The 40 days after his resurrection

  • Thread starter Thread starter StrawberryJam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

StrawberryJam

Guest
He speaks to Peter privately.
He speaks to James privately.

James is the head of the church in Jerusalem.

I know many things happened at this time, but for some reason I am finding this to be odd.
James is becoming more interesting to me.
 
Look what I found on this church history site: churchhistory101.com/century1-p6.php

But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his Memoirs. He writes as follows: "James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to the present day…He was holy from his mother’s womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel…
  • Church History II.23.5-6
Ever seen anything like that?
 
Look what I found on this church history site: churchhistory101.com/century1-p6.php

But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his Memoirs. He writes as follows: "James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to the present day…He was holy from his mother’s womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel…
  • Church History II.23.5-6
Ever seen anything like that?
Wait up. Is he like St. John the Baptist then???
 
Look what I found on this church history site: churchhistory101.com/century1-p6.php

But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his Memoirs. He writes as follows: "James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to the present day…He was holy from his mother’s womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel…
  • Church History II.23.5-6
Ever seen anything like that?
I am happy to have more information about James,

Thank you
 
This opens up more questions.

How many were so sanctifyed from the womb? Was St. John the Baptist less, or equal to others that are also sanctifyed from the womb, and how do protestants respond to this?
 
This opens up more questions.

How many were so sanctifyed from the womb? Was St. John the Baptist less, or equal to others that are also sanctifyed from the womb, and how do protestants respond to this?
Hi, StrawberryJam,

I’d say, from Jesus’ words when John the Baptist baptized Him, that John the Baptist was greater than others also sanctified in the womb.

I also think that James becoming the head of the Church in Jerusalem does not contradict our Lord’s pronouncement that on Peter will He build His church. The question here, is does Peter’s crucifixion precede James coming to head the Jerusalem Church?

God loves you,
Don
 
Hi, StrawberryJam,

I’d say, from Jesus’ words when John the Baptist baptized Him, that John the Baptist was greater than others also sanctified in the womb.

I also think that James becoming the head of the Church in Jerusalem does not contradict our Lord’s pronouncement that on Peter will He build His church. The question here, is does Peter’s crucifixion precede James coming to head the Jerusalem Church?

God loves you,
Don
Don, is there a number of sanctifyed in the womb named or mentioned in the bible? I can’t find anything on this.
Oh, and thanks for the homework assignment on the bolded. Just what I wanted today.
Thank you? I just love adding more to the pile.
 
Okay, first off – the fact that James didn’t drink, etc. is an indication that James (like Samson and other famous folks) was a Nazirite, a person who had taken certain vows. (Normally, religion and drinking did mix.)

Being “sanctified from the womb” is probably meant to mean that, like Samuel, his mother or his parents promised him to God before he was born (and possibly even promised that he’d be a Nazirite).
 
Nazorite was not an order, but an ascetic “lifestyle” that one swore to for a given length of time- six months, a year, etc. So one didn’t have to be a priest, or an Essene, but could experience the Godliness of the ascetic without making a lifetime commitment. They had certain rules on eating and consumption and ritual, and they had to shave their heads.

James can be looked at as more of a link between the Nazarene sect and the Second Temple High Priesthood. Which would make sense, as James lived in Jerusalem, and most of the Priests were very antithetical to the country “Paul the Apostle” style of an all-enclusive, evangelistic Christian Church.James wore the miter and partook in mainstream Jewish ritual, and managed to survive for more than two decades within the priest-controlled city of Jerusalem.

James might have been tolerated by the more liberal of the High Priesthood, who were aghast at what the hardliners were doing to Jesus’ early followers. As Jesus’ brother, he would be a most useful symbol of peaceful co-existence between the Jews and the early Christians. At that time, the Sanhedrin had been outlawed by the Romans, perhaps in response to the continued activities of the Second Temple Priests against the Christians.

In A.D. 62, when there was a gap between Procurators, the High Priest Ananus, the son of Ananus, took the opportunity to reconvene the Sanhedrin, where he immediately pushed through the execution of James and a few others, probably all Christians. The Jewish people did not like this, and Agrippa II removed Ananus from power in short order, but it was too late for James.

The Jewish East then was only years away from outright revolt.

Source Hagan “Fires of Rome”
 
Nazorite was not an order, but an ascetic “lifestyle” that one swore to for a given length of time- six months, a year, etc. So one didn’t have to be a priest, or an Essene, but could experience the Godliness of the ascetic without making a lifetime commitment. They had certain rules on eating and consumption and ritual, and they had to shave their heads.

James can be looked at as more of a link between the Nazarene sect and the Second Temple High Priesthood. Which would make sense, as James lived in Jerusalem, and most of the Priests were very antithetical to the country “Paul the Apostle” style of an all-enclusive, evangelistic Christian Church.James wore the miter and partook in mainstream Jewish ritual, and managed to survive for more than two decades within the priest-controlled city of Jerusalem.

James might have been tolerated by the more liberal of the High Priesthood, who were aghast at what the hardliners were doing to Jesus’ early followers. As Jesus’ brother, he would be a most useful symbol of peaceful co-existence between the Jews and the early Christians. At that time, the Sanhedrin had been outlawed by the Romans, perhaps in response to the continued activities of the Second Temple Priests against the Christians.

In A.D. 62, when there was a gap between Procurators, the High Priest Ananus, the son of Ananus, took the opportunity to reconvene the Sanhedrin, where he immediately pushed through the execution of James and a few others, probably all Christians. The Jewish people did not like this, and Agrippa II removed Ananus from power in short order, but it was too late for James.

The Jewish East then was only years away from outright revolt.

Source Hagan “Fires of Rome”
Thank you,

I will be getting my hands on this book as soon as possible, and hope to read it.
 
Don, is there a number of sanctifyed in the womb named or mentioned in the bible? I can’t find anything on this.
Oh, and thanks for the homework assignment on the bolded. Just what I wanted today.
Thank you? I just love adding more to the pile.
Hi, StrawberryJam,

Although I haven’t looked for that, I can’t say as that I’ve come across a list in one place of those sanctified in the womb, by the Holy Spirit. It’s true, that devout parents did commit their children in the womb to the service of God. I would like to think that such committal was in response to the Holy Spirit bringing God’s plan for that child to the parents.
So, in answer to your question, the number of souls sanctified in the womb is not given in one text of the Holy Bible. I’m sure that a study of the entire Holy Bible would yield a given number, but I think that’s not germane to the purpose of God’s written word. Which purpose was a record of God’s doing with people; to open a way for God to come to us; and to bring us to God.

BTW, I owe you an apology. I didn’t read your statement that you’re an agnostic and just assumed you were an atheist. Sincere apologies. A family member very dear to me is also agnostic.

God loves you,
Don
 
Small potatoes Don,. I understand. Glad to hear there is no number mentioned. I was going a little crazy trying to find that information.

Have a good one and let your family member know I think you are a nice guy.
 
He speaks to Peter privately.
He speaks to James privately.

James is the head of the church in Jerusalem.

I know many things happened at this time, but for some reason I am finding this to be odd.
James is becoming more interesting to me.
What is amazing to me is James was the half-brother of Jesus … yet, did not believe him the Christ, for all those early years. It took the Resurrection from the dead, and appearing to James … to convert him to Christianity.

And, it’s the same for us. We need to be touched by the living Christ to become True Believers. Would Christ do any less for us today … than he did for his kinship James ?
 
What is amazing to me is James was the half-brother of Jesus … yet, did not believe him the Christ, for all those early years. It took the Resurrection from the dead, and appearing to James … to convert him to Christianity.

And, it’s the same for us. We need to be touched by the living Christ to become True Believers. Would Christ do any less for us today … than he did for his kinship James ?
I have to be very frank with you on this.

Imagine if the way you were touched by this was seeing the dead pop out of tombs.
That’s not the scary part though.

The scary part is why is there no mention of where they went after their appearance?
 
Small potatoes Don,. I understand. Glad to hear there is no number mentioned. I was going a little crazy trying to find that information.

Have a good one and let your family member know I think you are a nice guy.
Thank you kindly, StrawberryJam,

You have a good one, too. I think you’re good people, for what it’s worth.

God loves you,
Don
 
What is amazing to me is James was the half-brother of Jesus … yet, did not believe him the Christ, for all those early years. It took the Resurrection from the dead, and appearing to James … to convert him to Christianity.

And, it’s the same for us. We need to be touched by the living Christ to become True Believers. Would Christ do any less for us today … than he did for his kinship James ?
OK I’m confused. Half-brother? I thought Jesus had no siblings. Maybe you mean step-brother? A half-brother means they share one parent by birth. Which would mean James is Mary’s second child. Doesn’t the Church teach that Mary only had one Child? God bless you.
 
OK I’m confused. Half-brother? I thought Jesus had no siblings. Maybe you mean step-brother? A half-brother means they share one parent by birth. Which would mean James is Mary’s second child. Doesn’t the Church teach that Mary only had one Child? God bless you.
Let’s not get sidetracked on that.
 
Let’s not get sidetracked on that.
Well, I am, though.

Would someone versed in Scripture and Church teaching help me and shed some more light on that? Is James the half-brother of Jesus or the step-brother? Or what? Thank you and have a great day!
 
Sorry, Strawberry. I was responding to BRB’s post.

I, too, am fascinated with what I am learning in this thread about the role of James (who is not Jesus brother by blood but by marriage) in the early Church. I think it is an interesting question that Donsnow raised about which came first, James’ or Peter’s primacy in the early Church. Things that make you go hmmmmm.

Hope everyone is having a good day. The Peace of Christ to all!
 
OK I’m confused. Half-brother? I thought Jesus had no siblings. Maybe you mean step-brother? A half-brother means they share one parent by birth.

Which would mean James is Mary’s second child.
Half-brother = Step-brother.

And, NO … Mary had only ONE child by natural / supernatural birth. James was son of Joseph … in his earlier marriage. May of lost that first wife by death, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top