Peter & James & the Church of Jerusalem not Christian?

[Bernard Muller]

I have a new blog post on a key point for my case. Feel free to comment at will.

Title: Did the early Galilean pillars of the Church of Jerusalem (Peter, John & Jesus' brother James) become Christians?

Teaser: There is an abundance of evidence and clues leading to a NO answer, despite the effort by the early Christian authors to show otherwise.

URL: http://historical-jesus.info/108.html

Cordially, Bernard

[John2]

Hi Bernard,

I realize this is not a settled issue, but to share my viewpoint I think the Letter of James was written by James "the brother of the Lord" of Galatians (whether he was a brother of Jesus or not), or at least someone before 70 CE with a similar point of view. And while the author doesn't use the word "Christian" (perhaps it didn't exist at the time and place of the letter's writing, cf. Acts 11:26: "The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch."), this is implied in the introduction that says "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ" (1:1).

[Bernard Muller]

to John 2,
I noted that also: "The letter has very little Christianity in it (mostly two occurrences of "Jesus Christ") and is very much Jewish in character."
I take the letter was put together by a Jewish Christian, from preaching pieces as heard from James, the brother of Jesus, for Jewish Christian audiences, around 60-65 CE.
But because James was not known to be Christian, the author did not dare to put much Christian stuff in the mouth of James, just "Christ" as a surname for Jesus in 1:1 and 2:1, the second time as "Jesus Christ of glory".

Cordially, Bernard

[outhouse]

Did the early Galilean pillars of the Church of Jerusalem



Cordially, Bernard

My personal view is there is already a mistake in calling the Galilean followers pillars, and belonging to the house in Jerusalem Paul talks about.

I think they were not pillars, that they ran at arrest, that there were only his inner circle, and not 12 at his arrest.

I don't see Aramaic Galileans hanging out in Jerusalem, I don't see them condoning a Hellenistic perversion of their religion.

[John2]

Bernard,

You wrote:

"the author did not dare to put much Christian stuff in the mouth of James, just "Christ" as a surname for Jesus in 1:1 and 2:1, the second time as "Jesus Christ of glory".

What's "Christian stuff" in mid-first century Judea (assuming that the letter is genuine), if not the kind of things the Letter talks about and its author's declaration that he is a slave of Jesus Christ and exaltation of him as "Lord"? The Letter is also arguably concerned about the teaching of Paul, which is another indication of its Christian character. I would expect what now is called Jewish Christianity in mid first century Judea to have "very little Christianity in it," but the fact remains that there is some, so in my view it and its author are Christian.

[Bernard Muller]

to John2,

What's "Christian stuff" in mid-first century Judea (assuming that the letter is genuine), if not the kind of things the Letter talks about and its author's declaration that he is a slave of Jesus Christ and exaltation of him as "Lord"? The Letter is also arguably concerned about the teaching of Paul, which is another indication of its Christian character. I would expect what now is called Jewish Christianity in mid first century Judea to have "very little Christianity in it," but the fact remains that there is some, so in my view it and its author are Christian.

The author is not James but the compiler of some of James sayings (I already said it in my previous post). That author also added some of his own stuff. And yes, I think there are some allusions against the preaching of others, including Paul & other apostles "in Christ" (1:25, 2:10, 12, 2:14-3-12).
http://historical-jesus.info/38.html

Cordially, Bernard

[Bernard Muller]

To outhouse,

I think they were not pillars, that they ran at arrest, that there were only his inner circle, and not 12 at his arrest.

They were not pillars yet and 12 disciples is likely an invention of "Mark".

I don't see Aramaic Galileans hanging out in Jerusalem, I don't see them condoning a Hellenistic perversion of their religion.

They did not hang around Jerusalem but nevertheless, some of them resurfaced in the city years later, as part of a community whose proto-Christian beliefs were still very compatible with orthodox Judaism.

Anyway, that's what I argued here (with evidence), among other places:
http://historical-jesus.info/11.html
http://historical-jesus.info/12.html
http://historical-jesus.info/hjes3x.html

Cordially, Bernard

[John2]

Bernard,

It sounds like we have a similar view for the most part on the provenance of the Letter of James, because even though I'm comfortable with the possibility that it could have been written by James, I'm equally comfortable with the idea that it was written by one of his followers (and before 70 CE in any event). So we see things pretty much eye to eye.

But I don't buy the idea that the Letter isn't Christian when its author identifies himself as a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. What is that if not a Christian?

And Paul says that the churches of Judea were "in Christ" too in Gal. 1:22-24:

"I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only heard the report: 'The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.' And they praised God because of me."

And I'm baffled by what you say in your opening link about Hegesippus presenting James as being not a Christian, because he says that upon his death James was "a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ" (EH 2.23).

[Bernard Muller]

to John2,
Did you read http://historical-jesus.info/38.html?
with that conclusion:
But let's notice NO parable, NO Jesus as a teacher, NO "sacrifice", NO Jesus in heaven, NO future resurrections, NO Son of God, essentially reflecting James was not a Christian as confirmed here and here and here.

"I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only heard the report: 'The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.' And they praised God because of me."

The churches of Judea in Christ did not necessarily include the church of Jerusalem.
As a matter of fact, never Paul declared that church, or any of its members were "in Christ".

And I'm baffled by what you say in your opening link about Hegesippus presenting James as being not a Christian, because he says that upon his death James was "a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ"

Did you read http://historical-jesus.info/83.html?
Yes that's what Hegesippus, a Christian wrote: no wonder. And that is relative to the last moment before James' death, where James would have come out of the closet (with the help of extracts from "Acts"!). And before that, he was not professing anything Christian about his brother, other than saying "the gate of Jesus", which does not have to refer to anything Christian.
And I never said Hegesippus presented James as being not a Christian. He certainly tried very hard to do so!

Cordially, Bernard

[TedM]

Hi Bernard,

All good points as usual. Perhaps you addressed this elsewhere, but it seems to me that Paul would have either not associated at all with the 'pillars' or would have mentioned that they didn't believe Jesus had been resurrected if that was the case. He had ample opportunity to do that every time he mentioned or alluded to them in all of his letters, and for him that was what Christianity was all about. What are your thoughts about that?