Oberon says, "Courts aren't just about finding out what most likely happened. They are about making sure as much as possible the innocent don't get convicted."
:facepalm:
The only way to make sure the innocent don't get convicted is by finding out what happened.
This is rich:
"The reasons are pretty clear to anyone not completely blinded by bias: Paul specifically states he met Jesus' brother James."
Not the Lords' brother, but "Jesus' brother," and "specifically" no less. There's no bias there. :no:
Paul refers to Peter, James, and John as "pillars." The gospels reflect those three as the names of the three closest disciples to Jesus repeatedly, as in Peter, James, and John.
The Transfiguration
2 After six days Jesus took Peter, James and John with him and led them up a high...
Some people see the same name and jump to conclusions and then have to make up all kinds of excuses as to why those conclusions are not reflected in the gospels or Acts. Sorry, but I'm not going there.
What I believe or don't believe is completely irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that the gospel writers and Acts failed to notice that Jesus' brother had a ministry and that he was supposedly martyred.
I can't accept that the James Paul referred to was Jesus' brother because the gospels and Acts do not mention that Jesus' brother had a ministry nor do they mention his supposed martyrdom, in fact they tell us nothing about him.
When people claim that Paul is referring to Jesus' brother I...
The son of Zebedee is not dead at this point. According to Acts he was killed in what would have been the year 44CE during Paul's second visit to Jerusalem, 14 years after his first visit. Paul himself makes no mention of James being killed nor that he met with a different James during his...
Besides, one has to completely ignore the fact that the gospels nor Acts mentions a brother of Jesus having a ministry, nor do they mention his supposed martyrdom.
Unfortunately, a lot of religious language is left open to interpretation leaving it difficult to know what a religious author has in mind, this case is no different. By all your reasoning and descriptions and grammatical rules, brother of Jesus would have been far more apt, especially in this...
We're talking about use of language in a religious context. Your insistence that this phrase has one meaning and one meaning only is of no consequence within a religious context. Religious language makes use of meaning in a creative way, and anyway it cares to regardless of your rigid rules of...
As if within a religious context the use of language is ever clear. Brother is used dozens upon dozens of times to mean a Christian believer consistently throughout the epistles and even Acts, so it becomes a source of amazement when one can be so certain that this one phrase is clearly to be...
OK, so brother of the Lord could be a title reserved for James because of his position within the church which is what has been suggested by R. M. Price and others. I see.
It's well understood that Lord is another name for God, such as with angel of the Lord. If James was called the brother of the Lord by people that spoke of angels of the Lord, perhaps James was called a brother of the Lord (God) because of his position within the church, and considering that...