James the Brother of Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls II (109 page)

What is really behind these episodes about ‘
prophets and teachers
’ such as ‘
Agabus
’ ‘
coming down from Jerusalem to A
n
tioch
’ are
the messengers
from
or
representatives of James
like ‘
Judas Barsabas
’, ‘
Thaddaeus
’, and even ‘
Judas Thomas
’ sent down to
Antioch-by-Callirhoe
or
Edessa Orrhoe
either to convert or make sure everyone had correctly gotten the message of obedience to the Law, an obedience which
prima facie
included
circumcision
. Persons such as these would also include by r
e
fraction ‘
Judas the brother of James
’ (‘
Addai
’ in the First Apocalypse of James and, ‘
Theuda the brother of the Just One
’, in the Second) going down to carry on these initial conversion activities in ‘
the
Land of the Edessenes
’, as Eusebius would e
x
press it, and, no doubt, further east in
Adiabene
.

Paul’s adventures, recorded from Chapters 13–15 of Acts, largely overlap those in Chapters 16–18. They are often referred to as his
First
,
Second
, or
Third Missionary Journey
s, depending on how much or how little overlap one thinks there is. The present writer, obviously, thinks there was quite a bit. Ingenious efforts to harmonize these have been largely ineffective and, instead of the picture of ‘
three
’ Missionary Journeys, we are probably really only speaking about one extended one and its of
f
shoots or variations – the one finally told about at some length in the ‘
We Document
’.

A good example of this overlapping is what happens in ‘
Antioch of Pisidia
’. As usual, Paul makes a bee-line on the Sa
b
bath to the Synagogue to preach (Acts 13:14). He ‘
speaks out boldly
’ but the Jews, ‘
filled with envy
,
opposed the things Paul said
,
blaspheming
’ (13:45). The parallels with Acts 18:6’s picture of what supposedly happened later at Corinth are patent. Again, as at Corinth too, in this first incident on mainland Asia Minor at ‘
Antioch of Pisidia
’, Paul goes to the Synagogue on a succession of Sabbaths. Here, ‘
the Jews stirred up a persecution against Paul among the honourable
,
worshipping women and chief men of the city
’ and, just as later, Paul exploits this as an occasion to announce his intention to ‘
turn to the Gentiles
’ (13:46-50). This time, however, it is not his ‘
garments
’ that he ‘
shakes out
’, but now he and Barnabas ‘
shake off the dust of their feet against them
’ (13:51) after
the people of Antioch of Pisidia
now
‘
cast out
’
Paul and Barnabas
‘
from their coasts
’ or ‘
borders
’.

At this point, Acts suddenly dispenses with all the dissimulation or, as some might characterize it, disinformation and gives us
the real circumstances
behind Paul’s return to Jerusalem after his first meeting with James
fourteen years before
. Hitherto this causality had only been implied but never explicitly stated in all these other highly improbable notices in Acts. It would also appear to be the real reason behind the so-called ‘
Jerusalem Council
’ or ‘
Conference
’. As Acts 15:1 puts this, ‘
Some
,
ha
v
ing
come down from Judea
,
were teaching the brothers that
,
unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses
,
you could not be saved
’, and we are right back again in the scenario of Galatians 2:3–2:14. One can assume, as well, that this is more or less the truth of the matter and what we have here is what would ordinarily be reckoned as a summons on the part of ‘
those of repute
’ or ‘
those reckoned to be something
’, as Paul calls them in Galatians 2:6, in Jerusalem – meaning ‘
James
,
Cephas
,
and John
’.

Here too, Paul first makes the accusation in Galatians 2:4 we have already alluded to of ‘
false brothers stealing in by stealth to spy out the freedom we enjoy in Christ Jesus
,
so that they might enslave us’
,
deliberately playing off the issue of
circumc
i
sion
– in his implication of some ‘
spying on their privy parts
’
– that, according to Acts, triggered the so-called ‘
Jerusalem Council
’ in the first place. Paul means here, of course, as already explained, ‘
freedom from the Law
’ as opposed to ‘
slavery to it
’ and not what would be more apt, given the historical situation, ‘
freedom from Rome
’ as opposed to ‘
slavery to it
’ – a juxt
a
position of imagery Paul also picks up again in his
allegory
about
Hagar
and Sarah.

Whether there was an actual ‘
Council
’ as such, as Acts presents it, and not simply a semi-private audience of some kind between Paul and the Jerusalem ‘
Pillars
’, as Paul recounts in Galatians 2:1-13, is highly unlikely. Acts 15:2–7 magnifies this into a meeting of
the whole Assembly
(‘
the Apostles and the Elders
’). According to it,
this insistence on circumcision
causes
‘
an uproar
’
in the Community at Antioch
, whereupon
Paul
,
Barnabas
,
and
‘
certain others
’
are chosen
‘
to go up to the Apostles and the Elders in Jerusalem regarding this question
’ (15:2).

Apostolic Credentials, ‘
Boasting
’, and ‘
the Apostles of Surpassing Degree
’ in Paul

Despite the many questions about these events and their sequence, what the so-called ‘
Jerusalem Council
’ really was has been labored over long and hard by numerous scholars with varying answers, usually depending on the theological point-of-view of the given observer. The results achieved are not particularly satisfying because: 1) researchers rarely come to grips with Acts’ tendencies to dissimulate – or even, for that matter, its creative writing – to say nothing of its oftentimes mischievou
s
ness; and 2) the Dead Sea Scrolls had not yet been discovered and, even when they had, have either simply been shunted aside or not been used – not being considered relevant to the real life setting of this famous confrontation, nor even to hone one’s understanding of true events in Palestine of the time. This is still true.

Therefore, we consider that it is better to start from scratch, as it were, using primary sources only and tease the info
r
mation out of them. The notices we have just encountered above about persons dogging Paul’s footsteps with a contrary do
c
trine are rife in Paul’s Letters and he repeatedly and often bitterly complains about just that sort of thing.
Yet specialists are either still unwilling or unable to definitively determine the identity of these ubiquitous ‘
some
’ or ‘
certain ones
’ about whom he is constantly complaining. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 9:1 he asserts: ‘
Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?
Even if I were not an Apostle to others
,
I should still be an Apostle to you
,
who are the seal of my Apostleship in the Lord
.
This is my answer to
those who would examine me
.’
Paul’s wounded pride here is self-evident. So is his feeling of inferiority to those above him whom he refers to by phrases such as ‘
Super Apostles
’, ‘
Hebrews
’, and even ‘
pseudo-Apostles’ and
‘
dishonest workmen’
.

Continuing on the subject of Apostolic Credentials in 2 Corinthians 3:1, Paul asks rhetorically, his wounded pride and feelings of inferiority again painfully evident, ‘
Do we begin again to
commend ourselves
to you
?’ Then, alluding to the ever-recurring issue of not having official ‘
written
’ letters of Apostolic appointment from James: ‘
Unlike
some
,
we need no letters of recommendation either to you or from you
.’
One should compare this to the Pseudoclementine
Homilies
’
picture of Peter teaching at Tripoli: ‘
Our Lord and Prophet
,
who has sent us
,
declared to us that the Evil One
,
having disputed with him forty days
,
but failing to prevail against him
,
promised He would send Apostles from among his subjects to deceive them
.
Ther
e
fore
,
above all
,
remember to shun any Apostle
,
teacher
,
or prophet who does not accurately compare his teaching with James … the brother of My Lord
…
and this
,
even if he comes to you with recommendations
.’
22
The contrast here should be patent.

In 2 Corinthians 3:2–3, Paul then employs the imagery of letters of this kind being written on the ‘
fleshy tablets
’ of his
supporters’ hearts, not on the cold ‘
tablets of stone
’, in the process denigrating the attachment of his opponents within ‘
the Church
’ to
the Mosaic Commandments
. Since it is such a startling inversion of Palestinian themes, it is worth citing it fully: ‘
You are our epistle
,
having been inscribed in our hearts
,
being known and being read by all men
,
it being manifest that you are Christ
’
s letter
,
served by us
,
having been inscribed
,
not with ink
,
but with the Spirit of the Living God
–
not on tablets of stone, but on the fleshy tablets of the heart
.’

In 2 Corinthians 10:8ff.,
he launches into one of his most dizzying displays of rhetorical virtuosity which he commences by referring, once more, to ‘
boasting
’ – this time, ‘
about the
Authority which the Lord gave to us
for building up and not tearing you down
’. Once again, we know whom he is referring to by these words, though one might ask which ‘
Lord
’,
when
, and
which
‘
us
’ – but Paul is manifestly employing the royal ‘
we
’ here.

Notwithstanding, we have seen the same claim regarding his Apostolic ‘
Authority
’ in Galatians 1:1’s ‘
not from men nor through man
’ (in Romans 2:11 above, that God is ‘
no respecter of persons
’). In 2 Corinthians 10:9 – in alluding to the poor physical impression he apparently makes in person – he follows this in the next line by evoking the issue of ‘
letters
’, asserting, ‘
so that I may not seem as if frightening you by means of letters
’. To this he immediately answers antiphonically in 10:11, ‘
let such a person consider
’ – meaning the person complaining about his ‘
Apostolate in the Lord
’ –
that
, ‘
though we are absent in word
,
through letters we are present in deed
’.