Originally posted by FMF
It was a very political time.

Christianity was in its infancy and i think to an extent, the background of Roman and Hellenistic and Judaism and some of the respective practices is evident and indeed some of the issues associated with these are discernible from scripture. As for the Christians i think it can be established that they were initially a-political and very often at odds with governments and authorities because of it, only when it was adopted as the state religion did the Machiavellian antics really take root.

Originally posted by FMF
"Fictional" in what sense?

as in non-existent. implied by some verses maybe and implied by the common sense of mary and joe having some sex like married people do, sex resulting in children.

but from what is actually said in the bible. jesus's brother james is as real as jesus's sister Cleopatra (substitute cleo with whatever name you like).

EDIT: sure, i may be mistaken and there really is a verse that says: "Generic Jewish Name" was the son of Mary the mother of jesus.
I would like to see that though.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
[James is "fictional"] as in non-existent.

OK. I see.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
on a more serious note i just thought my question about english baptizing other dudes because they are too lazy to try to pronounce their real names was as relevant as the fictional brother of jesus.

Is it laziness or simply lack of knowledge?
Do you know what his 'real' name was?
Do you know what Jesus' real name was?
Or is it simply convention to use English 'versions' of names? We quite happily do it for most country names - and they frequently do it for our countries.