James the Brother of Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls II by Robert Eisenman Read Free Book Online Page B

many of these epithets, the descriptions ‘ the Righteous One ’, ‘ Pious ’, ‘ highly spoken of by the whole N a tion of the Jews ’, and ‘ supplicating God continually ’, apply more appropriately to someone like James than anyone else one can specify in this Period. Notwithstanding, even here I have already expressed the opinion that what one really has to do with is a refurbishment of the visit of ‘ a certain Simon’ who called the people into an Assembly in Jerusalem , as described by Jos e phus, to Agrippa I (37–44 CE) in Caesarea ‘ to see what was done there contrary to Law ’ – the reason of course being, that Agrippa I was perhaps the only Herodian highly spoken of by a goodly portion of the Jews not only because of the Maccabean blood on his father’s side ( via Herod’s original Maccabean wife Mariamme), but also, contrary to the behaviour of other Herodians, his self-evident attempts at conciliating his fellow Countrymen. 83 Even the Talmud portrays this Agrippa’s concern to ingratiate himself over such matters. 84
    In other words, the ‘ Simon ’ at this time in Josephus was a ‘ Zealot ’ who wanted to bar mixed-blood persons or foreigners from the Temple , not admit them , as Acts portrays its ‘ Simon ’, his contemporary. But, as we shall see in the end, even the name ‘ Cornelius ’ will have particular relevance towards some of the issues circulating in this Period and beyond – especially the Lex Cornelia de Sicarius et Veneficis , attributed to the legendary Roman General, Publius Cornelia Scipio, but probably not put into real effect until after the First Jewish Revolt by Nerva (96–98 CE) and repressively applied by Hadrian (117–38 CE) to discourage both Revolution and ‘ circumcision ’ across the board. 85
    Again Peter repeats in the speech he now makes to this Cornelius on going into his house – for perhaps the seventh or eighth time (depending on whether one includes the one attributed to Stephen) – the usual ‘ Blood libel’ . If we had not got the point by now, we would perhaps have gotten it after this. After describing how ‘ God anointed Jesus , who was from Nazareth , with the Holy Spirit and with Power ’ (the ‘ Great Power ’ ideology again) and how Jesus then went around ‘ doing good (as in 10:2 earlier, note the ‘ Jamesian ’ language of ‘ doing ’ here, now attached to Hellenistic curings and other miracles ) and ‘ healing all who were being oppressed ’ – significantly not by Rome , but ‘by the Devil ’ ( Diabolou )! – Peter now adds, ‘ which he did both in the Country of the Jews and in Jerusalem ’ (this clearly an exposition aimed and directed at non-Jews), but ‘ whom they ( the Jews ) put to death by hanging on a tree ’ (Acts 10:39 – the typical description of crucifixion Acts has already had Peter use in 5:30 and used by Paul in Galatians 3:13).
    By way of introduction to these matters, Peter alludes to two points important in many descriptions of James: 1) ‘ God is not a respecter of persons ’ (10:34), which is a fundamental set piece of all early Church descriptions of James – already hig h lighted above and parodied by Paul at the beginning of Galatians, ‘ do I persuade men or God or do I seek to please men ’ (1:10). 86 2) ‘ In every Nation , he who fears Him (God) and works Righteousness is acceptable to Him ’ (10:35), which is basica l ly the approach of the Damascus Document with its emphasis on ‘ works Righteousness ’ and, in particular, at the end of the exhortative section of the Cairo recension, where ‘ fearing God ’ and ‘ God-Fearers ’ are several times evoked – to whom its ‘ New Covenant in the Land of Damascus ’ is also clearly addressed – but ‘ God-Fearers ’ who obey the Law not those who di s obey it . 87
    Like Stephen’s speech above, the very introduction to these points – supposedly spoken by ‘ an Angel of God ’ (‘ a man in bright clothing at