Runboard.com
Слава Україні!


runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4 

 
gnastynate Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 05-2011
Posts: 142
Reply | Quote
James VS. Paul (an offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


As a part of the discussion of the book James the Brother of Jesus by Robert Eisenman it was found that the author is of the opinion that James and probably Jude are good and valid writings that express the same message that Jesus taught. The author is also of the opinion that Paul distorted the teachings of Jesus and created a Christianity that was never supposed to be. The purpose of this thread is to compare and contrast James and Paul

Last edited by gnastynate, 6/19/2011, 5:00 pm
6/14/2011, 8:53 pm Link to this post Send Email to gnastynate   Send PM to gnastynate Blog
 
BornAgain9 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 07-2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 691
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

gnastynate ...

As a part of the discussion of the book James the Brother of Jesus by Robert Eisenman it was found that the author is of the opinion that James and probably Jude are good and valid writings that express the same message that Jesus taught. The author is also of the opinion that Paul distorted the teachings of Jesus and created a Christianity that was never supposed to be. The purpose of this thread is to compare and contrast James and Paul



Paul did say that what he taught he learned from no man. If there is no God, then what he taught came from his own imagination. The important point is Paul is basically admitting that the reason his teaching is so different from that of the apostles is that he did not get it from them. Paul teaches that the apostles, those who followed Jesus, those who spent day and night with him, actually misunderstood Jesus and that he (Paul), who had never known Jesus, and who disagreed with Jesus' followers about what Jesus taught, actually knew Jesus better than they. Does that really make sense? Eisenman says no, it doesn't. His reasoning is that if you can track down what James and the others believed, then you will likely grasp much of what the living Jesus taught them. Now that makes sense.

6/14/2011, 9:13 pm Link to this post Send Email to BornAgain9   Send PM to BornAgain9 ICQ Blog
 
gnastynate Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 05-2011
Posts: 142
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

BornAgain9 ...

quoting

gnastynate ...

As a part of the discussion of the book James the Brother of Jesus by Robert Eisenman it was found that the author is of the opinion that James and probably Jude are good and valid writings that express the same message that Jesus taught. The author is also of the opinion that Paul distorted the teachings of Jesus and created a Christianity that was never supposed to be. The purpose of this thread is to compare and contrast James and Paul



Paul did say that what he taught he learned from no man. If there is no God, then what he taught came from his own imagination. The important point is Paul is basically admitting that the reason his teaching is so different from that of the apostles is that he did not get it from them. Paul teaches that the apostles, those who followed Jesus, those who spent day and night with him, actually misunderstood Jesus and that he (Paul), who had never known Jesus, and who disagreed with Jesus' followers about what Jesus taught, actually knew Jesus better than they. Does that really make sense? Eisenman says no, it doesn't. His reasoning is that if you can track down what James and the others believed, then you will likely grasp much of what the living Jesus taught them. Now that makes sense.



It makes sense if:

A.) you don't believe in God
B.) you don't compare their belief to the scriptures they claim to be following

I really hoped to get my first comparison up tonight but between playing outside with my kids and getting caught up in other posts I didn't get around to it. I will try to have some prepared for tomorrow night though.

6/14/2011, 9:36 pm Link to this post Send Email to gnastynate   Send PM to gnastynate Blog
 
Bookworm88 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

BornAgain9 ...
Paul did say that what he taught he learned from no man. If there is no God, then what he taught came from his own imagination. The important point is Paul is basically admitting that the reason his teaching is so different from that of the apostles is that he did not get it from them.

I don't think Paul is in any way admitting that his message is different from the apostles. He is just saying that he got the message in the same way that the apostles got the message, that is, direct from the primary source. He didn't get the message second-hand from the apostles. Paul's message was not all that different from what the apostles were told to teach. In Luke 24:44-47, Jesus summarised the message that all the apostles would be teaching.
44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Jesus specifically said that this message would be preached "to all nations," not just to the Jews, and it was to include his resurrection. Paul was being obedient to the words of Jesus.

 
quoting

Paul teaches that the apostles, those who followed Jesus, those who spent day and night with him, actually misunderstood Jesus and that he (Paul), who had never known Jesus, and who disagreed with Jesus' followers about what Jesus taught, actually knew Jesus better than they. Does that really make sense?

Do you have a Bible verse from one of Paul's books that has Paul saying that the apostles misunderstood Jesus? I mean, there are some verses in the Gospels themselves which talk about the disciples not understanding what Jesus was saying, but I can't think of any passages in which Paul talks about the disciples not understanding something.


 
quoting

Eisenman says no, it doesn't. His reasoning is that if you can track down what James and the others believed, then you will likely grasp much of what the living Jesus taught them. Now that makes sense.

Unless, of course, James was the one misunderstanding what Jesus was teaching. Then, when you track down what James was teaching, you would get the misunderstanding. James the brother of Jesus wasn't one of the original 12 apostles, after all.

6/15/2011, 11:18 pm Link to this post Send Email to Bookworm88   Send PM to Bookworm88
 
BornAgain9 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 07-2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 691
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

Bookworm88 ...
quoting

BornAgain9 ...
Eisenman says no, it doesn't. His reasoning is that if you can track down what James and the others believed, then you will likely grasp much of what the living Jesus taught them. Now that makes sense.

Unless, of course, James was the one misunderstanding what Jesus was teaching...


Which Pauline doctrine wants everyone to believe. The message of Jesus expressed by the Jamesians was very different from Paul's teachings about Jesus. The Pseudo-Clementines says that Jesus appointed James his successor. This would imply that Jesus was happy with James' understanding of him. And if they were brothers then they knew each other very well.


quoting

Bookworm88 ...
Then, when you track down what James was teaching, you would get the misunderstanding. James the brother of Jesus wasn't one of the original 12 apostles, after all.


I think Eisenman's view is that James, the brother of Jesus, was one of the original twelve. If this is true then it was important for the Paulines to hide this fact (it would help their cause to do so). Eisenman argues that the NT creates a confusion of characters named James to confound the historical reality. He also argues that in the earliest documents there is ever only one James mentioned -- that is the brother of Jesus (this is off the top of my head now, so I don't have the page numbers). Do you recall Eisenman saying these things?

I suppose these are not things most Christians would want to believe. Eisenman, I think uses the historical documents to make these assertions, and it would seem that from a secular understanding of history these things begin falling into place as Eisenman explains them.

Now, of course, you can say something like, "Well, in Acts, chapter such and such it says the disciples misunderstood Jesus," just as Paul stated, so nothing Eisneman says can be true; but then there would be no point in examining the literature outside the Bible.

________

For some 150 years biblical scholars have acknowledged that the Gospels are not historically accurate. Eisenman does not give reasons for this; he just accepts this and moves on (because in his mind this fact is already clearly established). I think this realization over his approach came as something as a surprise to you, but I think that in order to accept his other arguments this one fact needs to be established first. Other books look as this issue, while Eisenman does not. We may be putting the cart before the horse in examining Eisenman before clearing up this other matter that stand in the way of understanding him. The problem is, I fear, you will want to reject any other historical consideration if it doesn't agree with passages in the Gospels.
6/16/2011, 9:05 pm Link to this post Send Email to BornAgain9   Send PM to BornAgain9 ICQ Blog
 
Bookworm88 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

BornAgain9 ...
For some 150 years biblical scholars have acknowledged that the Gospels are not historically accurate. Eisenman does not give reasons for this; he just accepts this and moves on (because in his mind this fact is already clearly established). I think this realization over his approach came as something as a surprise to you, but I think that in order to accept his other arguments this one fact needs to be established first. Other books look as this issue, while Eisenman does not. We may be putting the cart before the horse in examining Eisenman before clearing up this other matter that stand in the way of understanding him. The problem is, I fear, you will want to reject any other historical consideration if it doesn't agree with passages in the Gospels.

Are you lumping all biblical scholars into one group as if there was some monolithic belief system of all biblical scholars? There are plenty of biblical scholars who would disagree with Eisenman.

I have no problem looking at "other historical considerations" to get some idea of what they say, but wouldn't those other documents from way back when also have the same sort of flaws that the gospels are accused of having? I'm not sure why they should be given MORE consideration than the gospels. Eisenman almost seems to be saying that the main proof of their authenticity is their disagreement with the scriptures. I'll have to find the quote that gave me that impression.

6/16/2011, 10:07 pm Link to this post Send Email to Bookworm88   Send PM to Bookworm88
 
gnastynate Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 05-2011
Posts: 142
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


Ok, Swamp People, Pawn Stars and the other thread is keeping me from getting this post started, but I'm going to get a few.

Here's just a little background information. James was sending his letter to converted Jews while Paul's letters are mostly to gentile converts or to various traveling partners. Please keep this difference of audiences in mind when trying to understand what is being said and why.

Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;


quoting

1Pe 4:12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:
1Pe 4:13 But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
1Pe 4:14 If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.



Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
Jas 1:4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

quoting

Rom 5:3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;
Rom 5:4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope:




Jas 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Jas 1:6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.

quoting


Mar 11:24 Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.

1Ti 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.



Jas 1:7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
Jas 1:8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

quoting


Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.




Jas 1:9 Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted:
Jas 1:10 But the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away.
Jas 1:11 For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.

quoting


1Ti 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

1Ti 6:9 But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
1Ti 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
1Ti 6:11 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
1Ti 6:12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.




Jas 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him

quoting


1Co 9:25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

2Ti 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.



I'm going to stop there for now because I really need to sleep and that's been in short supply lately. I also want to see what kind of complaints this causes before I go to more trouble.

Last edited by gnastynate, 6/17/2011, 5:53 pm
6/16/2011, 10:12 pm Link to this post Send Email to gnastynate   Send PM to gnastynate Blog
 
gnastynate Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 05-2011
Posts: 142
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


Ok, I'm going to assume then that we all agree thus far that Paul and James were teaching the same thing in slightly different ways to different people. I will continue as time permits.
6/19/2011, 5:02 pm Link to this post Send Email to gnastynate   Send PM to gnastynate Blog
 
Bookworm88 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

gnastynate ...
  I also want to see what kind of complaints this causes before I go to more trouble.

Oh, I hadn't noticed that you were wanting for complaints before you continued on. emoticon
 Okay. For verses 1-2, you compared verses from Peter instead of verses from Paul. How's that? I expect better. emoticon

6/19/2011, 9:40 pm Link to this post Send Email to Bookworm88   Send PM to Bookworm88
 
gnastynate Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 05-2011
Posts: 142
Reply | Quote
Re: James VS. Paul (a offshoot of James the Brother of Jesus)


quoting

Bookworm88 ...

quoting

gnastynate ...
  I also want to see what kind of complaints this causes before I go to more trouble.

Oh, I hadn't noticed that you were wanting for complaints before you continued on. emoticon
 Okay. For verses 1-2, you compared verses from Peter instead of verses from Paul. How's that? I expect better. emoticon



I realize that, and I'm glad you pointed it out. The book states that the Peter as we know and see him through the NT is a corrupted and modified version of the real deal so I'm including him in the comparison when possible just to show harmony throughout his works as well.

Basically I just wanted to know if anyone thought the comparisons defied simple logic so far. I did go far enough to compare some verses that the book says disagree with each other so I was wondering if we are all in agreement that Paul and James, while they may or may not have disliked each other, did seem to be teaching the same things with different ways of emphasis.

6/20/2011, 8:43 pm Link to this post Send Email to gnastynate   Send PM to gnastynate Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4 





You are not logged in (login)



Back To Top