Source: Alan Saxby and James Crossley, James, Brother of Jesus, and the Jerusalem Church: A Radical Exploration of Christian Origins (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2015)
The Family and the Brothers of Jesus.wav
This podcast delves into the life and significance of James, the brother of Jesus, moving beyond simply viewing him through the lens of early Christian communities to consider his personal history. The speakers engage in speculative analysis, particularly regarding the parable of the Prodigal Son, suggesting it might echo family dynamics between James and Jesus. They also explore the complex relationship between Jesus and his family, as depicted in the Gospels, considering whether there was historical alienation or simply the natural strains of balancing familial ties with a divine calling, and ultimately highlighting James' unique authority within the early Christian movement, distinct from his relation to Jesus.
1. Speculative exploration of family dynamics through the lens of the Parable of the Prodigal Son: The sources engage in a speculative exercise, drawing parallels between the figures in the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11–32) and the relationship between James and Jesus. It is suggested that the elder brother in the parable, known for his long years of working obediently and his adherence to the father's commands, could be seen as a "dead ringer" for James, who was famous for his strict adherence to the Torah. This comparison highlights the elder brother's complaint about never receiving recognition or means to celebrate, which might resonate with James's position. Conversely, the younger son, who asks for his inheritance in advance and travels to a "distant country," is speculatively linked to Jesus. The sources explore the possibility that this younger son's action reflects a historical attempt by Jesus to seek capital for an entrepreneurial endeavor, perhaps motivated by economic pressure on the family. His subsequent failure, destitution, and time spent among "those outside the Law" are considered as potential origins for Jesus's characteristic stance as a "friend of sinners" and his willingness to eat with them, a behavior seen as contrasting with the Torah fidelity associated with James. The parable's setting on a large farm and the legal aspects of inheritance are discussed as background, noting that requesting an early share was legal, though perhaps morally disapproved. This interpretation, while acknowledged as speculative, is defended as a disciplined use of imagination that connects with known socio-economic conditions in first-century Galilee and facts about the family from the New Testament text. It avoids imposing anachronistic family concepts or psychologizing in a way criticized in earlier historical Jesus research.
2. Considering the possibility that James was the eldest brother and Jesus a younger sibling: The sources delve into the question of the birth order of Jesus and his siblings, presenting an inference from the family portrait that Jesus might not have been the eldest but a younger son to James. This possibility aligns with suggestions found in later traditions, such as the Protevangelium of James and the views linked to Epiphanius from the fourth century, which proposed that Jesus's siblings were the children of Joseph from a first marriage. This "Epiphanian view" suggests that James and the other siblings were step-siblings to Jesus, born from Joseph's prior marriage. The sources support the credibility of James being the eldest sibling by examining the naming pattern of the five brothers mentioned in the sources (James/Jacob, Joseph/Joses, Judah, Simon, and Jesus). The names James, Joseph, Judah, and Simon are associated with key figures in Israel's history, particularly the patriarchs. James (Jacob), who was also named Israel, father of the twelve tribes, is considered a fitting name for the eldest son. Judah and Simon were also popular names, associated with heroes of the Maccabean revolution, possibly indicating Joseph's political/religious sympathies with the restoration movement in Israel. The name Jesus (Joshua), associated with leading Israel into the Land, marks a break in this patriarchal naming pattern, which could indicate a new family development, potentially linked to Mary, described as Joseph's new and much younger wife. The designation of Jesus as "the son of Mary" in a patriarchal society is also considered as possibly supporting the idea that Mary was Joseph's second wife, distinguishing Jesus from his siblings who were not Mary's sons. While this possibility of James being significantly older than Jesus is noted to have implications for James's age at his death, it is considered not insurmountable and potentially eased if some younger brothers were Mary's sons from Joseph.
3. Examining the complex and potentially strained relationship between Jesus and his family during his ministry: The sources explore various Gospel accounts concerning Jesus's interactions with his family, noting that the records are somewhat ambivalent. John's Gospel shows Jesus's mother and brothers present at events like the Cana wedding and journeying with him, although it also portrays their faith as inadequate, potentially reflecting a theological critique of the Jakobusgemeinde by the evangelist. This Gospel also describes Jesus entrusting the care of his mother to "the beloved disciple" rather than his brothers at his death. Mark's Gospel raises more direct questions about the relationship, particularly in the Nazareth incident where Jesus includes his kin among his unbelieving townsfolk. A significant pericope in Mark describes Jesus's family (implicitly including James) responding to disturbing reports about Jesus's mental state. Mark contrasts Jesus's new "family" (disciples) who do the will of God and are "inside" with his natural family who are "outside," potentially a later Markan critique of the dominical family and their leadership, fostering a perception of historical alienation. However, counterpoints are raised: Mark also portrays the disbelief of the Twelve, and the evidence regarding the family's unbelief is questioned. An alternative perspective suggests the family's actions reflect natural concern for Jesus's well-being, and Jesus's keeping them at a distance might be a coping strategy for managing the conflict between strong family ties and his intense sense of divine calling. The journey of the family to see him is seen as evidence of the strength of the family tie. Despite potential strains, an underlying sense of kinship is suggested. The sources conclude that the evidence doesn't fully support the Markan portrayal of alienation or the idea that the brothers were part of Jesus's close disciple group. Paul's earliest witness seems unaware of any such estrangement, as such a tradition would likely have been used in his arguments about his apostolic status.
4. Tracing the family's movement from Nazareth and James's emergence as a leader in Jerusalem: The sources examine the implication of the Nazareth incident in Mark's Gospel, noting that the reference to Jesus's sisters still being "here with us" suggests that his brothers and mother no longer lived in Nazareth at that time. It is inferred that the sisters had married locally, while the brothers were grown men when they left Nazareth with Mary, likely within a decade or so before Jesus began his ministry around the age of thirty. While Jesus eventually settled in Capernaum, the whereabouts of the rest of the family are unknown, except for the mention of a family wedding at Cana. Significantly, within a few years of the Nazareth incident, James is found in a leadership position (a Pillar) in Jerusalem, leading a group sometimes referred to as "Nazarenes." This suggests the family moved to Jerusalem. James's role as a Pillar, comparable to an Essene mebaqqer, implies a recognized competence in Torah interpretation and literacy, which would require time spent in Jerusalem. The sources raise the question of how long James had lived in Jerusalem, speculating it could have been for up to ten years before Jesus's activity in Galilee. This raises the possibility that James, Mary, and the other brothers were already established in Jerusalem before Jesus's public ministry and his final journey to the city. Casual references in the Gospels to assistance Jesus received in Jerusalem, such as obtaining a colt for his entry or securing a room for the Passover celebration, are viewed as potentially sourced from his family connections already established within the city.
5. Defining the status and authority of James in comparison to his brothers: The sources distinguish James's position and authority from that of his other brothers. While "James" and "Jude" were popular names, James is specifically identified by Paul as "the Lord's brother," primarily for identification purposes. His authority, however, is noted to stem principally from his recognition as a Pillar of the Jakobusgemeinde, alongside figures like Cephas and John. Paul's distinction between "brothers of the Lord" and "the other apostles" indicates the brothers' involvement in the Jakobusgemeinde's mission and that family membership did carry some status, leading to figures like Symeon, a cousin, succeeding James according to tradition. However, this familial authority is suggested to be potentially overrated, as James's unique authority did not transfer to his brothers. During James's lifetime, there was a clear difference in standing: James remained firmly in charge at the center (Jerusalem), while his other brothers briefly appear as his itinerant envoys. This difference is further confirmed in the salutations of letters associated with the Jacobean tradition. The Epistle of Jude identifies its author explicitly as "the brother of James," not "the brother of Jesus," indicating that his identity and status were derived from his relationship to James, highlighting James's significant standing. The Epistle of James simply uses "James, a servant of God," without mentioning his sibling relationship to Jesus or his leadership position, implying the name "James" alone carried distinct and sufficient authority.
6. Analyzing the unique nature and source of James's personal authority: The sources conclude that James possessed a unique form of authority that set him apart. It was not authority gained by default or solely derived from being the brother of Jesus or even from his position as the leader of the proto-Christian movement in Jerusalem. Instead, this authority is described as being inextricably linked to James as a person. It is characterized as the sort of authority often associated with initial charismatic leadership, blending into a "Quasi-rabbinic Leadership." This authority was unique to James, non-negotiable, and non-transferable, adhering to him as potentially the founder of a movement. This leads to the question of whether the Jakobusgemeinde, which he led for thirty years, was established ex nihilo after Jesus's execution, or if it was an already existing group founded and led by James within the spectrum of Judaic Reform movements, which was later profoundly influenced by Jesus's message or even John the Baptist's message at some point. The sources highlight that unlike James, who remained a revered figure, particularly in certain Christian trajectories and was recognized as the first bishop of Jerusalem, his other brothers seemed to fade from significance in the post-apostolic period.
• First-century information about James is primarily found in fragments within the Gospels, which are focused on Jesus.
• It is speculated that James is represented as the elder brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11–32). This connection is drawn from the elder brother's adherence to the Torah.