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

RE: [XTalk] The Jesus movement before the NT

Expand Messages
  • Lisbeth S. Fried
    Dear Bruce, I have always assumed that the James mentioned in Paul s letters who headed the Jerusalem church was Jesus physical brother (cf. J. Ant. 20:200).
    Message 1 of 73 , Dec 9, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Bruce,

      I have always assumed that the James mentioned in Paul's letters who headed
      the Jerusalem church was Jesus' physical brother (cf. J. Ant. 20:200).
      Is this contested now?

      Liz


      Lisbeth S. Fried, Ph.D.
      Department of Near Eastern Studies
      and the Frankel Center for Judaic Studies
      University of Michigan
      202 S. Thayer -- Room 4111
      Ann Arbor, MI 48104
      www.lizfried.com <http://www.lizfried.com/>

      I sent (too much) rain on one city, and sent no rain on another city; and
      still you did not return to me, says YHWH. (Amo 4:7-8 )





      _____

      From: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of E Bruce Brooks
      Sent: Friday, December 09, 2011 12:44 PM
      To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [XTalk] The Jesus movement before the NT




      To: XTalk
      In Response To: Liz Fried
      On: Jesus's Family
      From: Bruce

      LIZ: What is the evidence that Jesus' first followers, by that I assume his
      family, labeled him "Messiah?"

      BRUCE: To start with, the parenthetical assumption might need to be
      reconsidered. Mark, being the earliest of the Gospels, is presumptively the
      best source for relations between Jesus and his family. Mk 3:31-35 shows
      Jesus contrasting his lineal family with his, well, his family consisting of
      "whoever does the will of God." It would seem to follow that his lineal
      family and those pursuing the same Way as himself are two different groups,
      with no overlap between.

      It is always fun to see what the Second Tier Gospels do with such passages
      (including changes of arrangement), but the point of most probable
      historical relevance is the Markan version, including its sequence with
      other material (on which point, notice especially what happens to Mk
      3:20-21).

      E Bruce Brooks
      University of Massachusetts at Amherst






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • David Mealand
      This topic ran for a while back in January. I have just seen a review of a book on Philo which gives particular attention to Philo s use of some passages from
      Message 73 of 73 , Feb 16 10:50 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        This topic ran for a while back in January.

        I have just seen a review of a book on Philo
        which gives particular attention to Philo's
        use of some passages from the haftarot which, it is
        argued, match part of a later cycle of such readings.
        Naomi Cohen, Philo's Scriptures ... (Brill 2007) is
        the book, and a very interesting and detailed review
        of it by Tzvee Zahavy is in Review of Rabbinic
        Judaism 15 (2012) 133-136.

        David M.







        ---------
        David Mealand, University of Edinburgh


        --
        The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
        Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.