Jesus's siblings

[Lunam_Meam]

@Lunam_Meam, I’m not sure if you’re aware of this (or perhaps it’s an issue only affecting my browser), but 80-90% of the window space in many of your posts comprise quotations of 5-10 different previous posts. If you highlight one specific part of a post, there’ll be a small ‘Quote’ pop-up that will allow to quote that bit without incorporating everything else.

I do this to maintain context when necessary.

 

[Bithynian]

I do this to maintain context when necessary.

It’s considered poor etiquette as it unnecessarily clutters up the screen for other users. For example one of your previous posts appears as such:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

If users require more context, they can select the downward-pointing arrow in the top-right corner of a quoted post to see prior responses in the conversation chain. Likewise, they can also select the upward-pointing arrow to have their browser scroll to the relevant post.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

Bithynian:

@Lunam_Meam, I’m not sure if you’re aware of this (or perhaps it’s an issue only affecting my browser), but 80-90% of the window space in many of your posts comprise quotations of 5-10 different previous posts. If you highlight one specific part of a post, there’ll be a small ‘Quote’ pop-up that will allow to quote that bit without incorporating everything else.

I do this to maintain context when necessary.

If users require more context, they can select the downward-pointing arrow in the top-right corner of a quoted post to see prior responses in the conversation chain. Likewise, they can also select the upward-pointing arrow to have their browser scroll to the relevant post.

Yes, they can do that, but I wish more people would, which is why I do what I do. And, considering how this forum is unfortunately run, I would not be surprised if there was a rule against how I quote. Lol. Anyway, I will try to keep my quoting in a post to a minimum so as to keep the peace. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

You are not the first, nor the last to believe this misconception,

A misconception that Luke holds to.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Cool, but you are going to have to respond to me with what exactly from the tradition gives you

I did respond.

You have yet to get a link.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Now, you attribute the verse “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” (Lk. 24:34) to having been spoken by the eleven apostles.

The Fathers of the Church and the Catechism disagree.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

You are not the first, nor the last to believe this misconception, but it is easy to do.

A misconception that Luke holds to.

So, you agree what you believe is a misconception!

Lunam_Meam:

…if you want me to see you can support your claim the supposed unnamed disciple at Emmaus is named Luke, then you are going to have to quote from the tradition exactly what gives you certainty of this.

I have actually posted a link from my source.

I can’t find it!

Lunam_Meam:

Now, you attribute the verse “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” (Lk. 24:34) to having been spoken by the eleven apostles.

The Fathers of the Church and the Catechism disagree.

Now show them this:

The eleven and their companions are saying this:

NIV
Luke 24:34: “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.”

ESV
Luke 24:34: “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!”

 

[Julius_Caesar]

So, you agree what you believe is a misconception

No. It’s a tongue in cheek statement.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Now show them this

That was a mistype. The Cathehism and the Fathers agree.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

I can’t find it!

Check my convo with TMC.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

Julius_Caesar:

Lunam_Meam:

You are not the first, nor the last to believe this misconception, but it is easy to do.

A misconception that Luke holds to.

So, you agree what you believe is a misconception!

No. It’s a tongue in cheek statement.

I know. As was mine.

Julius_Caesar:

Lunam_Meam:

…if you want me to see you can support your claim the supposed unnamed disciple at Emmaus is named Luke, then you are going to have to quote from the tradition exactly what gives you certainty of this.

I have actually posted a link from my source.

Check my convo with TMC.

I can’t find it!

The eleven and their companions are saying this:

NIV
Luke 24:34: “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.”

ESV
Luke 24:34: “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!”

Assuming that is true, assuming that Simon and Simon Peter are one and the same, and assuming Luke’s accounts in Lk. 24 are in order, after having said that, Jesus appeared amidst the apostles in the supper room (Lk. 24:36-49). And, in that instance, for the apostles present, especially Peter, to have been so fearful and disbelieving so as to act as though they had never seen, heard, or believed Jesus had risen at any point prior to does not follow your and other’s claim…

Thank you for sharing your beliefs though!

 

[LilyM]

Julius_Caesar:

So Paul can’t translate a Hebrew expression into Greek?

In my culture I refer to people who are cousins as my brothers. I don’t have to translate into English as cousins.

Sorry, that makes no sense. It seems to me the argument is that in Aramaic the word brother was used idiomatically to also refer to cousins. Why would a native Greek speaker writing in Greek use a translated Aramaic idiom, and do so just in this one instance to refer to James?

Many native English speakers writing in English - Aboriginal.Australians among them - will refer.to many persons as “brother” or “cousin” where strictly speaking neither term is correct. They may not have indigenous language as their first language- or even speak anything other than Enlgish - but their culturally broad concept of what brother and cousin mean still impacts how they communicate in English.

And they often don’t bother to clarify for non-indigenous persons that they aren’t using the words according to their OED definition or whatever - probably because they simply don’t see it as important enough to do so.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

And, in that instance, for the apostles present, especially Peter, to have been so fearful and disbelieving so as to act as though they had never seen, heard, or believed Jesus had risen at any point prior to does not follow your and other’s claim…

The same disciples who saw Jesus cure people were scared in a storm? The same disciples who after Jesus fed 5000 men thought Jesus was a ghost when He walked on water? Remember, they didn’t have the Holy Spirit.

 

[Dovekin]

There is also a possibility that brother of the Lord may have become a normal way of referring to James, almost a reflex, so that here was no need to translate. Like Monsignor. It would be unusual to translate that as Mi’lord.

I had an Italian uncle Francesco who was always called by a diminutive derived from Cesco. One day my mother called him Uncle Frank and we were all “we have an uncle Frank?” “Who?”

People may have been used to saying Jacob ach Adonai as his name, to distinguish him from other Jacobs. Translation into Greek may not have occurred to them, and when it did they used brother to express the idea of closeness in the Hebrew, even though it did not directly line up with the physical relationship.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

People may have been used to saying Jacob ach Adonai as his name, to distinguish him from other Jacobs. Translation into Greek may not have occurred to them, and when it did they used brother to express the idea of closeness in the Hebrew, even though it did not directly line up with the physical relationship.

So that just means “best friend?”

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Julius_Caesar:

Lunam_Meam:

…if you want me to see you can support your claim the supposed unnamed disciple at Emmaus is named Luke, then you are going to have to quote from the tradition exactly what gives you certainty of this.

I have actually posted a link from my source.

Check my convo with TMC.

I can’t find it! Help?

Lunam_Meam:

Julius_Caesar:

The eleven and their companions are saying this:

NIV
Luke 24:34: “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.”

ESV
Luke 24:34: “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!”

Assuming that is true, assuming that Simon and Simon Peter are one and the same, and assuming Luke’s accounts in Lk. 24 are in order, after having said that, Jesus appeared amidst the apostles in the supper room (Lk. 24:36-49). And, in that instance, for the apostles present, especially Peter, to have been so fearful and disbelieving so as to act as though they had never seen, heard, or believed Jesus had risen at any point prior to does not follow your and other’s claim…

The same disciples who saw Jesus cure people were scared in a storm? The same disciples who after Jesus fed 5000 men thought Jesus was a ghost when He walked on water? Remember, they didn’t have the Holy Spirit.

If the apostles witnessed or heard and believed Jesus cured someone, or fed thousands with little food in one instance, then not long after witnessed or heard and believed He did those same things again, but that second time reacted as though they had never seen, heard or believed He did them prior to, then you would have sufficient comparisons. However, even if you did have them, a similar comparison is not an explanation.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

If the apostles witnessed or heard and believed Jesus cured someone, or fed thousands with little food in one instance, then not long after witnessed or heard and believed He did those same things again, but that second time reacted as though they had never seen, heard or believed He did them

And?

The point is we’re dealing with the Apostles before Pentecost. They lacked in both understanding AND faith.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Julius_Caesar:

Lunam_Meam:

…if you want me to see you can support your claim the supposed unnamed disciple at Emmaus is named Luke, then you are going to have to quote from the tradition exactly what gives you certainty of this.

I have actually posted a link from my source.

Check my convo with TMC.

I can’t find it! Help?

Lunam_Meam:

Julius_Caesar:

The eleven and their companions are saying this:

NIV
Luke 24:34: “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.”

ESV
Luke 24:34: “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!”

Assuming that is true, assuming that Simon and Simon Peter are one and the same, and assuming Luke’s accounts in Lk. 24 are in order, after having said that, Jesus appeared amidst the apostles in the supper room (Lk. 24:36-49). And, in that instance, for the apostles present, especially Peter, to have been so fearful and disbelieving so as to act as though they had never seen, heard, or believed Jesus had risen at any point prior to does not follow your and other’s claim…

The point is we’re dealing with the Apostles before Pentecost. They lacked in both understanding AND faith.

We’re not dealing with total faithless brainlet’s either.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

We’re not dealing with total faithless brainlet’s either.

We are dealing with men who Jesus called out frequently for lack of faith AND understanding.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Julius_Caesar:

Lunam_Meam:

…if you want me to see you can support your claim the supposed unnamed disciple at Emmaus is named Luke, then you are going to have to quote from the tradition exactly what gives you certainty of this.

I have actually posted a link from my source.

Check my convo with TMC.

I can’t find it! Help?

Lunam_Meam:

Julius_Caesar:

The eleven and their companions are saying this:

NIV
Luke 24:34: “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.”

ESV
Luke 24:34: “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!”

Assuming that is true, assuming that Simon and Simon Peter are one and the same, and assuming Luke’s accounts in Lk. 24 are in order, after having said that, Jesus appeared amidst the apostles in the supper room (Lk. 24:36-49). And, in that instance, for the apostles present, especially Peter, to have been so fearful and disbelieving so as to act as though they had never seen, heard, or believed Jesus had risen at any point prior to does not follow your and other’s claim…

We are dealing with men who Jesus called out frequently for lack of faith AND understanding.

…but they were not total faithless brainlet’s.