Does “Brother of the Lord” settle the Jesus myth question?

On another forum I recently posted a discussion of the passage in Galatians where Paul says he met James, “the brother of the Lord”, setting out why I believe the passage is not necessarily the “slam dunk” that many say it is to prove Jesus was a historical figure. I have other posts on other topics … Continue reading “Does “Brother of the Lord” settle the Jesus myth question?”


The Function of “Brother of the Lord” in Galatians 1:19

It seems hardly a month passes without somebody on Vridar bringing up Galatians 1:19, in which Paul refers to James as the “brother of the Lord.” Recently I ran a search for the phrase here, and after reading each post, it struck me how much time we’ve spent wondering what it means and so little time asking why … Continue reading “The Function of “Brother of the Lord” in Galatians 1:19″


James the Brother of the Lord and James the Theologian of the Matrix

In his crusading zeal to slash and burn mythicism James McGrath is demonstrating once more his unfortunate lack of awareness of the actual content mythicist arguments and has done his readers a more general disservice by misrepresenting the nature of mainstream arguments on how various interpolations have worked their way into manuscript traditions. Somehow a … Continue reading “James the Brother of the Lord and James the Theologian of the Matrix”


The “Born of a Woman” / Galatians 4:4 INDEX

Proper indexing of my posts has fallen behind. One small step towards correcting this has been to collate all Vridar posts that have dealt with Galatians 4:4 and the famous “born of a woman” phrase. First I list persons whose various views have been presented here. Then . . .  well, you can see how … Continue reading “The “Born of a Woman” / Galatians 4:4 INDEX”


A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 5: The Transformation of Simon/Paul in Galatians

The Transformation of Simon/Paul into Proto-Orthodox Paul in Galatians 1:1 – 2:14   This post will consider Galatians 1:1 – 2:14 from the perspective of my Simonian hypothesis. That passage contains some of the few bits of biographical information the Pauline Corpus provides about Paul. If my hypothesis is correct, it should be able to … Continue reading “A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 5: The Transformation of Simon/Paul in Galatians”


Hoffmann: James was NOT the biological brother of Jesus

Steven Carr has drawn our attention to Dr R. Joseph Hoffmann’s argument that Paul’s reference in Galatians 1:19 to “James, the brother of the Lord”, was clearly not meant to be understood by Paul as an indicator that James was the biological brother of Jesus. He wrote in The Jesus Tomb Debacle: RIP: The James … Continue reading “Hoffmann: James was NOT the biological brother of Jesus”


Putting James the Brother of the Lord to a Bayesian Test

I saw none of the other apostles, except James the brother of the Lord. — Galatians 1:19 On this verse some hang their strongest assurance that Jesus himself was an historical figure. Paul says he met James, the brother of the Lord (assumed to be Jesus), so that is absolute proof that Jesus existed. That … Continue reading “Putting James the Brother of the Lord to a Bayesian Test”


Reading Galatians afresh: a Gnostic Paul, James, Peter and John?

Ron Goetz posted a comment elsewhere that reminded me of the works of Walter Schmithals on Paul’s letters. The one I have read most of, Paul & the Gnostics, is not the easiest of reads but is packed densely with detailed argument and detailed references to the scholarship of his day. But it does force … Continue reading “Reading Galatians afresh: a Gnostic Paul, James, Peter and John?”


James Brother of the Lord: Another Case for Interpolation

Never throw out old books. I have caught up with my 1942 edition of Jesus Not A Myth by A. D. Howell Smith. The book is an argument against mythicism as it was argued by a range of authors in its day: J. M. Robertson, Thomas Whittacker, L. Gordon Rylands, Arthur Drews, Bergh van Eysinga, … Continue reading “James Brother of the Lord: Another Case for Interpolation”


James Brother of the Lord, Porky Pies and Problems for the Historical Jesus Hypothesis

A good reason to accept the theory of evolution is that it predicts what we will find in the fossil record and its predictions have not yet failed. No one has found a rabbit fossil in pre-Cambrian rocks. If James had been a sibling of Jesus and a leader in the Jerusalem church (along with … Continue reading “James Brother of the Lord, Porky Pies and Problems for the Historical Jesus Hypothesis”


“Brother of the Lord” – Doherty versus McGrath

I am copying a comment by Earl Doherty here as a post in its own right. Doherty apparently attempted to post it on McGrath’s blog in response to McGrath’s post, James the Brother of the Lord and Mythicism, but was confronted with word-length issues. James was responding to Earl’s Menu Entree #3 in his Antidotes … Continue reading ““Brother of the Lord” – Doherty versus McGrath”


Earl Doherty’s Antidotes for a James McGrath Menu.

Earl Doherty has visited James McGrath’s Matrix Restaurant and sampled for himself all 23 items offered on his Menu of Answers for Mythicists. Here is the first part of Earl’s complete culinary report on his experience along with tips for other prospective diners. Herewith a response to Jim McGrath’s blog feature A Menu of Answers … Continue reading “Earl Doherty’s Antidotes for a James McGrath Menu.”


Applying Sound Historical Methodology to “James the Brother of the Lord”

It is easy for both historicists and mythicists to to descend to shallow proof-texting when arguing over the significance of Paul’s reference to James, the brother of the Lord, as evidence for the historicity of Jesus. I am not attempting here in this post to cover all the arguments. I only want to address the … Continue reading “Applying Sound Historical Methodology to “James the Brother of the Lord””


Continuing Dialog with ChatGPT — historical methods

Continuing from https://vridar.org/2023/10/01/a-dialog-with-chatgpt-on-christian-origins/ Me: What, if anything, changes, if we introduce the need for independent corroboration? ChatGPT: The requirement for independent corroboration significantly tightens the standards for historical verification. If historians strictly demand independent sources to corroborate each event or claim, it can add more confidence to their conclusions but also presents challenges: Higher Confidence … Continue reading “Continuing Dialog with ChatGPT — historical methods”