My post in no way questioned the intellect of the Son of God.
Rather, it was a comment on his line of work and his chosen socio-economic status, as described in scripture.
Moreover, I can’t imagine where you get the idea that anyone who knows scripture would think that Rabbi was a “courtesy title.”
Either you misread, or perhaps you were posting to someone else.
Apologies, ‘courtesy’ title was referring to Palter’s (the eye-roller) post on 7 April. Edersheim is definite that ‘Rabbi’ was a legal title and that you couldn’t just go round teaching in the Temple with no legal authority - that seems to have been forgotten.
Thanks for the debate.