James ..in Acts. //// Two different ones?


#1

Acts 12. Herod kills James, brother of John, with the sword.

Acts 21:18 ...Paul meets James, and all the elders ....


#2

[quote="brb3, post:1, topic:318898"]
Acts 12. Herod kills James, brother of John, with the sword.

Acts 21:18 ...Paul meets James, and all the elders ....

[/quote]

Yes. In the absence of access to a Bible dictionary . . .

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_son_of_Zebedee


#3

Yes. James son of Zebedee is a different person from James ‘brother’ of Jesus (aka James the Just).


#4

And, James the Just ( the Lesser), Bishop of Jerusalem…was a Cousin (brother) of Jesus ?


#5

[quote="brb3, post:4, topic:318898"]
And, James the Just ( the Lesser), Bishop of Jerusalem....was a Cousin (brother) of Jesus ?

[/quote]

Yes, either a cousin (according to one idea) or a step-brother (according to another idea). In fact, many of the first bishops and other prominent figures of the Jerusalem Church were actually related in some way to Jesus.

And we don't know if James the Lesser, James of Alphaeus, and James the Just are one and the same person. James of Alphaeus is often identified with James the Lesser, but there is a difference in opinion as to whether James of Alphaeus and James the Just are the same person: the West, following St. Jerome (again) tended to conflate the two, while the East regards them as two separate figures.


#6

[quote="patrick457, post:5, topic:318898"]
Yes, either a cousin (according to one idea) or a step-brother (according to another idea). In fact, many of the first bishops and other prominent figures of the Jerusalem Church were actually related in some way to Jesus.

And we don't know if James the Lesser, James of Alphaeus, and James the Just are one and the same person. James of Alphaeus is often identified with James the Lesser, but there is a difference in opinion as to whether James of Alphaeus and James the Just are the same person: the West, following St. Jerome (again) tended to conflate the two, while the East regards them as two separate figures.

[/quote]

3 James ? No way !! Jerome was the scriptural expert ...he says 2.

Unless, we are to believe James the Just was not an Apostle ...in which case, he couldn't of been Bishop of Jerusalem!


#7

[quote="brb3, post:6, topic:318898"]
3 James ? No way !! Jerome was the scriptural expert ...he says 2.

Unless, we are to believe James the Just was not an Apostle ...in which case, he couldn't of been Bishop of Jerusalem!

[/quote]

Correct. The "3 James" thesis really is quite weak.

The Acts of the Apostles in Ch 1 lists the 12 Apostles, one of them being James Alphaeus and the other James Zebedee (brother of John Zebedee). Acts 12:2 says James Zebedee was murdered by Herod. This leaves James Alphaeus as the only other option when in Acts 12:17 Peter escapes from Prison and say "Go tell James [Alpaheus] and the other disciples."

Also in Galatians 1:19, Paul says that after his conversion he went to Jerusalem but "I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother." Again, the only Apostles named James are Alphaeus and Zebedee.

There is no 3rd James ever introduced into Acts of the Apostles or anywhere else. It's a weak thesis and seems to be promoted by liberal scholarship that rejects the inspiration and unity of Scripture.


#8

[quote="Catholic_Dude, post:7, topic:318898"]
Correct. The "3 James" thesis really is quite weak.

The Acts of the Apostles in Ch 1 lists the 12 Apostles, one of them being James Alphaeus and the other James Zebedee (brother of John Zebedee). Acts 12:2 says James Zebedee was murdered by Herod. This leaves James Alphaeus as the only other option when in Acts 12:17 Peter escapes from Prison and say "Go tell James [Alpaheus] and the other disciples."

Also in Galatians 1:19, Paul says that after his conversion he went to Jerusalem but "I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother." Again, the only Apostles named James are Alphaeus and Zebedee.

There is no 3rd James ever introduced into Acts of the Apostles or anywhere else. It's a weak thesis and seems to be promoted by liberal scholarship that rejects the inspiration and unity of Scripture.

[/quote]

Yes ...Gal. 1:19 ....seals the matter for us !! Good citation !


#9

[quote="brb3, post:6, topic:318898"]
3 James ? No way !! Jerome was the scriptural expert ...he says 2.

Unless, we are to believe James the Just was not an Apostle ...in which case, he couldn't of been Bishop of Jerusalem!

[/quote]

Actually, Jerome says one James (James the Less=James of Alphaeus=James the Just). It is Eastern tradition which says two (James the Less=James of Alphaeus and James the Just). I should add that Hegesippus also speaks of James brother of Jesus as coming into the see of Jerusalem "after the apostles."


#10

[quote="patrick457, post:9, topic:318898"]
Actually, Jerome says one James (James the Less=James of Alphaeus=James the Just). It is Eastern tradition which says two (James the Less=James of Alphaeus and James the Just). I should add that Hegesippus also speaks of James brother of Jesus as coming into the see of Jerusalem "after the apostles."

[/quote]

Which makes no sense!.....since we have two apostles named James in Gospel....and two in Acts. How does Jerome justify his 1 James scenario ?

U must of meant 2 James for Jerome. Brother of John, the greater...and the Lesser, the Just..........with the East claiming existence of a 3rd, the Just, Cousin of Christ, ( a non-apostle).


#11

James the Less cannot be the same as James the "brother" of Jesus, because JtL was an apostle, one of the 12, while the "brothers" of Jesus did not believe on him during his ministry (John 7:5).


#12

Exactly. I did not include James the Greater earlier.

Jerome identified James the Just, brother of Jesus, with James son of Alphaeus, arguing that ‘brother’ here does not mean ‘brother’ in the biological sense. Basing himself on Galatians 1:19, he argued that James the Just is an apostle. Jerome concludes that Mary the mother of James and Joses (Mark 15:40, 47) is the wife of Alphaeus, the sister of Jesus’ mother (John 19:25). Given that James the Just has been identified with James of Alphaeus, Jerome indicated he cannot explain the connection of Mary the mother of James and Joses to Clopas. While many modern translations today insert the word “wife” to “Mary of Clopas” in John 19:25, Jerome seemed to understand this Mary as being Clopas’ daughter. Since James and Joses are the names of two of the four of those so-called brothers of Jesus (Mark 6:3), Mary of Clopas is identified as the wife of Alphaeus and mother of James.

There were later developments to this critical theory. While Jerome confessed that he cannot explain the connection of Mary to Clopas, suggesting that Clopas might be her father or that “Clopas” is actually a family name, Clopas and Alphaeus are later theorized to be different Greek renderings of the Aramaic name Halpai. It was St. John Chrysostom who first suggested that James was the son of Clopas, although Hegesippus suggested that it was Simeon (Simeon of Jerusalem) who was Clopas’ son.


#13

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.