my Testimonium article

[Bernard Muller]

Ok, you added one word (that the alleged interpolator would have removed).
ανδρα Ιακωβος ονομα αυτω και τινας ετερους
What does ανδρα mean in that context?
How would you translate the above Greek clause?

Cordially, Bernard

[spin]

Ok, you added one word...

Penny drops at last.

...(that the alleged interpolator would have removed).
ανδρα Ιακωβος ονομα αυτω και τινας ετερους
What does ανδρα mean in that context?
How would you translate the above Greek clause?

It isn't a clause. It's a nominal phrase that contains a sub-clause that qualifies the indefinite ανδρα. Just substitute "a man" for "the brother of ... christ" and you should get the idea.

[Bernard Muller]

So we would have "brought before them the man James (by) his name, and some others"
Rather than "brought before them the brother of Jesus called Christ, James (by) his name, and some others"
James needed to be qualified as a man. You are a genius!

Cordially, Bernard

[Peter Kirby]

This thread has officially jumped the shark.

[andrewcriddle]

........................

ανδρα [τον αδελφον Ιησου του λεγομενου χριστου] Ιακωβος ονομα αυτω και τινας ετερους

Wouldn't you have to change the case of James (Ιακωβον instead of Ιακωβος) ?

If you know why Ιακωβος is nominative in the present form of the text, you have your answer.

These naming sub-clauses typically take the nominative e.g. Gospel of John 1:6.

What has changed in the structure, Andrew? Has the sub-clause changed its relationship with the accusative it qualifies?

Thinking about it, in your version you have a naming sub-clause but no noun for it to qualify.

What was ανδρα doing sitting there??

I'm sorry spin. I misread your reconstruction. Apologies. It is grammatically entirely valid.

However, what you are proposing is that there was an original ανδρα which has been deleted and replaced with a phrase about the brother of Jesus. But this seems to agree with my original point that the proposed change is not just an interpolation but a rewrite of the whole passage.

Andrew Criddle

[spin]

So we would have "brought before them the man James (by) his name, and some others"
Rather than "brought before them the brother of Jesus called Christ, James (by) his name, and some others"
James needed to be qualified as a man. You are a genius!

Even now, because you still haven't paid any attention, you've fucked up. The fact that you knew nothing about the language you were playing with didn't stop you from grinding on. Look at the translation you give and explain where the article you supplied before "man" came from. What we have would be:

"brought before them a man named James and certain others"

and James is not qualified as a man, but "a man" is qualified by the subordinate naming clause.

I don't know about the thread having jumped the shark, but I'd say you have, Bernard. Why not just be silent about such things, rather than display your skills—on waterskis?

[spin]

However, what you are proposing is that there was an original ανδρα which has been deleted and replaced with a phrase about the brother of Jesus. But this seems to agree with my original point that the proposed change is not just an interpolation but a rewrite of the whole passage.

I just didn't consider the simple substitution of one noun phrase for another "a rewrite of the whole passage". Maybe it's a matter of interpretation.

[Bernard Muller]

to spin,
I did not find in the whole of Josephus' Antiqities an instance where ανδρα in written in front and immediately next to a name (of a person).
Maybe you can correct me on that.

Cordially, Bernard

[spin]

to spin,
I did not find in the whole of Josephus' Antiqities an instance where ανδρα in written in front and immediately next to a name (of a person).
Maybe you can correct me on that.

That's interesting.