Re: James as a witness
- Jack wrote:
>I agree. One tool for "questing" the historical Jesus should beEusebius writes in his chapter; Vespasian to Trajan: Enemies within the
>"questing" the historical James. If little bro is going to run
>the store when you are gone, it's pretty likely that he has a
>similar education, mindset and ideas. There are evidences that both
>were educated. We don't know anything about Simon, Yosef and
>Yehudah and that alone may be a result of the "anti-family"
>campaign of the Paulists and the later even more intensified
>efforts of historical assassination by the patristics. After
>all, if you are going to have a "perpetual virgin" mother,
>it's a bit embarassing to have four brothers and a couple
church under item 20:
"And there still survived of the Lord's family the grandsons of Jude, who
was said to be His brother, humanly speaking. These were informed against
as being of David's line, and brought by the evocatus before Domitian
Caesar, who was as afraide of the advent of Christ as Herod had been.
Domitian asked them whether they were descended from David, and they
admitted it. Then he asked them what property they owned and what funds
they had at their disposa.. They replied that they had only 9,000 denarii
between them, half belonging to each; this, they said, was not available in
cash, but was the estimated vaue of only thirty-nine plethra of land, from
which they raised the money to pay their taxes and the wherewithal to
support themselves by their own toil."
Sounds to me as if the brothers and sisters really existed and knew of
their heritage. The above was reportedly stated by Hegesippus (whoever he
Maybe Jesus wasn't the peasant many seem to try to make him. Maybe he had
a prior agreement with those who later became disciples that when the time
was right he would call them. They were expecting the call and had no
problem following at that time.