Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] Re: Questions concerning Ant. 20.9.1

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    ... From: Geoff Hudson To: Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 1:47 PM Subject: [XTalk] Re: Questions
    Message 1 of 4 , May 13, 2003
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Geoff Hudson" <geoff.hudson@...>
      To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 1:47 PM
      Subject: [XTalk] Re: Questions concerning Ant. 20.9.1

      > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, Peter Kirby <kirby@e...> wrote:
      > > 1. How did the personage being used to identify James come to be
      > famous enough in Rome to be used for the purposes of identification?
      > > 2. Why don't we find out anything about James in this passage?
      > > 3. Why isn't the passage clear about whether James died?
      > Perhaps it was not Jesus who was known to be famous, but James. Then
      > it would have been unnecessary to say anything further about him. He
      > would have had to be well known by Romans and Jews alike. Proving
      > that James spent years in Rome is difficult, but that is what I think
      > he did. He probably went there, possibly with his brother John (I
      > see the two together), following the outbreak of persecution as
      > described in Acts. I think that much of the history lies buried in
      > the Clementine literature.

      The James mentioned by Josephus is the brother of Jesus, not the brother of
      John. None of the bar Joseph boys were named John. You are thinking of
      James, "the greater" who, along with John, was the son of Zebedee and
      Salome. Both Jesus' cousins. Another cousin, James, the "lesser," the
      brother of Matthew, both sons of Clopas/Alphaeus (Joseph's brother) may be
      named after the mutual grandfather mentioned in the genealogy of Matthew (if
      historical). Just Jim, Big Jim and Little Jim, all cousins. There is no
      evidence or foundation for either of these Jims (whatever their historicity)
      spending time in Rome although there is a tradition that "Big Jim" (like
      Paul) went to Spain.

      I wont comment on the rest of your post since getting your "Jakes" straight
      is seminal to the points made.

      In 49 CE, Claudius expelled the "Jews" (Christians and Jews alike) from Rome
      and the "Christ people" were well known in Rome because of it. The James
      you are referencing was killed in the Agrippan (Agrippa I) "roundup" as was
      probably his brother John. The second "roundup" by Ananus resulted in the
      death of James, the Just (and "others") but apparently not with the approval
      of Agrippa II. It is possible that "the others" condemned with James were
      other disciples (and perhaps other brothers of Jesus) who appear to
      disappear from history. If Jude, Simon and Joseph, Jr were also killed it
      may explain why a cousin (Shymeon), son of Clopas/Alphaeus, succeeded James
      instead of one of the other siblings.

      This is all speculative, of course.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.