lpetrich

Earl Doherty's latest feedback page brings up yet another curious issue.

In response to someone's e-mail, he starts a discussion of "Brothers of the Lord" with
and continues with discussion of Galatians 1:19, which tells us that James was "the brother of the Lord." This is sometimes taken as a reference to a biological brother of Jesus Christ, and ED asks why nobody ever claimed apostolic succession from any of JC's (alleged) biological brothers, when they were willing to do so from the likes of the apostle Peter.

I note that his reader-feedback pages contain discussion of some other interesting issues, like why wasn't the date of Jesus Christ's death better recorded. Not surprisingly, he gets rants from fundies, like Gonads and Zombies:

Vivisector

Do we have good reason to suppose that Jesus's brothers (at a minimum, James and Jude) were apostles? In 1 Cor 9:5, Paul seems to differentiate between the apostles and the Lord's brothers. Additionally, James seems to be geographically associated only with Jerusalem, as opposed to conducting a travelling ministry. This gives me cause to doubt that Jesus's brothers were considered apostles.

In any event, if the Ebionites claimed a linkage to Jesus through James, then it seems Doherty's argument above is weakened substantially.

Cheers,

V.

GakuseiDon

From the fragments of Hegesippus, isn't that what actually happened?

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...egesippus.html

There still survived of the kindred of the Lord the grandsons of Judas, who according to the flesh was called his brother. These were informed against, as belonging to the family of David, and Evocatus brought them before Domitian Caesar: for that emperor dreaded the advent of Christ, as Herod had done.

So he asked them whether they were of the family of David; and they confessed they were. Next he asked them what property they had, or how much money they possessed. They both replied that they had only 9000 denaria between them, each of them owning half that sum; but even this they said they did not possess in cash, but as the estimated value of some land, consisting of thirty-nine plethra only, out of which they had to pay the dues, and that they supported themselves by their own labour. And then they began to hold out their hands, exhibiting, as proof of their manual labour, the roughness of their skin, and the corns raised on their hands by constant work.

Being then asked concerning Christ and His kingdom, what was its nature, and when and where it was to appear, they returned answer that it was not of this world, nor of the earth, but belonging to the sphere of heaven and angels, and would make its appearance at the end of time, when He shall come in glory, and judge living and dead, and render to every one according to the course of his life.7

Thereupon Domitian passed no condemnation upon them, but treated them with contempt, as too mean for notice, and let them go free. At the same time he issued a command, and put a stop to the persecution against the Church.

When they were released they became leaders8 of the churches, as was natural in the case of those who were at once martyrs and of the kindred of the Lord.

I also see that Earl refers to me on the feedback page, though not by name. Darn!

Vivisector

Exactly. We also have the relationship between the Ebionites/Nazoreans and the authority of James as well as testimony in Paul's own epistles as to the prominence of James. It seems to me that, what Doherty would have expected to find is precisely what happened.

Cheers,

V.