Many Baptist and other Free Churches teach that James was the physical brother of Jesus. I have seen bibles in which the introduction to the Letters of James had a footnote explaining he was actually the younger brother of Jesus.

It would seem to be a modern thing though. I've never heard of any of the older theological sources trying to make such a point.

I'm all for allowing points of view, but the posts that generate bullish responses are far from just doing that - rather they are designed just to get said reaction. Nowhere will you find a post that says 'I think that...' being pilloried, but those that make bold inflammatory statements will be pulled apart and their inaccuracies pointed out. Welcome to the Internet.

Yupp, and personal attacks are not tolerated. Pointing out fallacies in individuals' posts is not the same thing as attacking the individuals themselves.

cough cough cough

Oh good explain the above.

It's better not to take many things here very seriously...

Better listen to a Hava Nagila or Zorba's Dance, if that doesn't make you feel better I don't know what it could..
(I know it's the wrong thread lol)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZweLtjNxZY

Agreed, the question was perhaps too simplified, and obviously 'Islamic values' will vary from person to person the same way as 'European values' or 'Christian values' would.

Who defines values? I would say the people as a majority define values, in the same way as culture - but again, there will always be differences, as described above.

But there are some values/culture that I think the vast majority do believe in which are at odds with the current values/culture, and I don't see them changing anytime soon (if ever) hence the simplified question.

Why don't you discuss these issues with historians, sociologists, theologians etc.? I am sure there are many seminars or really good debates on these themes. Just a suggestion, of course. I'm not sure what are you expecting from a public forum. Lots of people share their anxieties here but don't think that's very useful.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...omen-66dtwhdmw (Behind a paywall but you can bypass by searching in Google)

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/j...e-new-evidence - Wasn't impressed by the presenters at all, but the people they interviewed along the way were very interesting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-revealed.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...fine-for-jesus

https://www.enterthebible.org/Contro...&original_id=4

Thanks for that - but the word "may" appears in the quote of Prof. Bond - it's just speculation - and certainly there is nothing about "12 female apostles" being mentioned in the gospel of Luke you quote - in it they appear as companions and supporters. I guess one can argue semantics but still I don't see supporting evidence for "12 female apostles" there.

My school R.E. teacher, always taught that James was either the brother, half-brother or cousin of Jesus, and that the jury was out on the matter.

You're trying to be factually and academically correct in a matter of religion and feminism which are both by definition anything but factual Just leave it as it is...

You'd have to watch the programme to make your own judgement. It's worth the effort for the clip in the cave shrine to 'Bishop' Salome, and how women only took the veil in the 4th century.

My interest is purely from a historical aspect. I was raised Roman Catholic and attended R.C. schools, but I'm not religious. I see Jesus as a political activist figure who was possibly / probably the rightful heir of the Royal House of David living under a hostile Roman occupation.

Nope - the gospels are physical documents - ergo if something is or is not in there it should not be up for debate.

I've had 12 years of religious education followed by over 20 years of philosophical study and never came across any such claim. I'm no longer a Catholic per se btw but according to their doctrines them's some pretty outrageous claims to make i.e. "12 female apostles referenced in gospels".

...listening to the 1990 Rome Three Tenors concert whilst making pasta for dinner last night

Nothing stops anyone from writing a piece of bullshit and burying it around a lake for posterity to scratch their heads. For all I care, it was a bunch of practical jokers who had a few bottles of good wine and had some good time coming up with the most absurd story ever.

It's all about the varying translations that have been made through history, so there's very little that can be accepted as 100% accurate, which is why the scholars use terms like 'may', rather than committing to a specific version and staking their reputation on it.

Which is precisely why I wasn't impressed by the presenters of the Channel 4 programme. For me, they were lightweight and loose in their narrative. However, I was impressed by one of the museum curators they interviewed towards the end of the programme. She made a good case for how one of the 4th century Popes and Emperor Constantine (him again!) effectively 'wrote out' the female bishops and disciples from the teachings of the church. We only have glimpses of them in Luke 8:2–3 and Luke 24:10 but there is physical evidence that Salome, at least, was revered as a bishop until the 4th century.

She made a good case?! She was there?

So, what you're saying is, women can be religious nutters too!

Tom

I had the impression that was preisely what Kriss Kross was attempting, but that other came in and derailed that discussion and drowned it out, somewhow implying that it's not Ok to discuss stuff like that.

But yeah, such are the joys of the Internet.