James: the Lynchpin of Our Faith — Chapter 6

The dominant role that James played in the development of the rift between Jesus and the other members of the family should not be underestimated. With the death of Joseph, Jesus should have become the de facto head of the family. Being the firstborn son held great significance in the Jewish culture of that time, and with it came a number of responsibilities and privileges. The role of chief provider and final authority in family matters was certainly part of the package. Some of these responsibilities were cultural expectations, but others were actual requirements in the oral tradition, which later became Talmudic law.

Now here is the unenviable position that Jesus finds himself in. He is the firstborn, but he is not the son of Joseph. To use the colloquial term, he is the bastard son of another man—or so it would seem. Certainly, this is how the community would likely see him.

In a tight-knit, semi-rural community, it is reasonable to believe that from the moment of Mary’s initial pregnancy, there were whispers and hints of juicy gossip. Mary and Joseph were not living together. How did she get pregnant? Was this baby really Joseph’s son? As the child grew, in all likelihood it became evident from Jesus’ appearance that he was not Joseph’s boy. The local wags probably had great sport debating who the real father was.

To the natural mind, Mary’s tale of the visit from the angel Gabriel and conception by the Holy Spirit makes little logical sense. It is highly unlikely that she repeated this story to anyone except Joseph and perhaps her parents. Why say anything to anyone else? Why invite open ridicule from other family members, her friends and her neighbours? Let them think what they will. She knew the secret of Jesus conception: a secret it would remain. From Luke’s account of the lost boy Jesus in the temple courts, it is apparent that she did not even tell her son of his divine origin. It was left up to him to discover the identity of his true Father.

As for James and his younger brothers, as discussed earlier, they either discerned independently that Jesus was somehow different—not fully one of them—or they heard it from their neighbours and friends. They even may have heard it from Jesus himself. He was not shy in identifying himself as God’s son in the temple courts at age twelve. It is possible that young James and his brothers overheard Jesus’ response to his parents at that time, though they may not have originally understood the meaning and implications of his words. He may also have spoken with them about the identity of his real Father on other occasions, occasions not recorded in scripture, just as the patriarch Joseph revealed his divine destiny to his incredulous brothers (Genesis 37:5–11).

Finally, Jesus’ keen intellect, his love for the sacred scriptures and his general conduct surely set him apart from the other teens and young men in Nazareth. However, being different does not necessarily correspond with being accepted or popular among your peers. As pointed out earlier, Jesus’ ministry at the local synagogue was greeted with skepticism and open hostility by the townspeople (Mark 6:1–6, Luke 4:16–30). Additionally, his brothers did not believe in him. Though Jesus attracted many followers, many disciples—other young men like themselves—not one of his younger brothers are numbered among the apostolic band. As we have already witnessed, the relationship between them was tense and poisoned.

Without question, the death of Joseph must have raised several thorny issues. Did James recognize Jesus as the new head of the home? If Jesus was not the son of Joseph, then the privileges and responsibilities of headship should legitimately fall to James, Joseph’s firstborn—not to Jesus. For this reason, did the local religious community recognize James in the leadership role? Or did they recognize Jesus as the head of the household? Authorities in the local synagogue may well have had a say in this matter.

Primogeniture also affected the family inheritance. Who was rightfully the firstborn in this case? And what role, if any, did Mary play in all this? Was she simply a bystander while the male members of the family and the synagogue rulers sorted out these matters?

Though Jesus’ half-brothers did not believe in him, without a doubt his mother did. She knew and experienced the miraculous nature of his conception and birth. She marvelled at the prophetic words spoken over Jesus at his dedication in the temple (Luke 2:22–38). We are told that “Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart” (Luke 2:19). In addition, her words of concern prompted Jesus to perform the first miracle of his public ministry, as he turned water into wine (John 2:1–11). It is abundantly clear from the gospel accounts that Mary believedin the divinity of her firstborn. Undoubtedly, after the death of her husband, she found herself caught in the middle between her two strong-willed sons, Jesus and James.

To the present-day postmodern, the issue of primogeniture may seem to be socially insignificant, but this was of great significance to the society of this period. Even if there were strong amicable relations between these two brothers, this would still be a very trying question. If there existed the slightest hint of rivalry, unresolved grievances, or a competitive spirit, these issues could quickly turn into strife and bitter malice. It is reasonable to speculate that they did.

The Bible is largely silent on these matters. We have no indication as to when or how Joseph died. We catch only a few glimpses of the dynamics among the now full-grown members of the family, but the picture that emerges is rather disturbing. During the time of Jesus’ ministry, this appears to have been a household that is dysfunctional and deeply divided.

Did Jesus even want to be recognized as the head of Joseph’s home? Perhaps it was a responsibility that fell to him, but he did not want to bear it, since, according to his genetic code, he knew it was a role that was not rightfully his. Perhaps he took on the headship role through a sense of duty, but at every turn he faced resistance and resentment from his half-brothers.

James the oldest son of Joseph would have led this resistance, and an ambitious James may have been willing and eager to usurp Jesus’ authority. After all, he saw the leadership role as lawfully his. There were ample grounds for rancorous contention in this family, and by stitching together what we can discern from the gospel accounts, division and tension were clearly present as outlined below:

• When Jesus left the family home to be baptized by John, his
departure may have served partially as an escape from a poisoned
home environment. Forty days of fasting in the desert may have
been preferable to the ongoing rancour in Nazareth.

• This much we can ascertain from the gospel accounts: by
the time of the rupture in family relations recorded in Mark 3:20–35,
James is firmly in charge of the household.

• As the eldest son of Joseph, he is chief among the brotherhood
of unbelievers that make up his family as recorded in John 7:1–13.

• In consultation with his brothers, he has determined that Jesus
“Is out of his mind” (Mark 3: 21).

• He has organized a family expedition to take charge of his
deranged half-brother.

• Despite his best efforts, he has failed to make Jesus see the
error of his ways or regain control of what he likely sees as
a dangerous and irrational member of his household (Mark 3:31-35).

The half-brothers part ways. In the synoptic gospels this is their last recorded meeting before Jesus’ death.

For Jesus this rupture in relations means liberty. He is no longer answerable to James for his life and conduct. He is accountable only to God. From the time of his baptism by John, Jesus has extricated himself from the oppressive confines of his brother’s household. He is no longer the carpenter’s son. He has discovered his true identity as the Son of God, and now at age thirty, for the first time in his life, he is able to freely walk out the full meaning of that identity.

In the same way, Jesus called on his disciples to abandon all, including family, and come and follow him in a radical new way of life. (See Luke 14:25–27.) He is the Son of God. This truth becomes the central theme—the very core—of his teaching. His followers are children of God. He teaches them to pray to their heavenly Father. The fatherhood of God is at the heart of his message to the people. In the gospels, Jesus only directly addresses God by the name of ‘father’ or even ‘abba’ (daddy) except when quoting scripture.

As cited earlier, when he is called to see his mother and brothers outside the home where he is teaching, he answered,

“Who are my mother and my brothers?”

Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.” (Mark 3:31–35)

Please note Jesus does not say, “Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother and father.”

The father figure appears to be missing in this happy family circle. Or is he? For Jesus, his father is God, and his heavenly Father oversees this—his spiritual family gathered before him. His followers are his family.

The fatherhood of God is so central to Jesus that he later instructs his disciples with these words:

But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. (Matthew 23:8–10)

Indeed, according to Jesus’ radical new teaching, entrance into the kingdom of God is only possible through spiritual rebirth. Natural birth is insufficient. God must become your Father through the inner working of the Holy Spirit. His conversation with the Pharisee Nicodemus
makes this point clear:

He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”

“How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”

Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’” (John 3:2–7)

Citizenship in the heavenly kingdom is only conferred on those who are born of the Spirit through faith. Jesus made his own conception by the Holy Spirit the blueprint for his followers. They too must become living repositories of divine DNA. They too, by the process of spiritual rebirth, must become children of the heavenly Father. Baptism by immersion came to symbolize this inner transformation—this spiritual rebirth.

In his introductory remarks on the ministry of Jesus, John gives us further insight into this new creation—this new birth into the family of God:

He [Jesus] came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. (John 1:11–13)

Though Jesus was rejected by members of his own family as insane, he started a new spiritual family, a family born of God. Within that spiritual family he found a love and acceptance that superseded that of his brothers and sisters by birth. The importance of family by natural descent was replaced by the importance of spiritual rebirth. This was a radically new family—God’s family.

We can easily underestimate the dramatic shift in thinking that this required of his followers. Approaching God as a loving Father was a truly revolutionary concept. The Jewish God was austere, stern, distant and demanding; or so it was thought. But Jesus, God’s son, presented a totally different view of Him. He saw a caring Father who was as close as a whispered prayer—as near as our next breath. In the Old Testament the dominant metaphor for God is king—the ultimate ruler; in the gospels it is father—a family member.

Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount presents us with a compassionate God who truly cares about his people:

Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?

And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. (Matthew 6:26–34)

The contemporary teachers of the law were all about the outward observance of the rules and strict adherence to the rigours of the written code. This was a tightly controlled and religiously regimented society. In this stifling social atmosphere, the message that Jesus brought was like a breath of fresh air. God was not an uptight, omniscient slave master. He was actually a loving heavenly Father, who provided for his children’s needs.

It should come as no surprise then that people flocked to his teaching.

The implications of spiritual rebirth—this born-again experience—cannot be overstated. In a society where the family unit was all-important, this was a dramatic departure from the norm. The Jewish faith was and is rooted in the family from its very inception, beginning with the family of Abraham. Your place within the faith is based on heredity and lineage. You are a Jew because you were born a Jew—because your parents are Jewish, you can trace back your lineage to Abraham.

Furthermore, this is a closed tribal system. Entrance into the faith, with very few exceptions, is exclusively by birth. God’s chosen people are chosen by birth. According to accepted Jewish teaching of the time, God has no adopted children. You must be born into the faith. Jews saw (and continue to see) themselves as heirs to the covenant God made first with Abraham, then with Moses, and then the children of Israel. But Jesus was describing a new, more direct way of relating to God.

The only way for a male outsider to enter this closed religious system was by a dramatic, painful and even dangerous outward physical change—circumcision. A woman’s only portal into the faith was through her husband or father.

Jesus’ teaching on entrance into the kingdom of God through spiritual rebirth threw this entire religious system into disarray. It began with the repentance call of John the Baptist:

John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. And do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.” (Luke 3:7–9)

The Jewish leadership rejected John’s message of repentance and baptism even as they later rejected the message of rebirth as preached by Jesus. They needed no repentance; they were children of Abraham. Their lineage alone guaranteed them a place in the kingdom of God, or so they thought. Jesus did not hesitate to prick their self-righteous balloon:

To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”

Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.”

“Abraham is our father,” they answered.

“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the works of your own father.”

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” (John 8:31–47)

Jesus looked beyond the outward and physical into the heart. (See Matthew 15:10–20). The human heart needs to be cleansed through repentance, and the human spirit, dead in sin, needs to be born again by faith through the Holy Spirit. This teaching was completely contrary to the outward religious standard of the times. For many, religion was merely an ongoing parade of hypocrisy. It was a public show one engaged in for the sake of appearance, but Jesus continually cut through the religious clutter to get to the heart. In his sermon on the mount, Jesus pointed out this hypocrisy and called for a genuine change of heart. (See Matthew 6:1–18).

Furthermore, Jesus allowed no place for middle ground. You align yourself either for or against him. In that respect he was and is a highly divisive figure. In the discourse cited above, Jesus essentially called his detractors sons of the devil. They in turn thought the same of him:

The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?” (John 8:48)

This was an insult of the highest order, but Jesus did not back down. In fact, he upped the ante. He closed off this heated discussion in the temple courts by claiming to be God:

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds. (John 8:58–59)

He did not say, “Before Abraham was born, I was.” Jesus said, “Before Abraham was born, I am.” In so doing, he identified himself as Deity, the pre-existent one, the creator of the universe and the great “I am” of the Hebrew covenant. (See Exodus 3:14.)

To his listeners, this was blasphemy of the highest order. One should not be surprised that they tried to stone him. These are not the words of someone whom society would consider normal. They resembled the ravings of a madman.

So, then it would appear that James was right. His older brother was “out of his mind” (Mark 4:21). Here in Jesus’ own words, we have the text that proves that James was right in trying to prevent his brother from propagating this lunacy—this heresy—this fanatical teaching. Jesus claimed to be God. There can be no doubt that James believed Jesus would bring disgrace upon the whole family. This is why James distanced himself from his older brother. Undoubtedly, James also used his influence to prevent the other family members from falling under the spell of his brother, the deluded heretic.

As for Jesus, having left his natural family, he founded his own spiritual family of followers. From these he demanded absolute personal loyalty:

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn

‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-inlaw—
a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’

Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it. (Matthew 10:34–39)

Membership in Jesus’ family of born-again believers required absolute commitment—a commitment that superseded one’s commitment to flesh and blood family members. The cost of true discipleship was high, and it remains high today.

But Jesus was not asking his disciples to do anything that he did not ask of himself. His own household was divided and hostile to his mission. In a very real sense, his statement simply reflects the strife and division Jesus experienced within his family. He faced extreme opposition from his own family, and he anticipated that his disciples would face the same level of hostility as they chose to wholeheartedly follow him. Many believers throughout history and even today face severe opposition from family members as they seek to follow Jesus. Some have paid the ultimate price as martyrs at the hands of enraged family members.

Yes, Jesus came to bring a sword. He divided the Jewish nation, and he divided his family. The number of his f ollowers—his spiritual family—was growing, but so too was the opposition to his ministry.

Soon Mary would feel the soul-piercing power of the sword. This was the sword that the prophet Simeon spoke of during Jesus’ dedication as an infant in the temple many years earlier.

Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.” (Luke 2:34)

 

New from David Kitz

James—the brother of Jesus—who was this man? What evidence do we have that this “brother of our Lord” even existed?

David Kitz digs deep into archeology, family dynamics, church history, and the biblical texts. What emerges from his research is a portrait of a decisive, pivotal leader who embodied the will and character of Jesus Christ.

But how did James—James the unbeliever—transform to become a leader who changed the course of world history? In these pages you will uncover the answer and rediscover for yourself the life-changing power of the gospel.

To view further details or purchase directly from the author click here.