And still you are trying to make some deal out of me saying, the brothers of Jesus is what the topic is about what matters.
Again, at one point during our discussion of Jesus's brothers, you claimed that Elizabeth was Mary's cousin (post #166), to which I said:
"Your claiming that a Koine Greek word with the specific familial definition "cousin" was applied to Elizabeth mattered when you thought it proved that Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) couldn't have been Jesus's cousins. That is up until I said the following:
"There's more than one word in Koine Greek that can be used to refer to a cousin, such as "ἀνεψιός" (ἀνεψιός anepsios), which has a specific familial definition "a nephew, cousin" and "συγγενίς" (syngenis), which has a broader familial definition "a kinswoman, female relative", and can be used to refer to various types of female kin, including cousin. Therefore, if Elizabeth was Mary's cousin, the use of either of those Koine Greek would aptly apply, and it was the word "συγγενίς" (syngenis) that in the end was used in Lk. 1:36.
However, solely because the word "ἀνεψιός" (ἀνεψιός anepsios) wasn't used in Lk. 1:36, Elizabeth couldn't have been Mary's cousin as you claim, since you also claim that only the Koine Greek word with the specific familial definition "cousin", such as "ἀνεψιός" (ἀνεψιός anepsios), would've been used to refer to a cousin, and if its not then they can't be a cousin, and thus you contradict yourself regarding your own claim, according to your own logic."
How convenient that after I said the above you said it doesn't really matter that Elizabeth was Mary's cousin (post #174).
Yes, I apologize. The Lord's brother was an apostle, but not one of the twelve.
You say that as if you agreed with me from the start that James in Gal. 1:19 was an apostle when you haven't. You actually went from denying he was an apostle multiple times, to now accepting that he was, though still rejecting he was one of the twelve apostles. However, at the very least, its good you finally accept that James in Gal. 1:19 was an apostle of Jesus. Now, show where in Gal. 1:18-19 is it indicated that he wasn't one of the twelve apostles.
Now, again, we agree James in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 and the apostle James in Gal. 1:19 were the same person. In Gal. 1:18-19, it's indicated by Paul that James was both an apostle and family member of Jesus. This is because after Paul mentions he had seen the apostle Peter in Jerusalem, who was one of the twelve apostles, he adds that he didn't see any of the other apostles there, except James ("But I did not see another one of the apostles except James..."). The context of Gal. 1:18 and the words in bold red from v. 19 are what indicate that James was one of the twelve apostles. It's the title "the Lord's brother" that follows James's first name that indicates he was also Jesus's family member.
Therefore, if James was Jesus's sibling, he would've had to have also been one of the twelve apostles, either James of Zebedee or James of Alphaeus, however, neither were a son of Joseph and Mary, and thus he, nor his siblings Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Judas/Thaddeus) could've been Jesus's siblings. Note: This in itself does not prove Mary of Joseph was a perpetual Virgin, though there are reasons that show She is.
Let's talk about Jesus sisters, who was their father and mother, where is it mentioned. Now show me in the bible His sisters were His cousins.
I never said the unnamed sisters of Jesus in Matt: 13:56/Mk. 6:4 were Jesus's cousins. You're the one who believes Joseph and Mary were the parents of Jesus's unnamed sisters in Matt. 13:56-Mk. 6:4, despite them never being called the daughters of Joseph and Mary, nor the siblings of Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus).
Last edited: