Thanks for the response, but I still don't find it particularly important that Paul claims to have met James. Paul claims a lot of things, like having been taught by Gamaliel, which is quite unlikely given the poor understanding of Hebrew law/scripture he has. Even his claim to be a Jew is suspect, when he also claims to have been a Roman, a Pharisee, and the son of a Pharisee when it gets him out of trouble.
(cont'd) If Paul did meet a James, I think he was a competing authority in early Christianity, like Peter, but I think the relationship of these men to Jesus has been exaggerated over the years. Robert Eisenman covers this in his book, "James the Brother of Jesus".
I was going to comment that Paul could have been lying about meeting Jesus' brother but I felt it wasn't central to the issue at hand. One of the cheif claims of mythicism is that Paul doesn't mention a living Jesus. But a mention of Jesus' real life brother implies a real life Jesus. So, it doesn't refute the claim that Jesus never existed, but it does refute the claim that Paul never mentioned a living Jesus.
@NotWhollySane My point was that Paul often changed his tune when it would suit his needs. I still think it's plausible that "brother" may not mean flesh-and-blood sibling in those cases, and it could be an embellishment of James' real identity as a leader in early Christianity.
I don't see how claiming to be a Roman, then claiming to be a Jew, then claiming to be a Pharisee is Paul changing his tune. It's possible to be all three things at once isn't it? But yeah I admit that Paul could be lying or could be misinformed about James being the brother of Jesus. Still though Jesus having a brother wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was merely showing that Paul *said* Jesus has a real life brother, which refutes a main claim of mythicism.
Well I think we've discussed the translation issues before. Properly translated the verse is James the Brother of the Lord. The greek is ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου "Tou" is the genitive case and the genitive case of Tou/Tov is the case of possesion. If Paul meant to say James the brother in the lord he would have used the greek word ev which means in.
Thanks for the response, but I still don't find it particularly important that Paul claims to have met James. Paul claims a lot of things, like having been taught by Gamaliel, which is quite unlikely given the poor understanding of Hebrew law/scripture he has. Even his claim to be a Jew is suspect, when he also claims to have been a Roman, a Pharisee, and the son of a Pharisee when it gets him out of trouble.
TaylorX04 1 year ago
(cont'd) If Paul did meet a James, I think he was a competing authority in early Christianity, like Peter, but I think the relationship of these men to Jesus has been exaggerated over the years. Robert Eisenman covers this in his book, "James the Brother of Jesus".
TaylorX04 1 year ago
@TaylorX04
I was going to comment that Paul could have been lying about meeting Jesus' brother but I felt it wasn't central to the issue at hand. One of the cheif claims of mythicism is that Paul doesn't mention a living Jesus. But a mention of Jesus' real life brother implies a real life Jesus. So, it doesn't refute the claim that Jesus never existed, but it does refute the claim that Paul never mentioned a living Jesus.
NotWhollySane 1 year ago
@TaylorX04
Wouldn't being a Citizen of Rome, a Jew, a Pharisee, and the Son of a Pharisee be non-contradictory?
NotWhollySane 1 year ago
@NotWhollySane My point was that Paul often changed his tune when it would suit his needs. I still think it's plausible that "brother" may not mean flesh-and-blood sibling in those cases, and it could be an embellishment of James' real identity as a leader in early Christianity.
TaylorX04 1 year ago
@TaylorX04
I don't see how claiming to be a Roman, then claiming to be a Jew, then claiming to be a Pharisee is Paul changing his tune. It's possible to be all three things at once isn't it? But yeah I admit that Paul could be lying or could be misinformed about James being the brother of Jesus. Still though Jesus having a brother wasn't the point I was trying to make. I was merely showing that Paul *said* Jesus has a real life brother, which refutes a main claim of mythicism.
NotWhollySane 1 year ago
@TaylorX04
Well I think we've discussed the translation issues before. Properly translated the verse is James the Brother of the Lord. The greek is ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου "Tou" is the genitive case and the genitive case of Tou/Tov is the case of possesion. If Paul meant to say James the brother in the lord he would have used the greek word ev which means in.
NotWhollySane 1 year ago