davidlau17 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:14 am Since your entire argument hinges upon Gal 1:19 being inauthentic
Not just so. I may well replace the fourth step above from this:
As reaction against proto-Mark, the Jewish-Christians (Hegesippus = "Matthew") wanted to make this James their political propagandistic icon. Hence the interpolation was inserted in Gal 1:19, and James, despised "brother of Jesus" in proto-Mark, became the "Brother of Lord".
...to this:
As reaction against proto-Mark, the Jewish-Christians (Hegesippus = "Matthew") wanted to make this James their political propagandistic icon. Hence the mere Christian brother of Gal 1:19 , despised "brother of Jesus" in proto-Mark, was interpreted deliberately (i.e., even knowing the truth, i.e. that James was only a mere Christian brother) in a biological brother of Jesus.
All this to say that the difference is
very subtle between a mere interpolation of Gal 1:19 and a
deliberate false interpretation imposed on a
genuine Gal 1:19 (despite of the knowledge of the fact that a
spiritual brotherhood of James was meant for the original author).
Note that the explanation above explains what surprised Paula Fredriksen about
Mark 6:3 (
"Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James (=Jacob), Joseph, Judas (=Judah) and Simon (=Simeon)?" ):
It’s a little like naming a string of Olsons Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Franklin: the names themselves convey a close identification with the nation’s foundational past.
(Fredriksen, Paula. 1999.
Jesus of Nazareth, p.240)
It is not a coincidence. The biblical patriarchs found by the mythical Jesus
in the Sheol are now under the form of biological brothers of Jesus in Nazareth.