James the Brother of Jesus, David Eisenman

[InvisibleBallots]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/014025773X/102-3223623-7790551?v=glance&st=*

Robert Eisenman, one of the most eminent researchers of early Christianity working today, has produced an exhaustive study of the historical milieu at the time of Jesus and come to the conclusion that James, rather than Peter, was heir to his teachings. Because the historical material regarding James is actually quite plentiful, a clear picture arises not only in regard to who James was, but by extension, who Jesus was also. Controversy is assured; still, given a patient reading, one will discover that Eisenman's research is meticulous, his arguments cogent, and his conclusions persuasive. This should prove to be a popular and influential book.

In previous writings (most recently, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, LJ 2/1/93), Eisenman drew attention to apparent parallels between the Qumran community reflected in the scrolls and the early Jewish Christian community led by James, the brother of Jesus. In his latest work, he attempts to examine further those parallels and to rescue James from "the scrapheap of history." Eisenman believes James's role in early Christianity has been downplayed in the tradition(s) preserved in the New Testament, primarily the Gospels and Acts. Vestiges of the real James are blurred. Eisenman, therefore, chooses to place more confidence in extra-biblical writings, especially the Dead Sea Scrolls, for understanding James and his role in early Christianity; he takes every opportunity to deprecate the writings of the New Testament (except where they can be pressed into service to strengthen his case). At times it is difficult to determine whether the author's goal is to reclaim James or defame the New Testament. This piece of tendentious research is not the key to unlocking anything about early Christianity.

(To save everyone some time: My agenda when posting Fomenko, was of course, to spread Russian supremacism to DU. When posting Yahuda, my agenda was to promote Greco-fascism. By posting Eisenman, my newest secret agenda is to promote fundamentalist Islam!)

[InvisibleBallots]

1. remember the "James Ossuary"?

Sort of related to many of the claims of Fomenko - it took, what, 5 years from the publication of Eisenmann, to someone creating a fraudulent artifact - which originally was dated as contemporary of James - and trying to pass it off as authentic. Back in the 1300-1500s, discerning between authentic and fraudulent artifacts was mostly guesswork, since they simply did not have our technology then.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1036620679267_14/?hub=SciTech

In a souvenir shop on the Via Dolorosa, an antiquities dealer studied a photo of what may -- just may -- be the oldest archaeological link to Jesus. Then he shrugged.

It's quite possible, he said, that he handled the limestone burial box with the inscription "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." But he couldn't remember. Over the past 40 years, the Palestinian dealer said, he and his late father sold hundreds of these ossuaries that were snatched from burial caves in the slopes near Jerusalem's Old City.

[On the Road]

2. One of the Five Books that Has Influenced Me Most

Eisenmann revolutionized my thinking about Jesus by bringing into discussion a whole wealth of alternate material and making a compelling argument on why Paul did not represent Jesus at all and should be pretty much disregarded.

I wrote one of the 61 reviews on Amazon. Eisenmann's assistant actually wrote me saying that he had read the review and appreciated it. I'll attach it as a reply to this post.

Eisenmann was supposed to come out with a new book in Spring 2000, but it never appeared. Amazon shows a book called "The Gospel Code" to be released in May 2005 by a Robert Eisenmann, who I assume is the same guy.

[On the Road]

3. Reivew I Wrote on Amazon

Incredible Detail!, June 24, 1998
Reviewer: Jack D. Neefus (College Park, MD USA)

This book needs all 1112 pages--there is no fluff here. Personally, I feel honored as a reader by being provided with such extensive quotations and background as Eisenman provides in order to illuminate his reasoning process. This allows me as a reader to evaluate the data myself and judge whether I think his conclusions are warranted.

'Jesus was like James' is the thesis of this book, and Eisenman not only illuminates who James was, but makes it very difficult to draw a picture of Jesus that is too far from James. (I've been trying to find some wiggle room, and it's difficult!)

Some of the things this book taught me or persuaded me were probable:

o 1st Century Judea was more violently polarized than is often depicted.

o James was the chief opposition priest, leading the popular movement against the accomodationist priests. He was very powerful and controversial even apart from his relationship to Jesus.

o The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was originally attributed to the death of James, not Jesus.

o James was a Nazirite (devoted to God) from birth. He was a lifelong vegetarian, teetotaller, and virgin. He never cut his hair.

o Jesus' family were probably Rechabites, a tradition combining Jewish asceticism along with manual trades such as metalworking or carpentry.

o Apparently, Paul murderously assaulted James shortly before Paul's conversion.

o Large sections of Paul's epistles are devoted to lengthy personal attacks on James which are quite gratuitously nasty. (James also personally attacks Paul in his epistle.)

o Paul was a Roman accomodationist after his conversion (as well as before).

o Paul seems to have been a Herodian, i.e. related by blood to Herod the Great's family.

o The Essenes of the Dead Sea Scrolls were (or became) Jewish Christians.

All the above items (except the Rechabite one) come directly from historical and patristic sources. (That is, they are not based on 'interesting similarities', such as the idea that Jesus might have been a wandering! sage in the cynic tradition.)

There's a lot more. Eisenman was not convincing to me on everything:

o For my taste, he draws too many conclusions from linguistic similarities (eg, frequent references to 'nets' or 'casting down' in the NT and the Dead Sea Scrolls). Perhaps it's more stiking in the original texts.

o He often collapses two or three characters into one, such as the disciple James and James the brother of Jesus. On the other hand, his solution to Jesus' family structure is strikingly elegant in light of the many conflicting lists and references.

Yeah, I guess the writing style didn't always sparkle, but I could not put this book down. I can't wait for the second volume!