Were Jesus's brothers born of another woman?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

L

LuxMundy

Guest
What do you want from me? What's your goal here?

I was just responding to your following post:

It means that the Pope thinks the matter is unsettled. You don't. He does. So do I.

You chose to initiate a discussion with me about the apostle James in Gal. 1:19, and said that Paul didn't indicate that he's one of the Twelve. In post #4, I gave my argument for why he did, supported by the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, which collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve.

And, not only that. The following is all that they collectively prove:

(I) Jesus's brothers (kinsmen/relatives) Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) were the sons of His Mother's Spouse's brother, Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas), and his wife Mary of Clopas (Cleophas/Alphaeus), the sister in-law of Mary of Joseph (Jn. 19:25), and thus His cousins

(II) Jesus's cousins James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) also were the apostles James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) of Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas) of the Twelve

(III) Jesus's cousin James (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) was not only the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, but also "James the Less" (Mk. 15:40), "James the brother of the Lord" (Gal. 1:19), "James the Just", "James the bishop of Jerusalem" (Ac. 15:13-21), and "James the author of the Epistle of James" (Jas. 1:1)

Therefore, no, it's not "James in Gal. 1:19 may well have been one of the Twelve", but rather he was one of the Twelve.

In Benedict's letter, it only says that there's some who dispute over the indenties of James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven, and repeatedly proven, for example, that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

If you had something that actually disputes post #4, you would've presented it by now. So, this looks to be a case where despite being shown proof, what you'd would rather believe is stronger.
 

Biblepaige

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2024
461
333
63
Virginia
www.samaritanspurse.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Satanic teachings are transparent.

Jesus had human blood and he was born of a woman.
"Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:"

Jesus was God. God is a spirit and has no blood.
It's amazing how blatant some are in denying God's teachings here.

How do they get away with that?


 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I was just responding to your following post:



You chose to initiate a discussion with me about the apostle James in Gal. 1:19, and said that Paul didn't indicate that he's one of the Twelve. In post #4, I gave my argument for why he did, supported by the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, which collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve.

And, not only that. The following is all that they collectively prove:

(I) Jesus's brothers (kinsmen/relatives) Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) were the sons of His Mother's Spouse's brother, Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas), and his wife Mary of Clopas (Cleophas/Alphaeus), the sister in-law of Mary of Joseph (Jn. 19:25), and thus His cousins

(II) Jesus's cousins James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) also were the apostles James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) of Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas) of the Twelve

(III) Jesus's cousin James (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) was not only the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, but also "James the Less" (Mk. 15:40), "James the brother of the Lord" (Gal. 1:19), "James the Just", "James the bishop of Jerusalem" (Ac. 15:13-21), and "James the author of the Epistle of James" (Jas. 1:1)

Therefore, no, it's not "James in Gal. 1:19 may well have been one of the Twelve", but rather he was one of the Twelve.

In Benedict's letter, it only says that there's some who dispute over the indenties of James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven, and repeatedly proven, for example, that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

If you had something that actually disputes post #4, you would've presented it by now. So, this looks to be a case where despite being shown proof, what you'd would rather believe is stronger.
But we have already beaten this to death! I've told you in Post #54 why I don't think Paul considered James the brother of the Lord one of the Twelve. You disagree. Fine. What else can I do for you?
 
L

LuxMundy

Guest
I've told you in Post #54 why I don't think Paul considered James the brother of the Lord one of the Twelve.

What you said in post #54 has been refuted, because in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, which collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve.

And, not only that. The following is all that they collectively prove:

(I) Jesus's brothers (kinsmen/relatives) Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) were the sons of His Mother's Spouse's brother, Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas), and his wife Mary of Clopas (Cleophas/Alphaeus), the sister in-law of Mary of Joseph (Jn. 19:25), and thus His cousins

(II) Jesus's cousins James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) also were the apostles James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) of Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas) of the Twelve

(III) Jesus's cousin James (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) was not only the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, but also "James the Less" (Mk. 15:40), "James the brother of the Lord" (Gal. 1:19), "James the Just", "James the bishop of Jerusalem" (Ac. 15:13-21), and "James the author of the Epistle of James" (Jas. 1:1)

And your latest argument against this evidence is that the identies of apostle James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19 disputed. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

If you had something that actually disputes post #4, you would've presented it by now. So, this looks to be a case where despite being shown proof, what you'd would rather believe is stronger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Belafonte

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What you said in post #54 has been refuted, because in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, which collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve.

And, not only that. The following is all that they collectively prove:

(I) Jesus's brothers (kinsmen/relatives) Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) were the sons of His Mother's Spouse's brother, Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas), and his wife Mary of Clopas (Cleophas/Alphaeus), the sister in-law of Mary of Joseph (Jn. 19:25), and thus His cousins

(II) Jesus's cousins James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) also were the apostles James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) of Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas) of the Twelve

(III) Jesus's cousin James (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) was not only the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, but also "James the Less" (Mk. 15:40), "James the brother of the Lord" (Gal. 1:19), "James the Just", "James the bishop of Jerusalem" (Ac. 15:13-21), and "James the author of the Epistle of James" (Jas. 1:1)

And your latest argument against this evidence is that the identies of apostle James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19 disputed. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

If you had something that actually disputes post #4, you would've presented it by now. So, this looks to be a case where despite being shown proof, what you'd would rather believe is stronger.
How many times do you plan to copy and paste the exact same thing? By my count, you are now up to seven.
 
L

LuxMundy

Guest
How many times do you plan to copy and paste the exact same thing? By my count, you are now up to seven.

Well, are you making me repeat myself to cause a distraction to avoid addressing what I'm saying? Seems like it. So, I'm going to repeat myself, and see if you continue to distract, finally address, or say nothing:

What you said in post #54 has been refuted, because in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, which collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve.

And, not only that. The following is all that they collectively prove:

(I) Jesus's brothers (kinsmen/relatives) Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) were the sons of His Mother's Spouse's brother, Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas), and his wife Mary of Clopas (Cleophas/Alphaeus), the sister in-law of Mary of Joseph (Jn. 19:25), and thus His cousins

(II) Jesus's cousins James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) also were the apostles James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) of Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas) of the Twelve

(III) Jesus's cousin James (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) was not only the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, but also "James the Less" (Mk. 15:40), "James the brother of the Lord" (Gal. 1:19), "James the Just", "James the bishop of Jerusalem" (Ac. 15:13-21), and "James the author of the Epistle of James" (Jas. 1:1)

And your latest argument against this evidence is that the identies of apostle James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19 disputed. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

If you had something that actually disputes post #4, you would've presented it by now. So, this looks to be a case where despite being shown proof, what you'd would rather believe is stronger.
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, are you making me repeat myself to cause a distraction to avoid addressing what I'm saying? Seems like it. So, I'm going to repeat myself, and see if you continue to distract, finally address, or say nothing:

What you said in post #54 has been refuted, because in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, which collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve.

And, not only that. The following is all that they collectively prove:

(I) Jesus's brothers (kinsmen/relatives) Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) were the sons of His Mother's Spouse's brother, Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas), and his wife Mary of Clopas (Cleophas/Alphaeus), the sister in-law of Mary of Joseph (Jn. 19:25), and thus His cousins

(II) Jesus's cousins James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) also were the apostles James and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) of Alphaeus (Clopas/Cleophas) of the Twelve

(III) Jesus's cousin James (Matt. 13:55, Mk.6:3) was not only the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, but also "James the Less" (Mk. 15:40), "James the brother of the Lord" (Gal. 1:19), "James the Just", "James the bishop of Jerusalem" (Ac. 15:13-21), and "James the author of the Epistle of James" (Jas. 1:1)

And your latest argument against this evidence is that the identies of apostle James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19 disputed. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

If you had something that actually disputes post #4, you would've presented it by now. So, this looks to be a case where despite being shown proof, what you'd would rather believe is stronger.
I'm not making you repeat yourself. You are choosing to do that, ad nauseam. Take a look at 1 Cor. 15 and see if it says this:

5 He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Of course, he had already appeared to James as one of the twelve, but I like being redundant.

Or maybe this:

5 He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. So, he appeared to James twice -- once as part of the twelve, and then a separate time. Why am I bothering to add that tidbit? Because 2,000 years from now @asoul will be inferring it anyway.
 
L

LuxMundy

Guest
I'm not making you repeat yourself.

By not addressing something, you're making someone have to repeat what they want you to address, if you can, and if you can't, then say that you don't have anything to address it with.

So, again, what you said in post #54 has been refuted, because in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, Jesus's cousin, James the Less, James the Just, James the bishop of Jerusalem, and James the author of the Epistle of James.

Your latest argument against that evidence is that the identities of apostle James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19 disputed. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven, for example, that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.

Take a look at 1 Cor. 15 [...]

Oh, I have. So, who do you believe James is in 1 Cor. 15:7 and why?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
8,243
1,202
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
and James the author of the Epistle of James.
He was most assuredly the half brother of Jesus. I love that his Epistle does not state that, like Luke not referencing himself once in the Acts of the Apostles or Luke itself!

How would you know James lived with Christ growing up from his Epistle?

F2F
 
L

LuxMundy

Guest
How would you know James lived with Christ growing up from his Epistle?

One way I know is from the evidence in post #4 that proves James the author of the Epistle of James was Jesus's cousin, as well as the apostle James of Alphaeus, James in Gal. 1:19, James the Less, James the Just, and James the bishop of Jerusalem.
 

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
8,243
1,202
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
One way I know is from the evidence in post #4 that proves James the author of the Epistle of James was Jesus's cousin, as well as the apostle James of Alphaeus, James in Gal. 1:19, James the Less, James the Just, and James the bishop of Jerusalem.
In other words you don't know or understand from his Epistle that James is the half brother of Jesus?

F2F
 

Ritajanice

Born-Again
Mar 9, 2023
13,204
7,525
113
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Matthew 13
King James Version
13 The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea side.

2 And great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore.

3 And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow;

4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:

5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:

6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:

8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.

9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.

17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.

19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;

21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.

22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:

25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.

27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

31 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:

32 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.

37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.

45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:

46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:

48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.

49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.

52 Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.

53 And it came to pass, that when Jesus had finished these parables, he departed thence.

54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?

55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

58 And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief.
 

Ritajanice

Born-Again
Mar 9, 2023
13,204
7,525
113
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Nowhere in it is he called Jesus's half-brother.


Welcome to the forum asoul.



What do you make of this?

His brethren?

Short commentary.

The most prominent half-sibling of Jesus was James. This is not to be confused with James the son of Zebedee, brother of John (see Matthew 4:21). James the son of Zebedee was executed early in Christian history according to Acts 12:2. Jesus' half-brother James is referenced several times in the New Testament.

Interesting to hear your thoughts...

55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
 
Last edited:

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
By not addressing something, you're making someone have to repeat what they want you to address, if you can, and if you can't, then say that you don't have anything to address it with
I don't give a damn what you think my motives are for not addressing everything you say -- and if that failure to address compels you to repeat yourself over and over, you are a very sick puppy.
Your latest argument against that evidence is that the identities of apostle James of Alphaeus and James in Gal. 1:19 disputed. What has ever been proven that still isn't disputed by some? It's been proven, for example, that the Earth is round, yet there are people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. Therefore, this argument of "It's still disputed!" that you're putting up against post #4 is weak.
Like Pope Benedict, I said EXPERTS disagree on the subject. Show me an EXPERT who thinks the world is flat, and I'll kiss your ass and give you a week to draw a crowd.
So, who do you believe James is in 1 Cor. 15:7 and why?
I believe he was a relative of Jesus who was the first leader of the church in Jerusalem. Why? Because that is how Paul consistently portrays him. Paul doesn't Identify him as one of the Twelve, and doesn't identify his daddy. I can't be sure who his daddy was. And if you're sure, good for you. If others lack your certainty, just swallow hard and try to accept it. Can you do that? Or is turning some anonymous online poster around how you get off?
 
Last edited:
L

LuxMundy

Guest
I don't give a damn what you think my motives are for not addressing everything you say [...]

By not addressing something that someone says to you in a discussion, you're making them have to repeat what they want you to address until it is, or an explanation is given for why it won't be.

Like Pope Benedict, I said EXPERTS disagree on the subject. Show me an EXPERT who thinks the world is flat [...]

I didn't say that there are currently experts on the flat Earth theory, but rather people who still dispute it, and/or claim to have proven it's flat. There are proven things disputed among experts and non-experts alike, and I understand that just because someone is considered to be an expert in a field, it doesn't mean they're automatically right on a specific topic within it. Therefore, to think your argument of "x is disputed among experts!" in and of itself means something in your favor is naive.

Benedict wrote, "Among experts, the question of the identity of these two figures with the same name, James son of Alphaeus and James "the brother of the Lord", is disputed." What experts? What makes them valid experts? Who do they believe James of Alphaeus and James the brother of the Lord were? Have they seen the same collective evidence in post #4 elsewhere? There's your homework.

Now, what you said in post #54 has been refuted, because in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively prove that James in Gal. 1:19 was the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, Jesus's cousin, James the Less, James the Just, James the bishop of Jerusalem, and the author of the Epistle of James. Do you currently have anything that you believe refutes that collective evidence or not?

I believe he was a relative of Jesus who was the first leader of the church in Jerusalem. [...]

Do you know what kind of relative James in Gal. 1:19 was to Jesus? What evidence leads you to believe that James in Gal. 1:19 and James, the first leader (bishop) of Jerusalem, were the same person?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Do you know what kind of relative James in Gal. 1:19 was to Jesus?
I don't.
What evidence leads you to believe that James in Gal. 1:19 and James, the first leader (bishop) of Jerusalem, were the same person?
Paul's letter to the Galatians only speaks of one James. The first time he is referenced, it is as "brother of the Lord." The second time, in Gal. 2:9, it is as an acknowledged "pillar" of the Church who blesses Paul's mission to the Gentiles with the right hand of fellowship. (The third time, in Gal. 2:12, it is as the sender of Judaizers who turned Peter's table habits around.) The Galatians presumably knew who he was speaking about, else he would have taken pains to distinguish the James of Gal. 1:19 from the James of Gal 2:12. He didn't.

To quote J.B. Lightfoot, "At the time when St. Paul wrote, there was but one person eminent enough in the church to be called James simply without any distinguishing epithet—the Lord’s brother, the bishop of Jerusalem."
 
L

LuxMundy

Guest
Paul's letter to the Galatians only speaks of one James. The first time he is referenced, it is as "brother of the Lord." The second time, in Gal. 2:9, it is as an acknowledged "pillar" of the Church who blesses Paul's mission to the Gentiles with the right hand of fellowship. (The third time, in Gal. 2:12, it is as the sender of Judaizers who turned Peter's table habits around.) The Galatians presumably knew who he was speaking about, else he would have taken pains to distinguish the James of Gal. 1:19 from the James of Gal 2:12. He didn't.

To quote J.B. Lightfoot, "At the time when St. Paul wrote, there was but one person eminent enough in the church to be called James simply without any distinguishing epithet—the Lord’s brother, the bishop of Jerusalem."

I agree with that conclusion and for more reasons than just that. For example, in post #4, the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively prove that Jesus's kinsman/relative and apostle James in Gal. 1:19 was His cousin and specifically the apostle James of Alphaeus of the Twelve. That same collective evidence also proves that that James, James the Less, James the Just, and the author of the Epistle of James, were the same person. Do you currently have anything that you believe refutes that collective evidence or not?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I agree with that conclusion, and for more reasons than just that. For example, in post #4 the scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources (early Christian Church Fathers), even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively prove that Jesus's relative and apostle James in Gal. 1:19 was His cousin and specifically the apostle James of Alphaeus. That same collective evidence also proves that that James is the same as James the Less, James the Just, and James the author of the Epistle of James. Do you currently have anything that you believe refutes that collective evidence or not?
"Refutes," or "calls into question"? Those are two different things. As are "argument" and "evidence." (For example the views of an early church father on whether James was one of the Twelve are argument, not evidence.)

Do I think the James of Gal. 1:19, the so-called "brother of the Lord," was also called James the Just? Yes. Do I think he authored the Epistle of James? Yes. Do I think he was one of the original Twelve? I have my doubts.

First, John 7:5 says Jesus's brothers didn't believe in him, which suggests that no brothers were among the Twelve -- yet there would have to be two such brothers if James the son of Alphaeus was one of them, for Levi is also a son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14). We would need to posit -- without a shred of evidence -- that the events of John chapter 7 preceded the call of the Twelve. I cannot make that assumption.

Second, Mark 6:1-4 states:
"And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him. 2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands? 3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. 4 But Jesus, said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house."

Here is Jesus preaching in Nazareth where the people know his family – including his “brother” James. If that same James was one of the disciples following him to Nazareth, I can't imagine that Jesus would have said that he was rejected among his own kin without qualification. If the disciple James was His kin, He lied in v. 4.

Third, your Post #4 says "In Gal. 1:19, Paul calls a man named "James" Jesus's "ἀδελφός" (adelphos/brother), and the context shows that its applicable definition is "kinsman, or relative" as well. Therefore, we can deduce that the James's in Matt. 13:55, Mk. 6:3 and Gal. 1:19 were the same person." But we cannot deduce this from the mere fact that "ἀδελφός" can mean "kinsman." I've already given my reasons in Post #54.

Fourth, Acts 1:13 references "James the son of Alphaeus" as one of the Eleven (after Judas Iscariot was gone). Luke does not call him "brother of the Lord" -- a much better way for the companion of Paul to refer to him if it were the same person. That Luke mentions the Eleven as gathered with Jesus's "brothers" in the very next verse tends to confirm his understanding that the Eleven and the brothers were separate groups.

Fifth, Gal. 2:9 lists "James and Cephas and John" in that order. Lists of apostles in the gospels always name Peter first. Paul would have no reason to stray from that order if all three were among the original Twelve.

Sixth, I take to heart Scott Hahn's introduction to the Epistle of James in The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible:

"The author of the epistle identifies himself as "James" (1:1). Because several persons in the NT bear this name, it is necessary to settle on his identity by a process of elimination. Two men of this name were among the apostles of Jesus: James the son of Zebedee (Mk 1:19; 3:17) and James the son of Alphaeus (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). No doubt these figures possessed the requisite authority to instruct the Church in writing, but most scholars think it improbable that either one wrote the Letter of James—the former was martyred in A.D. 44, probably too early to have been the author (Acts 12:2), and very little is known about the latter beyond the fact of his enrollment among the Twelve. Instead, scholars through the centuries have given preference to a third figure of the apostolic age: James of Jerusalem, also known as "the Lord's brother" (Gal 1:19). This James was a kinsman of Jesus (Mk 6:3)."
 
Last edited: