Church History, Volume 1 (of 3)Kurtz, J. H. (Johann Heinrich)
Religion
Church History, Volume 1 (of 3)
Kurtz, J. H. (Johann Heinrich)
Church history
b. Soon, however, it came to be felt that the idea that Joseph
had conjugal intercourse with Mary after the birth of Jesus
was in conflict with the ascetic tendency now rising into
favour, and so to help themselves out of this embarrassment,
it was assumed that the brothers of Jesus were sons of
Joseph by a former wife.
c. The want of biblical foundation for this view was the
occasion of its being abandoned in favour of a theory,
first hinted at by Jerome, according to which the expression
brothers of Jesus is to be taken in a wider sense as meaning
cousins, and in this way James the brother of the Lord was
identified with James the son of Alphæus, one of the twelve
disciples, and the four or five Jameses named in the New
Testament were reduced to two, James the son of Zebedee
and James son of Alphæus. It was specially urged from
John xix. 25 that James the son of Alphæus was the sister’s
son of Jesus’ mother. This was done by a purely arbitrary
identification of the name Clopas or Cleophas with the
Alphæus of the Synoptists, the rendering of the words Μαρία
τοῦ Κλωπᾶ by the wife of Clopas, and also the assumption,
which is scarcely conceivable, that the sister of the mother
of Jesus was also called Mary. We should therefore in this
passage regard the sister of the mother of Jesus and Mary
wife of Clopas as two distinct persons. In that case the
wife of Alphæus may have been called Mary and have had two
sons who, like two of the four brothers of Jesus, were named
James and Joses (Matt. xxvii. 56; Mark xv. 40; Luke xxiv. 10);
but even then, in the James here mentioned, we should meet
with another James otherwise unknown, different from the
James son of Alphæus in the list of the Apostles, whose name
occurs in Luke xv. 16 and Acts i. 13 in the phrase Judas of
James, where the genitive undoubtedly means brother of James
son of Alphæus. And though in Gal. i. 19, James the brother
of the Lord seems to be called an Apostle, when this is
compared with Acts xiv. 14, it affords no proof that he
belonged to the number of the twelve.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account