Bretheren - question on Galatians 1:19

[Schabel]

I heard (on John Martignoni’s radio show) what COULD amount to a scriptural “proof” that the “bretheren” of the Lord referred to in the Bible are not Jesus’ immediate family members.

James, the “brother” of Jesus, is referred to by Paul in Gal 1:19:
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother. (RSV)

This makes him both the “brother” of Jesus AND an apostle. However, there are only 2 apostles named James. One is the son of Zebedee, the other the son of Alphaeus (cf Matt 10: 2-4).

This argument relys, however, on the interpretation of the Greek in Gal 1:19, IMO. Various translations have it somewhat different:

19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother. (KJV)
19 I saw none of the other apostles–only James, the Lord’s brother. (NIV)
19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother. (ASV)
19 and other of the apostles I did not see, except James, the brother of the Lord. (YLT)
19 But other of the apostles I saw none, saving James the brother of the Lord. (Douay Rheims)

Is there an expert in the Bible’s original Greek who can confirm that this phrase unambiguously says that James, the Lord’s “brother,” is also one of the apostles?

Thanks so much in advance!

 

[SteveT]

I can’t help you on the Greek, but even if it does unambiguously call James both brother and apostle, that wouldn’t necessarily prove this James was the son of Alpahaeus. “Apostle” means simply one who is sent; it referred in a special way to the 12, but Paul also considered himself an “apostle” in virtue of Christ’s appearance to him and call upon his life on the road to Emmaus. Paul recounts elsewhere that James, the Lord’s brother, also had an individual encounter with the risen Lord. If you use this argument against a Protestant, they will reply that James, during Jesus’ earthly ministry, was not a believer (John 7:5), but that after the resurrection Jesus appeared to Him specifically (1 Cor 15:7) and gave him a ministry in the early church, in virtue of which he became an apostle (“one who is sent”) in the same way Paul was an apostle. Of course, that doesn’t prove that this James was the Lord’s biological brother either - it just shows that the question can’t be definitively settled by appeal to scripture alone.

 

[Todd_Easton]

In Acts 14:14. both Paul and Barnabas are referred to as apostles.
In 1 Thes 2:6 with 1:1, Paul, seems to refer to himself, Sylvanus and Timothy as apostles.

Given the above verses, it is possible that James, the “brother” of the Lord, was an apostle but not one of the Twelve Apostles.

 

[tobias]

Context is everything. The preceding point that Paul is making is that he did not recieve the gospel from human beings, but from a direct revelation of Jesus Christ. In verse 17 he says that he did not go to Jerusalem to confer with those who were apostles before him. Then in verse 18 he says that 3 years later he went to Jerusalem and spent 3 days with Cephas, and saw none of the other apostles accept James the brother of the Lord. The inference that I take is that he was specifically speaking of the 12.

 

[Schabel]

tobias:

Context is everything. The preceding point that Paul is making is that he did not recieve the gospel from human beings, but from a direct revelation of Jesus Christ. In verse 17 he says that he did not go to Jerusalem to confer with those who were apostles before him. Then in verse 18 he says that 3 years later he went to Jerusalem and spent 3 days with Cephas, and saw none of the other apostles accept James the brother of the Lord. The inference that I take is that he was specifically speaking of the 12.

I absolutely agree. To take a contrary meaning of “apostle” in this context means that Paul saw no other Christians in Jerusalem during the 15 days he spent with Peter, and with James. Rather hard to believe.

 

[Schabel]

Any further (name removed by moderator)ut on the Greek meaning? Anyone?

 

[mtr01]

Here is the passage in Greek (with Strong’s dictionary numbers):

Gal 1:19

ετερον2087 A-ASM δε1161 CONJ των3588 T-GPM αποστολων652 N-GPM ουκ3756 PRT-N ειδον1492 V-2AAI-1S ει1487 COND μη3361 PRT-N ιακωβον2385 N-ASM τον3588 T-ASM αδελφον80 N-ASM του3588 T-GSM κυριου2962 N-GSM I’m certainly no Greek scholar, but I would imagine that the two words that would be in question would be #652 and #80

#652 is apostolos. Strong’s defines it as:

From G649; a delegate; specifically an ambassador of the Gospel; officially a commissioner of Christ (“apostle”), (with miraculous powers): - apostle, messenger, he that is sent.

Word #80 is, of course, adelphos:

From G1 (as a connective particle) and δελφύς delphus (the womb); a brother (literally or figuratively) near or remote (much like [H1]): - brother.

cont’d…

 

[mtr01]

…cont’d

Looking at verse 17, we get:

Gal 1:17 (GNT-TR+) ουδε3761 ADV ανηλθον424 V-2AAI-1S εις1519 PREP ιεροσολυμα2414 N-ASF προς4314 PREP τους3588 T-APM προ4253 PREP εμου1700 P-1GS αποστολους652 N-APM αλλ235 CONJ απηλθον565 V-2AAI-1S εις1519 PREP αραβιαν688 N-ASF και2532 CONJ παλιν3825 ADV υπεστρεψα5290 V-AAI-1S εις1519 PREP δαμασκον1154 N-ASF

For what it’s worth, the people that St. Paul didn’t see by not going to Jerusalem were the *apostolos *(same word #652 as in verse 19) who were before him.

Thus, I would ted to agree that given the context (as described in previous posts), St. Paul was referring to “the twelve”. As a result, adelphos in verse 19 would need to be taken in it’s figurative sense, as defined by Strong’s.

However, not being anything close to fluent in Greek, I can’t really speak to the grammar of the verse, however based on both the King James and the Douay translations, it seems pretty clear that Paul is saying that he didn’t see any *apostolos *except the Lord’s *adelphos (*which would make sense since James was the father of the Church in Jerusalem), again arguing for the figurative or remote sense of “brother”.

 

[cjaubert]

Wait a second. While admitting that I do not follow these Greek arguments very well, it seems to me that if one (a protestant) wants to claim that, “Hey, ‘brother’ means brother,” then, to be intellectually honest, he cannot then say, “But, ‘apostle’ does not mean 'apostle.” Put another way, you can’t have it both ways. Seems to me that this “proof” is just that - proof that Jesus did not have brothers in the blood brother sense.