'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by archibald » Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:33 pm

I am in the middle of reading this book:

Image

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Judas-Nazareth ... 1591431824

Here is Unterbrink's website on the topic (I am not sure when it was last updated):

https://judasthegalilean.weebly.com/

I am finding the thesis very interesting. Basically, it suggests that our 'Jesus' was really Judas The Galilean. Also that our 'Paul' was Josephus' Saul, a Herodian and a cousin of Agrippa I.

Have any of you much more-learned-than-me chaps (and/or chapesses) read or considered this (quite complicated) hypothesis, which is essentially historical rather than ahistorical?

I myself don't know whether to be sold on it completely or not.....just yet.

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5244
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by Peter Kirby » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:15 pm

For those of us less versed in Unterbrink, what do you find interesting or compelling about it?
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 10017
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:39 pm

Barrie Wilson is the guy who co-wrote that book with Simcha Jacobovich.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by archibald » Sat Dec 30, 2017 1:42 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:15 pm
For those of us less versed in Unterbrink, what do you find interesting or compelling about it?
Lots of different things. I can't say as I feel sure they all come together, but I can't help feeling he's on to something, or 'some things' if you like (particularly about Paul, as it happens).

What I like most is that he's a pretty thorough 'forensic detective', and that he mostly works with evidence, piecing bits together in interesting and plausible ways, rather than speculating about evidence that we don't have (though he does some of that too, but not much).

I also like that he does not seem to harbour any biases as regards salvaging anything much about 'Jesus' or 'Paul'. As such, I get no feeling that he is trying to rescue their historicity or their reputation, such is his decimation of them. To him, for example, the gospels are pretty much literary fiction.

To my mind, though he himself doesn't articulate it, his starting point is similar to Reza Aslan, in asking 'what sort of people tended to get crucified by the Romans in Judea in those days?'. Thereafter the similarities between his approach and Aslan's pretty much end.

His other 'starting premise' (imo a very reasonable and non-controversial one) is that in the very early days of the cult, Paul's preachings were at odds with those of an original and prior Jerusalem group of followers and that after Paul's version became the 'winner', the conflict was papered over.

My general view regarding the origins of christianity is basically 'we can never know', so I don't tend to completely rule in or out almost any thesis and we must always be cautious and tentative. The best we can aim for is breadth or depth of explanatory power (in explaining the available evidence). Unterbrink's thesis, be it correct or incorrect, at least seems to have that, imo. For instance, it could explain an apparent lack of independent references to Jesus and Paul, and it might even offer an explanation for the so-called (relative) silence of Paul.


Laters. I am heading out for the day.
Last edited by archibald on Sat Dec 30, 2017 3:08 am, edited 7 times in total.

archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by archibald » Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:11 am

Secret Alias wrote:
Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:39 pm
Barrie Wilson is the guy who co-wrote that book with Simcha Jacobovich.
Barrie Wilson only wrote the foreword? Author is Daniel Unterbrink.

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2521
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by DCHindley » Sat Dec 30, 2017 6:45 am

I've tried to get Daniel into a conversation (I think it was on FRDB) when he posted a link to the book, but he never responded to my post. I really don't know why Unterbrink zeroed in on "Judah the Galilean".

Judah the Galilean, IIRC, is somewhat of a composite figure based on both the leader of a rebel faction in the days of Archelaeus, and on speculations about the lineage of a couple of rebel bandit chiefs caught and executed between Jesus' time and the rebellion of 66 CE. The common link seems to be "Zealots." This subject is investigated by Cecil Roth, about whom John2 and I had a discussion (there are links to articles by Roth in those threads). Some of the more recent authorities on Josephus (S Mason, etc.) have also look at this angle, and "demythologize" the figures a bit, as technically Josephus does not use the term "zealot" except to describe a specific faction in revolutionary Jerusalem of the 60's-70s CE.

I guess that D. U. thinks these legends were later attributed to a Jesus who is presented as living in the early 30's CE, so a bit of a time shift into the future may be required here.

Alternatively, Frans V zeroes in on figures in the first Judean revolt against Rome, which he definitely thinks were projected backwards to the Jesus of the 30's CE.

All this forward and then backwards motion is making me dizzy! :cheeky:

DCH

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by Jax » Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:46 am

Sounds like it might have elements in common with A Shift in Time by Lena Einhorn and James the Brother of Jesus by Robert Eisenman.

Einhorn also proposes that the Gospels are fiction, using Josephus as a guide and backdating the material.

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by Jax » Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:04 am

From his website I see that he relies on Slavonic Josephus for some of his conclusions (unless I misunderstand him), but isn't Slavonic Josephus considered not usable as a source for a first century Jesus?

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by Jax » Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:08 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:15 pm
For those of us less versed in Unterbrink, what do you find interesting or compelling about it?
:lol: I just caught this.

From this and a comment by Dave below I take it that Daniel Unterbrink is know to these forums.

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2521
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: 'Judas of Nazareth' by Daniel Unterbrink

Post by DCHindley » Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:37 am

Jax wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:08 am
Peter Kirby wrote:
Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:15 pm
For those of us less versed in Unterbrink, what do you find interesting or compelling about it?
:lol: I just caught this.

From this and a comment by Dave below I take it that Daniel Unterbrink is know to these forums.
He comes up now and then, but no9t much discussion has come of it.

DCH

Post Reply