! Remember, Paul considered himself an apostle.

In addition, one need not conclude that the James of Gal 1:19 is also James the 'pillar'/leader in Gal 2, although most assume that.

Therefore Gal 1:19 is corroborated much more than you seem to realize.
TedM is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 07:20 AM   #68
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
There is NO apostle that is called the Lord's brother in the FOUR lists of Apostles.
You apparently didn't read or follow what I said about that. There is a decent case to be made for saying that Clopas and Alphaeus are the same person based on the Aramaic and Greek. The gospels mention a Mary, the sister of Jesus' mother had a son named James, and was married to Clopas. That James then could be the Apostle James, son of Alphaeus. That would make this James a cousin to Jesus. Since there was no Aramaic word for 'cousin' the translation to Greek would have been 'brother', it appears. Therefore James the son of Alphaeus in the Gospels would have been stated in to have been Jesus' brother. That's the line of reasoning. Jerome specifically corroborates all of this, as you pointed out.

Secondly Josephus corroborates that James and Jesus Christ were considered 'brothers', and it is likely (since he bothered to even mention James) that James was prominent in Jerusalem.
You should be starting to doubt this reference.

I have had an argument here for years that Origen, saying he knew of the James story from Josephus, didn't get it from him, because Josephus certainly says nothing about the fall of Jerusalem being related to the death of James. Try and find any definite Josephan information in Origen, CC 1.42. None there. Instead it is probable that Origen intuited this idea from his reading of Hegesippus (a name confused in antiquity with Josephus), who notes that the fall of Jerusalem happened "immediately after" the death of James. Origen confused Josephus with Hegesippus. A later scribe, reading Origen couldn't find the reference in Josephus so it would seem left a note in the margin, "the brother of Jesus called christ", which later crept into the text. This explains why we have the horrible syntax in Josephus.

It always stuns me that scholars can take Josephus nowhere else talking about the messiah (christ), yet doing so in both instances of a reference to Jesus. It's incredible and a sure indicator of a christian scribal hand at work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Plus 2 gospels mention a James being the Lord's brother, without specifically stating he was an apostle. However, one could be an 'apostle' without being in the list of Twelve! Remember, Paul considered himself an apostle.

In addition, one need not conclude that the James of Gal 1:19 is also James the 'pillar'/leader in Gal 2, although most assume that.

Therefore Gal 1:19 is corroborated much more than you seem to realize.
Actually no corroboration involved. We see that it required a later interpretation that accepted the special κυριος bring used for Jesus, leading to the development of Hegesippus's tradition fragment, used by Origen, then inserted into Josephus. This is the churning over of ideas in a developing tradition. AJ 20.200 which originally talked of James and certain others was changed to reflect what Origen got from his reading of Hegesippus.
spin is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 07:38 AM   #69
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
There is NO apostle that is called the Lord's brother in the FOUR lists of Apostles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
You apparently didn't read or follow what I said about that.
Apparently, you do not read Galatians 1.18-19. Again, the Galatians writer is specifically claiming that he met TWO apostles in Jerusalem.

One was Peter and the other was James the Lord's brother.

Again, there are Two Jameses who were apostles and NONE was called the Lord's brother.

One apostle James was the Son of Zebedee and the other apostle James was the Son of Alphaeus.

In the Canon, Jesus was NOT the Son of Zebedee or the Son of Alphaeus--Jesus was born AFTER his mother was made PREGNANT by a Spirit.

Again, this was an extremely easy matter to resolve. Let us now continue and examine the Parents of Jesus.

Matthew 1
Quote:
This is how the birth of Jesus Christ took place. When Mary his mother was engaged to Joseph, before they were married, she became pregnant by the Holy Spirit.
The conception by a SPIRIT is corroborated in gLuke 1.

Luke 1
Quote:
26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28 And the angel came in unto her, and said ............................31 And, behold , thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS............................................. ....... 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be , seeing I know not a man?

35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Again, we have ZERO corroboration for Galatians 1.19 in the Canon. None of the Apostles listed were the son of a SPIRIT.

Jesus was the Son of a Holy Spirit and Mary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM
...Plus 2 gospels mention a James being the Lord's brother, without specifically stating he was an apostle. However, one could be an 'apostle' without being in the list of Twelve! Remember, Paul considered himself an apostle.
I am extremely delighted that you say "Paul" considered himself an apostle because you have actually highlighted the fundamental problem with the Pauline Corpus.

The claim that Pauline writers were Apostles is NOT corroborated in the Gospels.

The Pauline Corpus is a source of fiction, fraud, forgeries, false attribution, multiple unknown authors and was unknown up to at least 180 CE.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 07:38 AM   #70
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
You should be starting to doubt this reference.
I do, and it's on my list to look at someday.

Quote:
It always stuns me that scholars can take Josephus nowhere else talking about the messiah (christ), yet doing so in both instances of a reference to Jesus.
It doesn't seem odd to me, as long as Josephus made it clear that Jesus was 'called' Christ.


Quote:
Actually no corroboration involved. We see that it required a later interpretation that accepted the special κυριος bring used for Jesus, leading to the development of Hegesippus's tradition fragment, used by Origen, then inserted into Josephus. This is the churning over of ideas in a developing tradition. AJ 20.200 which originally talked of James and certain others was changed to reflect what Origen got from his reading of Hegesippus.
You seem to not understand what the meaning of 'corroboration' is. Maybe you meant to say 'proven' instead of 'involved'. The fact that Origen clearly attributes mention of James to Josephus means that either he corroborates James' role correctly or he corroborates it incorrectly. Theories about Origen being 'confused' need some pretty good support to be taken seriously. Maybe that exists..dunno.
TedM is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:19 PM.

Top

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