[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion James the Brother of Jesus
At 16:49 16/05/97 -0400, Dunnlaw@aol.com wrote:
>I have been slowly working my way through "James the Brother of Jesus." I'm
>only about half way through so far, but it seems to me that the broad stroke
>is something like the following:
>
>1. James was a Nazorean/Essene/Rachabite/ priest whose approach to his
>religion was in pari materi with the "Qumran Sect." (The implication is that
>so was his brother.)
I haven't read the book you cite however based on the evidence I have seen,
Ya'aquv was not only a Netzarim but he first paqiyd of the Netzarim. My
read, however, is that he, and Y'hoshua, while having certain sympathies for
the Qumran Tz'doqim and likely struggling to encourage unity, probably
suggested by the relationship to Yokhanan "Ha-Matbiyl," were very much more
closely aligned with the P'rushim than with the Qumran Tz'doqim.
>2. James was stoned by Herodian backed Pharisees because he was threatening
>their control of, inter alia, the Temple.
How could the priest by a P'rushim rather than a Pseudo-Tz'doqim? That
doesn't seem possible, much less likely. It seems to me that Ya'aquv was
stoned by Roman-backed Pseudo-Tz'doqim, *not* P'rushim, "because he was
threatening..."
>3. The "early church" (i.e., befoe Paul) had no message for Gentiles
>whatsoever.
True. The earliest source texts of the NT make no mention of gentiles
except for one Samaritan. The greek terms and phrases referred either to
"Hellenists," which were Jews, or to Jews "among the goyim," i.e., in Jewish
communities of the Diaspora.
>4. The gospels and Acts are not accurate renditions of what the message of
>James and his brother.
Also true.
>5. Paul was a Herodian/Roman backed Pharisee individual who used Jesus as a
>touchstone to develop a position substantially left of the Pharisees.
I'm interested in the evidence that he was Herodian/Roman backed. Eusebius
indicates that the Netzarim regarded Paul as an apostate, which means that
he was one of the proto-Christian, outside of Judaism (as an apostate from
Judaism having crossed the sine qua non of accepting the *entirety* of
Miyshnah). It would then follow that he would have been regarded as "using
Jxsus" to develop a position incompatible with Judaism (which included both
Netzarim and P'rushim).
>6. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the above.
Unjustified hyperbole. I think 4Q MMT makes some of these conclusions
unavoidable. But to say they confirm all of these things is logically an
overstatement.
>Is the foregoing a reasonable understanding of the book and do others agree
>with the tight parallels drawn between James and the Qumran Sect.
>
>Mark Dunn
>Dunnlaw@aol.com
I have no comment on the book as I haven't read it. However, based on what
I have learned so far -- which seems to contradict a "tight parallel* drawn
between Ya'aquv and the Qumran Sect, I'm very skeptical.
I remain open to the evidence, however.
Biy-V'rakhot Torah,
Yirmiyahu Ben-David
Paqiyd 16, Global Congregation of Nazarene Jews
Netzarim Viritual Community Center
www.netzarim.co.il
Ra'anana, Israel
Netzarim... Authentic