Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 6626
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:04 pm

I have read and reviewed positively the book of R.G.Price,
https://www.amazon.com/Deciphering-Gosp ... =r+g+price

In particular, I like the his proposed interpretation of Gal 1:19: James brother of Lord as the same James "Son of Zebedee".

Especially, he says that the fourth gospel is against even the memory of the two sons of Zebedee. Hence I think that when the GJohn's Jesus says: "I am the Gate", then he is polemizing implicitly against the previous claim made by James the Pillar Son of Zebedee: "I am the Gate of Jesus".

Note that in Mark there is also an episode where this John son of Zebedee would like that Jesus anathemizes the Independent Exorcist (a pauline figure). Hence he works as xenophobic filter of who has to enter in the sect: in this sense he is a "Gate of Jesus".

Note that the Cyrenaic episode is used by Mark to make irony about the Jesus's words: "who wants to be my disciple, let him take his cross and follow me". Hence Peter is replaced by the Cyrenaic as who has to follow the way of Jesus. Note that the gJohn's Jesus says polemically against Peter's claim to follow Jesus: "I am the way".

In addition to this, Arthur Drews noted who resembled the Cyrenaic as Bearer of the Pillars (hence for Mark the Cross, i.e. Jesus himself, is the true Gate and Way and Pillar of Jesus, not Peter or James):
Hercules/Melkart.

Image

Hence the name of Peter as Pillar is strictly connected with the his claim to be the only channel of communication with Jesus: he also is the Gate of Jesus.

Conclusion
Hegesippus, by identifying the James Pillar son of Zebedee "Brother of Lord" and "Gate of Jesus" with James the carnal brother of Jesus, started the legend that Jesus had a carnal brother caliph named James.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

rgprice
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by rgprice » Mon Sep 17, 2018 12:33 am

Hi Giuseppe, thank you for the review.

I think its clear that the idea that James the leader of the early Jesus cult in Jerusalem was a literal brother of Jesus didn't exist until the late 2nd century.

There are really two possibilities, one of which I didn't address in my book (but I'm adding to a 2nd edition).

1) Is that Paul really wrote "the Lord's brother", but no one took it to mean literal brother until much later, and Hegesippus recorded this view or perhaps was the first to offer this interpretation.
2) "the Lord's brother" was not originally in the text at all. Hegesippus is the late 2nd century made the claim prior to the addition of that text. The claim made by Hegesippus started the belief and led to the later insertion of that text into Galatians.

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6032
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by MrMacSon » Mon Sep 17, 2018 12:44 am

rgprice wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 12:33 am

Hi Giuseppe, thank you for the review.

I think its clear that the idea that James the leader of the early Jesus cult in Jerusalem was a literal brother of Jesus didn't exist until the late 2nd century.

There are really two possibilities, one of which I didn't address in my book (but I'm adding to a 2nd edition) -

1) Is that Paul really wrote "the Lord's brother", but no one took it to mean literal brother until much later, and Hegesippus recorded this view or perhaps was the first to offer this interpretation.

2) "the Lord's brother" was not originally in the text at all. Hegesippus is the late 2nd century made the claim prior to the addition of that text. The claim made by Hegesippus started the belief and led to the later insertion of that text into Galatians.
I think there are a number of scenario's like this where, after Church Fathers or commentators like Hegesippus mention something, it appears in the texts or doctrine: they seem to be influencers, at least, if not contributors per se.

User avatar
toejam
Posts: 753
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by toejam » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:46 am

Where does Hegesippus say James the brother is James son of Zebedee?
My study list: https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-bignell/judeo-christian-origins-bibliography/851830651507208

rgprice
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by rgprice » Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:09 am

I'm not sure exactly what Giuseppe is saying. What I said in the book is that James son of Zebedee was intended to represent the James who Paul met and talked about in his letters. That James was later misidentified by church leaders as the literal brother of Jesus, and thus led to a false split between James "son of Zebedee" and James brother of Jesus.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6626
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:11 am

rgprice wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 12:33 am
Is that Paul really wrote "the Lord's brother", but no one took it to mean literal brother until much later, and Hegesippus recorded this view or perhaps was the first to offer this interpretation.
Precisely that is what I had thought, in the incipit of the thread. Basically, I am imagining that James the Pillar (who will be called “son of Zebedee” by Mark) was also one who claimed to be 'the Gate of Jesus'.

Against that claim, the author of the Fourth Gospel put on Jesus the words “I am the Gate”, to reduce further the influence of James.

In the same way, if Mark invented the Cyrenaic episode to attack the Peter's claim to be the true Pillar (and note that the Cyrenaic is portrayed as a bearer of a cross: not coincidentially we have the portrait Hercules/Melkart who bears the Pillars in the hellenistic culture, see figure above), then we can infer that when the Johannine Jesus says ''I am the way", he is polemizing against Peter, too.

Note that the two Pillars, for Hercules, represent the two columns of the famous 'Pillars of Hercules' in Gades,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Hercules

the Gate towards the Atlantic Ocean. Hence their utility is to work as channel of communication between two distinct worlds. In the case of the Pillars of Jerusalem, they are the only Apostles who claim direct communication with Jesus on this earth.


Therefore my thesis is that Hegesippus was usurping, for the his invented carnal brother of Jesus, not only the title of “Gate of Jesus”, but also that of “Brother of Lord”. In other words, even Hegesippus had in mind the James “son of Zebedee” as the his James the “Gate of Jesus”, even if he claimed that he was the carnal brother of Jesus.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6032
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by MrMacSon » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:42 pm

R. Alan Culpepper, in John, the Son of Zebedee: The Life of a Legend,Univ of South Carolina Press, 1994, makes reference to conjecture by J.H. Bernard that "corruption in the text of Papias led to confusion of James the brother of Jesus and James the son of Zebedee and the corruption was then read as a reference to the deaths of James and John." (p. 172) https://books.google.com.au/books?id=-6 ... ee&f=false

I presume the article by J.H. Bernard is 'The Traditions as to the Death of John the Son of Zebedee' The Irish Church Quarterly Vol. 1, No. 1, Jan, 1908 https://www.jstor.org/stable/30066866?s ... b_contents

---------------
Attachments
Culpepepper1.PNG
Culpepepper1.PNG (495.08 KiB) Viewed 6805 times
Last edited by MrMacSon on Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:54 pm, edited 8 times in total.

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 6032
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by MrMacSon » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:45 pm

Culpepepper2.PNG
Culpepepper2.PNG (486.58 KiB) Viewed 6805 times

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1109
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by John T » Mon Sep 17, 2018 3:30 pm

rgprice wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:09 am
I'm not sure exactly what Giuseppe is saying. What I said in the book is that James son of Zebedee was intended to represent the James who Paul met and talked about in his letters. That James was later misidentified by church leaders as the literal brother of Jesus, and thus led to a false split between James "son of Zebedee" and James brother of Jesus.
Don't worry, not even Giuseppe is sure what he is saying.

I take it then that you don't agree with Robert Eisenmen that James the Just was the brother of Jesus?

Please expound on how you know that James, "son of Zebedee" was the James that Paul actually referred to instead of James the Just.

Thanks in advance.

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

rgprice
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Did Hegesippus break the equation "James brother of Lord = Son of Zebedee"?

Post by rgprice » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:16 pm

I'm assuming English isn't Giuseppe's first language.

I'm saying James the Just and James son of Zebedee and the James Paul met in Galatians are all actually the "same person". Except that James son of Zebedee is really just fictional character, but he's a fictional character based on the James mentioned in Galatians.

As for identifying who these people are, there is a lot of converging evidence. It's kind of a lot to go over here. Chapters 2 & 9 of my book deal heavily with the issue. Clearly the Peter, James and John in GMark are meant to represent the Peter, James and John described in Paul's letters.

Post Reply