gryan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 5:14 am
My thesis comes out of a close reading of Galatians. I have answers to all your good questions but it gets complicated.
Short answer: Catholic church tradition going back to Jerome has it that James son of Alphaeus and James the Lord's brother were one and the same person. I think they got the characters right, but made a mistake when they combined the two into one.
On one hand, I agree with the scholars who say that "James the Lord's brother" was the same-womb brother of Jesus (see Mark 6:3 and 15:40). I think "James the less" was "James, the Lord's brother"--the flesh and blood brother of Jesus. I think Paul did indeed "consult with flesh and blood" when he saw "James the Lord's brother" (Gal 1:16 and 1:19)
I think it's worth it to dig a bit deeper into Jerome's identification of three Jameses: James the Lord's brother, James the son of Alphaeus, and James the Less. Jerome spells out his rationale for this identification explicitly in
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary . All of his deductions are based on his readings of the NT, and he gives us no indication that he had any better idea about the identities of the Jameses than either you or I would from our own intuition.
No one doubts that there were two apostles called by the name James, James the son of Zebedee, and James the son of Alphæus. Do you intend the comparatively unknown James the Less, who is called in Scripture the son of Mary, not however of Mary the mother of our Lord, to be an apostle, or not? If he is an apostle, he must be the son of Alphæus and a believer in Jesus. "For neither did his brethren believe in him."
If he is not an apostle, but a third James (who he can be I cannot tell), how can he be regarded as the Lord's brother, and how, being a third, can he be called less to distinguish him from greater, when greater and less are used to denote the relations existing, not between three, but between two? Notice, moreover, that the Lord's brother is an apostle, since Paul says, Galatians 1:18-19 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. And in the same Epistle, Galatians 2:9 And when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, etc. And that you may not suppose this James to be the son of Zebedee, you have only to read the Acts of the Apostles, and you will find that the latter had already been slain by Herod. The only conclusion is that the Mary who is described as the mother of James the Less was the wife of Alphæus and sister of Mary the Lord's mother, the one who is called by John the Evangelist Mary of Clopas, whether after her father, or kindred, or for some other reason.
Jerome is probably correct that James the Lord's brother and James the Less are the same person, but I agree with you that we can't necessarily say the same for James of Alphaeus. Jerome's identification of James of Alphaeus with James the Lord's brother is entirely dependent on his identification of James of Alphaeus with James the Less.
gryan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 5:14 am
On the other hand, I agree with scholars who say that James and Cephas of Galatians 2 who gave Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship are the same as the James and Peter of Acts 15. I note that Luke-Acts erases Mark's/Matthew's explicit naming of the other sons of Mary, mother of Jesus. So. within the narrative world of Luke-Acts, it is most likely that, after the death of James, son of Zebedee, the subsequent "James" named as a leader in and after Acts 12:17 was the other "James" named as one of the original 12. I think that the "recognized ones" (οἱ δοκοῦντες of Gal 2:2, 6, and 9) were all from the 12 (eg. the 12 who, according to Mark 10:42, where privy to Jesus' critique of οἱ δοκοῦντες of the Gentiles who "lord it over" their subjects).
I agree that the James and Cephas from Galatians 2 are identical with the James and Peter from Acts 15. I don't agree that the James presented to us in Acts 15 is necessarily meant to be James of Alphaeus or one of the 12. James, the leader of the Church, is never given an introduction or properly identified. He is introduced to us in passing through the mouth of Peter in Acts 12:17 ("Tell this to James and the brothers") almost immediately following the death of James of Zebedee. If it hadn't been for the fact that James of Zebedee had just died, we'd likely believe Peter was referring to him.
I don't see how James of Alphaeus being named as one of the original 12 would make him any more likely than the other 9 remaining disciples to take a leadership position in Jerusalem. John, still alive and not imprisoned, would seem to be a more likely candidate based on his more prominent status in the gospels. If James the Just was indeed the scarely mentioned James of Alphaeus, Acts seems to have omitted important information regarding this mysterious figure's rise to prominence and why he was elected over the others. If James the Just was the brother of the Lord mentioned in Galatians 1, this would give us an explanation for why this James took a leadership position (an explanation consistent with what Hegesippus tells us).
gryan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 15, 2022 5:14 amApart from getting any farther into the weeds of Galatians, I'm wondering how that "opening gambit" sits with you.
Do you mean the origin of the nickname "the Just"/"Righteous One"? I think you've properly noted the earliest instances of its application to James (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of the Hebrews, Hegesippus) - I'm not certain of the order in which these were written. I doubt it originated with Hegessipus; it might have some relation to the community that wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls.
