Get Your Hands On The Brother Of Jesus And The Lost Teachings Of Christianity Authored By Jeffrey J. Bütz Available Through Document

is an awesome work of research on the life of James the Just, I was raised Catholic and it was taught to us that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary and had no other siblings, I have since become aware that Jesus is from the line of David by way of his earthly father Joseph, Virgin birth and an earthly lineage do not match, I am of the opinion that Jesus and Mary had intercourse, Jesus was a Palestinian Jew who lived in a village of aboutpeople, He observed Passover well before the fateful one that ended his life, His Brother James the Just carried on until he met the same fate someyears later, Very readable and easy to follow, The topic of the historical Jesus and his family is fascinating, Mr. Butz has done his homework, This book clearly has its origins in an academic thesis written for a seminary and it is a bit wordy in places, but I very much appreciated the survey of past research and the incisive investigation connecting the Bible to later extrabiblical material.
This is exactly what I was looking for with regards to forming a larger picture of James the Just, Glad to have this in my library for future consultation, very well thought out and documented argument for what the early church was like, and why Paul spent so much time arguing for why he taught the way that he did.
One of the better books I've read on Jesus' brother James, Well researched and concise, and easy to read, Well thought out and exceptionally researched, Mr, Butz's book is infinitely more readable than Eisenman's "James the Brother of Jesus", My only objection and it is a minor one, is that Butz seems to feel he must prove the same points over and over while quoting numerous biblical scholars from every side of the issue along the way.
If one is writing a research paper on the subject, then a better book cannot be found but the definitive book on James for the general reader, at least in my opinion, remains unwritten.
I would definitely recommend this book, I did enjoy this book and it will definitely lead to more reading but Mr, Butz's final chapter is hokey and sentimental, ie his hope that in re examining things the book deals with might lead to a peace between "the three great western religions" his phrase, not mine Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Professor and Lutheran minister Butz is clearly writing his message to an American university audience as evidenced in several places, He is entitled to his opinion but I don't think the arguments in the book support his final comments,

I must state up front that I am a Christian who doesn't believe in the Virgin Birth let alone the belief held by Roman Catholicism in the perpetual virginity of Jesus' mother Mary, or the implied anti sexual attitude of what became orthodox Christianity.
James, Joses and Jude Judas thus were Jesus actual full siblings and according to Butz's arguments followers of their brother, Just read Acts and Galatians and you will read about the little mentioned 'brother or God" as some called him James who may or may not have written the Epistle of James.
He was regarded by some early Church fathers as the first "Bishop" of the Christian church, Of course, this is reading back into history, something we should avoid,

This books is clearly laid out, The author fully credits the scholarship in this area and places it in the context of earlier work byth Century German biblical scholars, He reminds us that there were more than one competing Christianities in the years after the resurrection of Jesus, James was the leader of the Jerusalem church not Peter, see Acts foryears until his martyrdom, Jewish Christianity, Butz believes that James was a Pharisee as was his brother, Jesus, became heresy and what became "Christian" was orthodox, Paul stands in opposition to Jewish Christianity and the issues that divided them became apparent when more and more Gentiles became Christians, What to do with these Christians, should they become Jewish ie circumcision, followers of the dietary laws etc Could Jewish Christians eat with Gentile Christians, even though it that was contrary to Jewish law Luke's account of these developments in Acts certainly were written to gloss over the very real differences of opinion and present the growth of Christianity as more harmonious than it most likely really was.


I think this book is a good introduction to the topic, Butz's The Brother of Jesus is not a scholarly work, per se, but is rather a gathering and analysis of the relevant critical scholarship and primary and secondary sources regarding James or Jacob the younger brother of Jesus, recognised as the Jewish Messiah by Christians and Muslims.


The analysis is astute, and most of the conclusions hold up to critical thought themselves, though some of the final suggestions on what the reclaimed understanding of Jewish Jesus and James mean for the future seem a little utopian.


In terms of what this exploration of James means however, the conclusion that Jewish Christianity constitutes the original Orthodoxy, and that much of what has become modern Christianity would have been seen as heretical by the original Apostles, is born out by history.
This has some important implications for how Christians need to reevaluate ourselves in relationship to our Jewish and Muslim siblings, If Jesus, James, Peter, and John like Jews and Muslims did not believe Jesus was literally God but rather a Messianic agent for building God's Kingdom, then can Christians today justly continue to hold to the idea of Jesus as the "Only Begotten" Divine "Son of God" This book is worth reading.
I can't speak for Christians, but I don't see how any variety of them would be upset by this book if they read it through to the end.
Christian theologians have rewritten the story of their religion so many times one would be hardpressed to outline it in a paragraph, One thing you won't hear many Christians talk about though is the "man," that is, the "Jewish man" Jesus the Nazirite who lived in the first century of the common era.
Or that he strictly followed the Law and that the distinction between he and his followers from other Jews was the belief that he arose from the line of David and was the longawaited Messiah.
One especially will not hear that it was that "line of David" which was allimportant and that when Jesus died unexpectedly, it was his brother James "the Just" who took over from him as leader of the Jewish movement.
Somewhere along the way, maybe very soon after Jesus died, during a period of intense grief, the followers convinced themselves Jesus was going to return very soon, James, therefore, was more a caretaker than actual leader of the sect,

Enter a fellow named Saul or Paul, who evidently had been trying to quash the Jewish movement of Jesus led by James, My thought is that guilt over his cruelty led him to a conversion experience, But true to his prior arrogance, he decided that only he knew the true nature of Jesus and further, "God's" desire for the future, He repudiated the Jesus movement led by James and what this book adds, is a clearheaded view of how that conflict played out in the first few decades after Jesus died.


In short, Butz makes the strong case that Jesus

was a devout Jewish leader and that, like several other men at the time, believed he was the Messiah, the chosen one, to lead his people out of Roman oppression if you are interested in this phenomenon, look up "Revitalization Movements".
What made the Jesus movement a bit different was the idea the followers held after Jesus was condemned to death by the Roman authorities for claiming or being betrayed as claiming that he was the rightful King of the Jews, that he would return soon to usher in a new world and perhaps they even believed they saw him through the tears of their grief.


Butz writes some fine history up to a point, He proudly announces that he has found the obvious and that if you follow along you will see it too, just they way one sees if one steps back to see the forest for the trees or the alignment of the tectonic plates of north and south American with Europe and Africa.
Then, Butz swoops back down to land on the trees again, and positions himself back on a single tectonic plate, Like the errant scientists who could not believe the plates aligned long ago as one continent, Butz cannot imagine history unfolding without the agency of a higher power, his god of the people of the book.


In the end, a Christian apologist, and not a historian, Butz believes his god "intended" for Paul to move the Jesus movement out from its Jewish context and that even the demise of Palestine by the Romans might have been "god's will" at least Butz implies this.


Butz states many times in the book that later Christian interpreters placed the blame of Jesus's death on the Jews when it truly was the Romans who were to blame, and Butz bemoans the terrible Antisemitism that resulted.


But doesn't Butz "see" that trying to accept the idea that an omnipotent being was directing activities in the first century, he falls into the very same trap Butz imagines his interpretation will provide a common starting point for talks between Christians, Jews and Muslims.
Even if that were true, Butz is setting up a scenario: there really is a God of the people of the book and his will was played out in the first century.


So, ignore all the other religions such as Hinduism, Buddism, Taoism, all the forms of animism, etc, because the people of the book are special,

Let's rise above the earth for a moment, outside the galaxy, across the universe a few million light years there is no intelligence out there, We evolved and we are just another variety of great ape, If our brains are so great, we better start using them to figure out the practical challenges we face as a species,

Enough with the Christianity already,
.