aa5874

I don't speculate. You will have to ask them. Around here people IMAGINE they know what others think. Right now, I can ONLY show you that Galatians 1.19 is Canonized and that a Canon is NOT regarded as a Heretical Document.

The Galatians Jesus was NOT human, but was a Resurrected Myth, so it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE that Galatians 1.19 refers to a human Jesus.

There is RIGHT now a QUEST for the historical Jesus by Scholars for about 250 years because the NT Canon is about the NON-historical Jesus.

Toto

The English word "brother" has about the same range of meanings as the Greek adelphos - both biological brother and brother in belief.

Duvduv

But brother is thought of as biological as opposed to "one of the brethren " or "fellow believer. " Thus shouldn't the English really be " ..James a fellow believer of the Lord"??

Toto

Brother in English can mean fellow believer, or fellow member of some group.

Doug Shaver

That depends on the community and the context. In some churches even today all the members are referred to as brothers and sisters. I used to belong to one of those churches.

aa5874

We are just going over the same single verse when the Pauline writings could NOT ever be Heretical and still Canonised.

Church writers that mentioned Galatians 1.19 also claimed Jesus was the Son of a Holy Ghost.

stephan huller

"Brother" was also a term used to denote homosexual partnership. I remember that from Petronius's Satyricon. I think it also surfaces in Tertullian's Apology. I anyone hasn't seen Fellini's Satyricon I highly recommend it. I remember making my family watch it for Xmas when I was fifteen. I think my Dad that I was going to turn out gay.

Vorkosigan

1.18 to 2.1 -- the verses that refer to the first trip of Paul. The THEM in 2.2 can only refer back to 1.17.

Vorkosigan

lmbarre

I find the the portrayals of Jesus is a mixture of myth, legend, and historical fact. Taking Jesus' usurpation of the authority of the high priest as the critical event, the historical Jesus was rightly condemned as a messianic pretender and was crucified by the Romans. As far as gMark's passion narrative goes, I find it to be a sophisticated, highly artistic portrayal, making Jesus out to be Aristotle's classic tragic hero. Even so, I do think that Jesus' last words were likely historical inasmuch as the presentation here is dissimilar from the final form of Mark's gospel. While Mark presents the story of Jesus as a comedy with a happy ending (the resurrection), gMark's portrayal is just the opposite--a searing tragedy. In this light, you can see that I am not simply repeating the gospel's version of the Jesus story. As for Mark 15:34 goes, I think that the criteria of dissimilarity, embarrassment and orality support the thesis that Jesus did actually speak his alleged last words.

lmbarre

Thank you for the clarification. So here is the text with the alleged interpolation.

1:13 For you have heard of my former way of life26 in Judaism, how I was savagely persecuting the church of God and trying to destroy it. 1:14 I27 was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my nation,28 and was29 extremely zealous for the traditions of my ancestors.30 1:15 But when the one31 who set me apart from birth32 and called me by his grace was pleased 1:16 to reveal his Son in33 me so that I could preach him34 among the Gentiles, I did not go to ask advice from35 any human being,36 1:17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem37 to see those who were apostles before me, but right away I departed to Arabia,38 and then returned to Damascus.

1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem39 to visit Cephas40 and get information from him,41 and I stayed with him fifteen days. 1:19 But I saw none of the other apostles42 except James the Lord’s brother. 1:20 I assure you43 that, before God, I am not lying about what I am writing to you!44 1:21 Afterward I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 1:22 But I was personally45 unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 1:23 They were only hearing, “The one who once persecuted us is now proclaiming the good news46 of the faith he once tried to destroy.” 1:24 So47 they glorified God because of me.48 2:1 Then after fourteen years I went up to Jerusalem1 again with Barnabas, taking Titus along too.

2:2 I went there2 because of3 a revelation and presented4 to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did so5 only in a private meeting with the influential people,6 to make sure that I was not running – or had not run7 – in vain. 2:3 Yet8 not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek. 2:4 Now this matter arose9 because of the false brothers with false pretenses10 who slipped in unnoticed to spy on11 our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, to make us slaves.12 2:5 But13 we did not surrender to them14 even for a moment,15 in order that the truth of the gospel would remain with you.16

I note that the theme of Paul's persecution mentioned in the insertion (1:23) is also found in the preceding context (1:13-14), thereby indicating that there is not an interpolation present.