"James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
gryan
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by gryan »

Re: Origen on "James the Just"

"For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless--being, although against his will, not far from the truth--that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),--the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice. Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. If, then, he says that it was on account of James that the desolation of Jerusalem was made to overtake the Jews, how should it not be more in accordance with reason to say that it happened on account (of the death) of Jesus Christ, of whose divinity so many Churches are witnesses, composed of those who have been convened from a flood of sins, and who have joined themselves to the Creator, and who refer all their actions to His good pleasure." http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html

-------

In my effort to understand Galatians as a coherent text, I find that it makes best sense to assume that James the Lord's brother and James the pillar were two different people. This reading of Galatians clashes with Origin's interpretion. Nevertheless, Origen identifies the key issues for interpretation of Paul's view of James the Lord's brother. Does Paul refer to James as the Lord's brother "on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together"? And/or, was it "because of his virtue and doctrine" (which provides Origin with a basis for calling him "James the Just")?

I think Origin was mistaken because he was trying to make the James's of Galatians fit his synthisis of Acts 15 and GMatt and Gospel of Hebrews on "James". By contrast, I interpret the Jameses NT Galatians first as part of a coherent letter, and second in light of GMark ,and third in light of Acts 15. I view GMatt as a destraction since his redaction of GMark erases the idea of James the brother of Jesus as "the lesser".
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 1210
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by GakuseiDon »

gryan wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:28 am Re: Origen on "James the Just"

"For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless--being, although against his will, not far from the truth--that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),--the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice. Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. If, then, he says that it was on account of James that the desolation of Jerusalem was made to overtake the Jews, how should it not be more in accordance with reason to say that it happened on account (of the death) of Jesus Christ, of whose divinity so many Churches are witnesses, composed of those who have been convened from a flood of sins, and who have joined themselves to the Creator, and who refer all their actions to His good pleasure." http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html
I think it should be kept in mind that Paul doesn't actually say anything like that highlighted, unless Origen has a source that we don't have. Origen likes to 'read between the lines', and he does this with not just ancient scriptural texts, but of the texts of more modern writers like Paul and Josephus, like he does in that passage.
gryan
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by gryan »

GakuseiDon wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 2:52 am
gryan wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:28 am Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html
I think it should be kept in mind that Paul doesn't actually say anything like that highlighted, unless Origen has a source that we don't have. Origen likes to 'read between the lines', and he does this with not just ancient scriptural texts, but of the texts of more modern writers like Paul and Josephus, like he does in that passage.
Re: "relationship by blood"

I think Origin's use of the phrase "relationship by blood" is exegetical. This is because of Paul's mention of a consult "with flesh and blood" which is, in my opinion, supposed to be understood in connection with the idea of "brother" in the phrase "brother of the Lord". In support of this interpretation, note the ABCBA chiastic structure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiastic_structure

-----------

Gal 1:6-8, 15-20, and 2:11-14

1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are following ἕτερον [a different] gospel— 7 not that there really is another [ἄλλο], unless there are some who are disturbing you and wanting to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (or an angel from heaven) should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be anathama! 9 As we have said before, and now I say again, if any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be anathama...

15But when God, the One having selected me from my mother’s womb and having called me by His grace, was pleased 16to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles,

A. I did not immediately consut flesh and blood,
B. nor did I go up to Jerusalem to the apostles before me,
C. but I went away into Arabia [Note Gal 4:25 where the phrase "Sinai is a Mountain in Arabia" is a non-Pauline interpolation, perhaps indicating that when Paul went to Arabia it was to be tempted in the wilderness] and returned again to Damascus.
B. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit with Cephas, and I remained with him fifteen
days. But, belonging to the apostles [i.e. “the apostles before me”. Note: Paul may have
seen many of "the apostles" during those 15 days with Cephas],
A. I discerned [εἶδον] no different one [ἕτερον, i.e. “no different one” belonging to “the apostles before me”], except James the Lord’s brother.

20 I assure you before God that what I am writing to you is no lie...

2:11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he had clearly done wrong! 12 Until the coming as to some from James, he had been eating with the Gentiles! But when he came ["when he came" meaning when Cephas arrived, contra the prevailing textual variant, "when they came"] , he was drawing back and separating himself because he was afraid of those who were pro-circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also joined with him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray with them by their hypocrisy. And when I discerned [εἶδον] that they were not walking uprightly toward the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all…"

----------------

Does the chaism count as evidence that "relationship of blood" is based on exegesis?

I think the argument for connecting "flesh and blood" with "brother" in this passage is enhanced by the "Othering" reading of Paul's language. If Paul saw James the Lord's brother as "different" in the sense of preaching a "different Gospel" then singling him out as a "flesh and blood" brother of Jesus is fittingly disparaging. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:50, "flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God." Meaning, being the Lord's "brother" in the "flesh and blood" sense of the word is of no eternal value.
yakovzutolmai
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 6:03 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by yakovzutolmai »

I have wondered if James might be the "Jacim" who governs Batanea, maybe responsible for keeping the peace in all of Trachonitis. By the Jewish Revolt, his son Philip is in charge of the cavalry militia and is fighting against the Provisional Government. This region is ground zero for much of the enthusiasm for many of the Jewish Christian sects.

If this were true, it makes James more of a political leader rather than a religious leader.

If we take Josephus's account, we have the Egyptian False Prophet stirring trouble prior to James's execution. If we make something out of the contrast between these two figures, incorporating the idea that James could only be executed when Roman supervision was absent, then there is some implication that James did nothing wrong.

That is, James was not a rebel, nor a rabble-rousing false prophet. In this sense, he was "Just", or innocent. His execution would have been pure factional politics. Jacim's father was Zamaris, commanding a Parthian horse troop. It's almost certain that Jacim would have political links to Adiabene, and the sect of Judaism popular in the Transjordan seems to have spread to Jews in Nisibis and Arbela.

Meanwhile, we can speculate that the sons of Ananus were favorable to Philo's theology due to the possibility that the anti-circumcision Ananias in Josephus was in fact the same person as the High Priest. This makes Ananus ben Ananus possibly aligned to the Jews of Alexandria, who up until this time still maintained their own temple at Onias.

If the baptizer awakenings from the 30s-50s caused a theological rift between Babylonian and Alexandrian Jews, then the conflict between Ananus and James would reflect this. A conflict which Rome would have no interest in, and which they would certainly hope to diffuse.

This is the context for my hypothesis that "Just" may connote "Innocent" rather than "Righteous".
gryan
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by gryan »

yakovzutolmai wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 8:00 am

If we take Josephus's account, we have the Egyptian False Prophet stirring trouble prior to James's execution...

This is the context for my hypothesis that "Just" may connote "Innocent" rather than "Righteous".
Re: Egyptian False Prophet

"In the Christian text, The Acts of the Apostles, the commander (chiliarch) of the Roman garrison in Jerusalem, Claudius Lysias, mistakes Paul for this Egyptian,[citation needed] saying "Aren’t you the Egyptian who started a revolt and led four thousand terrorists out into the wilderness some time ago?"
---------------------------------as reported in Wikipedia

Before today, I had not heard of this! Origin may have thought of James the Just as innocent. Such a study of Josephas is a very different context than the one I'm focusing on.

-----------------------

My project is largely what might be called "deconstruction." I am tracing Origin's notion of "James the Just" back to the New Testament sources.

The idea of James the Just in Origin and Jerome seems to me to be based on a misreading of Paul's letter to the Galatians with "James the Lord's brother" of Gal 1:19 misidentified as James the "pillar" of Gal 2:12.

I am fully aware that this thesis goes against not only Jerome, but also the prevailing scholarly consensus.
gryan
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by gryan »

gryan wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:28 am Re: Origen on "James the Just"

Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html
RE: Against Celsus (Greek: Κατὰ Κέλσου Kata Kelsou; Latin: Contra Celsum), preserved entirely in Greek...
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Contra_Celsum

Does anyone have access (via online links or otherwise) to the above highlighted section of Against Celsus in Greek? I'm particularly interested in the phrase "relationship of blood" in Greek, as Origen wrote it.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by mlinssen »

gryan wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 3:50 am
gryan wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:28 am Re: Origen on "James the Just"

Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html
RE: Against Celsus (Greek: Κατὰ Κέλσου Kata Kelsou; Latin: Contra Celsum), preserved entirely in Greek...
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Contra_Celsum

Does anyone have access (via online links or otherwise) to the above highlighted section of Against Celsus in Greek? I'm particularly interested in the phrase "relationship of blood" in Greek, as Origen wrote it.
http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Mig ... Celsum.pdf

1.47 Ἐβουλόμην δ' ἂν Κέλσῳ, προσωποποιήσαντι τὸν Ἰουδαῖον παραδεξάμενόν πως Ἰωάννην ὡς βαπτιστὴν βαπτίζοντα τὸν Ἰησοῦν, εἰπεῖν ὅτι τὸ Ἰωάννην γεγονέναι βαπτιστήν, εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτημάτων βαπτίζοντα, ἀνέγραψέ τις τῶν μετ' οὐ πολὺ τοῦ Ἰωάννου καὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γεγενημένων. Ἐν γὰρ τῷ ὀκτωκαιδεκάτῳ τῆς ἰουδαϊκῆς ἀρχαιο λογίας ὁ Ἰώσηπος μαρτυρεῖ τῷ Ἰωάννῃ ὡς βαπτιστῇ γεγενημένῳ καὶ καθάρσιον τοῖς βαπτισαμένοις ἐπαγγελλο μένῳ. Ὁ δ' αὐτός, καίτοι γε ἀπιστῶν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ὡς Χριστῷ, ζητῶν τὴν αἰτίαν τῆς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων πτώσεως καὶ τῆς τοῦ ναοῦ καθαιρέσεως, δέον αὐτὸν εἰπεῖν ὅτι ἡ κατὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπιβουλὴ τούτων αἰτία γέγονε τῷ λαῷ, ἐπεὶ ἀπέκτειναν τὸν προφητευόμενον Χριστόν· ὁ δὲ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄκων οὐ μακρὰν τῆς ἀληθείας γενόμενός φησι ταῦτα συμβεβηκέναι τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις κατ' ἐκδίκησιν Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου, ὃς ἦν ἀδελφὸς "Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ", ἐπειδήπερ δικαιότατον αὐτὸν ὄντα ἀπέκτειναν. Τὸν δὲ Ἰάκωβον τοῦτον ὁ Ἰησοῦ γνήσιος μαθητὴς Παῦλός φησιν ἑωρακέναι ὡς "ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου", οὐ τοσοῦτον διὰ τὸ πρὸς αἵματος συγγενὲς ἢ τὴν κοινὴν αὐτῶν ἀνατροφὴν ὅσον διὰ τὸ ἦθος καὶ τὸν λόγον. Εἴπερ οὖν διὰ Ἰάκωβον λέγει συμβεβηκέναι τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις τὰ κατὰ τὴν ἐρήμωσιν τῆς Ἱερουσαλήμ, πῶς οὐχὶ εὐλογώτερον διὰ Ἰησοῦν τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦτο φάσκειν γεγονέναι; Οὗ τῆς θειότητος μάρτυρες αἱ τοσαῦται τῶν μεταβαλόντων ἀπὸ τῆς χύσεως τῶν κακῶν ἐκκλησίαι καὶ ἠρτημένων τοῦ δημιουργοῦ καὶ πάντ' ἀναφερόντων ἐπὶ τὴν πρὸς ἐκεῖνον ἀρέσκειαν.

gryan
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by gryan »

mlinssen wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:00 am
gryan wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 3:50 am
gryan wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 1:28 am Re: Origen on "James the Just"

Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html
RE: Against Celsus (Greek: Κατὰ Κέλσου Kata Kelsou; Latin: Contra Celsum), preserved entirely in Greek...
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Contra_Celsum

Does anyone have access (via online links or otherwise) to the above highlighted section of Against Celsus in Greek? I'm particularly interested in the phrase "relationship of blood" in Greek, as Origen wrote it.
http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Mig ... Celsum.pdf

1.47 Ἐβουλόμην δ' ἂν Κέλσῳ, προσωποποιήσαντι τὸν Ἰουδαῖον παραδεξάμενόν πως Ἰωάννην ὡς βαπτιστὴν βαπτίζοντα τὸν Ἰησοῦν, εἰπεῖν ὅτι τὸ Ἰωάννην γεγονέναι βαπτιστήν, εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτημάτων βαπτίζοντα, ἀνέγραψέ τις τῶν μετ' οὐ πολὺ τοῦ Ἰωάννου καὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γεγενημένων. Ἐν γὰρ τῷ ὀκτωκαιδεκάτῳ τῆς ἰουδαϊκῆς ἀρχαιο λογίας ὁ Ἰώσηπος μαρτυρεῖ τῷ Ἰωάννῃ ὡς βαπτιστῇ γεγενημένῳ καὶ καθάρσιον τοῖς βαπτισαμένοις ἐπαγγελλο μένῳ. Ὁ δ' αὐτός, καίτοι γε ἀπιστῶν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ὡς Χριστῷ, ζητῶν τὴν αἰτίαν τῆς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων πτώσεως καὶ τῆς τοῦ ναοῦ καθαιρέσεως, δέον αὐτὸν εἰπεῖν ὅτι ἡ κατὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπιβουλὴ τούτων αἰτία γέγονε τῷ λαῷ, ἐπεὶ ἀπέκτειναν τὸν προφητευόμενον Χριστόν· ὁ δὲ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄκων οὐ μακρὰν τῆς ἀληθείας γενόμενός φησι ταῦτα συμβεβηκέναι τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις κατ' ἐκδίκησιν Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου, ὃς ἦν ἀδελφὸς "Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ", ἐπειδήπερ δικαιότατον αὐτὸν ὄντα ἀπέκτειναν. Τὸν δὲ Ἰάκωβον τοῦτον ὁ Ἰησοῦ γνήσιος μαθητὴς Παῦλός φησιν ἑωρακέναι ὡς "ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου", οὐ τοσοῦτον διὰ τὸ πρὸς αἵματος συγγενὲς ἢ τὴν κοινὴν αὐτῶν ἀνατροφὴν ὅσον διὰ τὸ ἦθος καὶ τὸν λόγον. Εἴπερ οὖν διὰ Ἰάκωβον λέγει συμβεβηκέναι τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις τὰ κατὰ τὴν ἐρήμωσιν τῆς Ἱερουσαλήμ, πῶς οὐχὶ εὐλογώτερον διὰ Ἰησοῦν τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦτο φάσκειν γεγονέναι; Οὗ τῆς θειότητος μάρτυρες αἱ τοσαῦται τῶν μεταβαλόντων ἀπὸ τῆς χύσεως τῶν κακῶν ἐκκλησίαι καὶ ἠρτημένων τοῦ δημιουργοῦ καὶ πάντ' ἀναφερόντων ἐπὶ τὴν πρὸς ἐκεῖνον ἀρέσκειαν.

Great! Thanks!

RE: Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου

Cf Matt. 23:35
American Standard Version
that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous (του αιματος αβελ του δικαιου) unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar.

Douay-Rheims Bible
That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just (του αιματος αβελ του δικαιου), even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.

Cf Lk 11:51
from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zachariah...

-------------

The αβελ του δικαιου of GMatt may be the only use of του δικαιου as an epithet in the NT.

I wonder if this usage influenced those who later coined the phrase "Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου". Or if Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου was earlier, then vice versa.

PS. Cf. the simple use of τοῦ δικαίου in Acts 7:52

"Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One (τοῦ δικαίου), whom you have now betrayed and murdered..."
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by mlinssen »

gryan wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 4:59 am
Great! Thanks!

RE: Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου

Cf Matt. 23:35
American Standard Version
that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous (του αιματος αβελ του δικαιου) unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar.

Douay-Rheims Bible
That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just (του αιματος αβελ του δικαιου), even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.

Cf Lk 11:51
from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zachariah...

-------------

The αβελ του δικαιου of GMatt may be the only use of του δικαιου as an epithet in the NT.

I wonder if this usage influenced those who later coined the phrase "Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου". Or if Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου was earlier, then vice versa.

PS. Cf. the simple use of τοῦ δικαίου in Acts 7:52

"Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One (τοῦ δικαίου), whom you have now betrayed and murdered..."
Holy cow, that's mighty interesting! First brain fart that comes up is that they overlooked the epithet, which naturally gained some traction after Christianity got solidly fused with Judaism. And then they could only equate the Righteous with Jesus, but its owner was named Jacob - so they fudged around with him being his brother, mate, intimate.

Matthew 23:35 has no variants but one: Sinaiticus omits "son of Barachiah", https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscri ... omSlider=0

Luke varies for K it sy and bo: they follow up with τοῦ δικαίου after Abel, and harmonisation attempts are likely given the additional variant of "son of Barachiah" in Bezae and again Syriac and Coptic crayons

180 occurrences of δικα in the NT... how could they omit Jacob?
gryan
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "James the Just": What is the origin of the phrase?

Post by gryan »

Re: Origen's phrase "on account of their relationship of blood" in Greek is τὸ πρὸς αἵματος συγγενὲς

Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html

http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Mig ... Celsum.pdf

ὁ δὲ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄκων οὐ μακρὰν τῆς ἀληθείας γενόμενός φησι ταῦτα συμβεβηκέναι τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις κατ' ἐκδίκησιν Ἰακώβου τοῦ δικαίου, ὃς ἦν ἀδελφὸς "Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ", ἐπειδήπερ δικαιότατον αὐτὸν ὄντα ἀπέκτειναν. Τὸν δὲ Ἰάκωβον τοῦτον ὁ Ἰησοῦ γνήσιος μαθητὴς Παῦλός φησιν ἑωρακέναι ὡς "ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου", οὐ τοσοῦτον διὰ τὸ πρὸς αἵματος συγγενὲς ἢ τὴν κοινὴν αὐτῶν ἀνατροφὴν ὅσον διὰ τὸ ἦθος καὶ τὸν λόγον.


-----------------

Origen's Greek words, translated "relationship of blood" are a match with passages about James in his relationship with Jesus as "brother": 1)αἷμα/blood is found in Gal 1:16, "I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood/αἵματι", and 2) συγγενής/relatives is found in Mark 6:4

Mark 6:4
1Jesus went on from there and came to His hometown, accompanied by His disciples. 2When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard Him were astonished. “Where did this man get these ideas?” they asked. “What is this wisdom He has been given? And how can He perform such miracles? 3Isn’t this the carpenter, the son of Mary and the brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? Aren’t His sisters here with us as well?” And they took offense at Him.

4Then Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown, among his relatives (ἐν τοῖς συγγενεῦσιν αὐτοῦ) , and in his own household is a prophet without honor.”

--------

It seems clear enough to me that Origin read Gal 1 to say that Paul consulted with "flesh and blood" when he saw the brother of the Lord, James (i.e. Jesus' blood relative).
Post Reply