Can one have any confidence, historically, in the "authority" of any of the Christian canon (or for that matter, the Tanakh), inasmuch as the books being written by a particular person? Isn't this a theological claim, based loosely on Eusebius and his literary references, many which are no longer with us?
In order to see "The Epistle of James" as written by "James," isn't this a far leap from the synoptics? Doesn't one have to piece together a snippet or two in Galatians, pair that with Acts, and create a "theological viewpoint" for someone known as James? Even if one views Acts and Galatians as historically accurate (I don't), this seems to be a stretch. It does, however, seem that some of the points in Galatians are countered by points in James. When I saw "James" as a historical being who wrote the epistle, it almost seemed like it was a response to Galatians.
I guess I wonder if that is history or theology.
Dennis Dean Carpenter
Dahlonega, Ga. USA
A question: When I tried to comment, "reply" gave me the name of the person to whom I was attempting to respond, not Synoptic. Why?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]