Tag Archives: James the brother of Jesus

A Not So Immaculate Conception

22 Sunday Feb 2026

Posted by in Books by David Kitz

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

James: the Lynchpin of Our Faith — Chapter 2

James was conceived in the ordinary way—the way that is common to all humanity. There was no virgin birth for him, no choir of angels trumpeted his arrival, and no star appeared to signal his nativity. He was from what we can surmise, just an ordinary child, born into a very extraordinary family.

Mary Consoles Eve by Sr. Grace Remington

It should be noted that there are three men in the New Testament who bear the name James. Since they have the same name, the identity of these three men is often confused. The most prominent James during Jesus’ earthly ministry was James, the son of Zebedee. He was numbered among the twelve apostles. He was the older brother of the apostleJohn—the John who penned the Gospel that bears his name. Peter and the two sons of Zebedee were part of Jesus’ inner circle. During his ministry, Jesus often called Peter, James, and John apart from the other apostles to privately accompany him.2 But there was a second James within the apostolic circle. This was James, son of Alphaeus. He is sometimes called James the Less. Though he is numbered among the twelve disciples, he did not play a significant role in the New Testament narrative.

In contrast to these two men, James, the brother of Jesus, was never part of the apostolic team. The apostle James, the son of Zebedee was martyred early in the development of the church in Jerusalem (Acts 12:1–2), and we hear nothing further of James, son of Alphaeus, beyond a mention in the gospel accounts. Our purpose here is solely to focus on James, the brother of Jesus.

But was this James really born into this holy family? Roman Catholics revere Mary as a perpetual virgin; hence, they view any teaching that Mary had other children by Joseph as utter heresy. However, other children is precisely what we find when we examine the New Testament scriptures. In fact, we have already touched on a Bible verse that disproves the premise upon which this Catholic doctrine is based. Mary was not a perpetual virgin, not according to the Gospel of Matthew.

When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. (Matthew 1:24–25)

For our purpose, the key words in this passage are did not consummate. In other words, Joseph had no sexual union with Mary until after Jesus was born. It is interesting to look at how other Bible scholars have translated the original Greek of this passage. Here are some examples:

Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus. (King James Version)

So when Joseph woke up, he married Mary, as the angel of the Lord had told him to. But he had no sexual relations with her before she gave birth to her son. And Joseph named him Jesus. (GNT)

And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus. (NASB)

When Joseph woke up he did what the angel had told him. He married Mary, but had no intercourse with her until she had given birth to a son. Then he gave him the name Jesus. (PHILLIPS)

All five of the translations cited above, while using different words, convey the same meaning. Mary remained a virgin until after the birth of the Christ child. Then after giving birth in due course, Joseph and Mary began normal sexual relations. This is what would be expected of any young married couple.

The King James Version (KJV) gives us the most literal translation of this passage. Matthew uses the Greek verb ginosko, which is translated into English as know, knew or to know. In this case, the verb is a negated progressive past tense, so in the KJV it is translated as knew her not. In the footnote to this passage the New American Standard Version more accurately renders the Greek used here as was not knowing her.

Matthew is using the verb know to convey the idea of carnal knowledge or sexual experience. By using the Greek form of this verb, he is harkening back to the first recorded instance of sexual relations in the Bible. “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, “I have gotten a man from the LORD” (Genesis 4:1, KJV, emphasis added). Matthew’s Jewish readers would immediately understand the biblical reference to this form of knowledge.

Art by Hult –www.biblicalarchaeology.org

The chief point we need to recognize here is that Joseph’s state of not knowing her came to an end. Mary was a virgin until some point after Jesus was born. In Matthew 1:25, the preposition rendered until (NIV) or till (KJV) is of crucial importance. It signals an action or a state of being coming to an end at a fixed point in the future. The Greek word translated as until is heos and it is more literally translated as up to or unto. In other words, Joseph’s state of not knowing his wife Mary lasted up to the birth of Jesus. Thereafter, the marriage was consummated, as the NIV translation states.

Luke gives us further evidence that this marriage was consummated; he even provides a strong clue to the timing. After referring to Jesus’ circumcision on the eighth day following his birth (Luke 2:21), the gospel writer goes on to report on Mary’s purification rites.

When the time came for the purification rites required by the Law of Moses, Joseph and Mary took him [Jesus] to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord”), and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: “a pair of doves or two young pigeons.” (Luke 2:22–24)

Leon Morris, in his commentary on the Gospel of Luke, rightly points out that there are two religious rites recorded in this passage.

Two quite separate ceremonies are involved here, the presentation of the child and the purification of the mother. The Levitical law provided that after the birth of a son a woman would be unclean for seven days leading up to the circumcision and for a further thirty-three she should keep away from all holy things (for a daughter the time was doubled; Leviticus12:1–5).3

After the completion of this purification rite, it was deemed fitting and proper for a Jewish married couple to resume their sexual relationship. Because prior to Jesus’ birth there had been no sexual relations between Mary and Joseph, one can logically conclude that their marriage was consummated shortly after this temple ceremony, most likely on the same day.

While the doctrine of the virgin birth rests on a solid scriptural foundation, there are no scriptural grounds from which one can argue that Mary remained a perpetual virgin. Joseph was instructed by the angel to take Mary home as his wife (Matthew 1:20). No special instructions on abstinence were given. One can then logically assume that normal marital relations ensued. In fact, in Matthew 1:25 we are explicitly told that Joseph knew his wife (consummated the marriage) after the birth of Jesus. Furthermore, Luke provides us with a definitive time frame as to when sexual relations began. Being observant Jews in every way, the Holy Family followed the rites proscribed by the Law. This includes the full rites of marriage.

Photo by Jonathan Borba on Pexels.com

It should then come as no surprise when we read that other children were born to this family. All four gospels refer to Jesus’ brothers; two of the gospels list them by name.

Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? (Matthew 13:55)

“Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. (Mark 6:3)

In the context of the two passages above, Mary is clearly identified as the mother of Jesus and his brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas. The Judas recorded here should not be confused with Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus. This Judas—the brother of James and half-brother of Jesus—is widely recognized as the New Testament author of the Book of Jude. Jude is a Greek language variant of Judas. In fact, this brother Judas identifies himself in the opening line of his New Testament epistle with these words: “Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James…” (Jude 1a).

The Mark 6:3 passage is significant because it establishes that there were also daughters born through the union of Mary and Joseph, as well as four sons. The fifth son is Jesus, the firstborn, who, according to scripture and long-established church doctrine, was conceived by the Holy Spirit.

Typically, children are listed according to their birth order. This appears to be precisely what is happening in the above passages. The sons are listed from oldest to youngest, though in Mark’s account Simon and Judas are reversed.

Since this was a patriarchal society, it should come as no great surprise that the daughters’ names are not mentioned. They may have been born after the boys listed here or perhaps interspersed among the boys in birth order. Matthew makes no reference to the sisters, while Mark mentions them but does not provide us with any names.

This passage from Mark is significant for another reason. The townspeople ask, “Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James…?”

In a patriarchal society—one that does not bother to list sisters’ names—why not frame the question this way: “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” By referring to Mary rather than Joseph, are the townspeople tacitly recognizing that Joseph was not the father of Jesus? This is a culturally unusual way of framing the question of lineage. It is presumed that Joseph died years earlier and that may explain why there is no reference made to him, but nonetheless it is peculiar that his name is not mentioned.

The list of brothers provides another clue about James. James is the anglicized version of the name Jacob, or in Hebrew Ya’aqov. Jacob, the Old Testament patriarch, was the second-born twin son of Isaac and Rebekah. Jacob’s older brother Esau was born with Jacob grasping onto his heel (Genesis 25:21–26).

Ya’aqov or James was a particularly fitting name for a second son in a Jewish family. But the name also suggests a certain character. The original Jacob was continually grasping for more. He was not content with his second-place status in relation to his brother. He provoked Esau into selling his birthright (Genesis 25:27-34) and later he conspired with his mother to cheat Esau out of his father’s blessing (Genesis 27).

If in character and conduct James/Ya’aqov resembled his Old Testament counterpart, then in his formative years Jesus would experience very difficult and challenging times with his brother. As we will see, during Jesus’ ministry James played the role of Jacob, a supplanter or deceptive usurper to great effect.

The list of brothers from Matthew and Mark’s Gospels form part of a description of the same incident—Jesus’ return to his hometown of Nazareth at the height of his public ministry. A closer look at Mark’s account provides us with a fascinating glimpse into this messianic family and the interplay of hometown perceptions and dynamics.

Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed.

“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sistershere with us?” And they took offense at him.

Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. He was amazed at their lack of faith. (Mark 6:1–6a)

There is a kind of small-town-plausibility to this story that is quite disarming. Local boy leaves home; makes the Big Time, surrounded by adoring crowds and an entourage of followers. Our heroic figure returns home, but rather than adulation, he is greeted by small-minded jealousy and skepticism. This is a situation that in various forms has played itself out a thousand times, in a thousand small towns throughout the ages and in every society. Reading between the lines you can perhaps hear the crowd’s unspoken thoughts. “He’s nothing special. I remember him as a runny-nosed little kid. We know his family. There’s nothing wonderful about them. Who does he think he is?”

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

This outcome was to be expected. They had no faith in him. He was too familiar, too ordinary in their eyes. They were amazed at his wisdom and the reports of miracles, but in their eyes he had committed the sin of overreaching. He had gone well beyond the expected small-town norms. Over achievers must be put in their place, so “they took offence at him” (Matthew 13:57a; Mark 6:3b).

There’s a confounding mix of the ordinary meeting the highly extraordinary in this account—an encounter of the common man with the ultimate superhuman. And Jesus was both: common and supernatural. He was the carpenter turned Savior of the world. This hometown reaction is what you might expect when God takes on flesh and becomes one of us. No one knew quite how to handle Him. He does not fit the norm. He is incongruent in so many ways, far outside the norm of human experience. The easiest response is to reject Him.

What can we conclude about James, the subject of this book, from these observations? What we have portrayed here is a rather ordinary first-century Jewish family. James, the second son of Joseph the carpenter (Matthew 13:55), was conceived and came into the world through Mary in the same way as any other child on the planet. He had one older brother named Jesus and three younger brothers, in addition to at least two sisters. It seems clear that Joseph had passed away at some point before the hometown visit recorded in Mark 6:1–6 and Matthew 13: 53–58. Before taking up his public ministry, Jesus had worked in the family business as a carpenter. It seems highly likely that with Jesus’ departure, James would have continued in the family trade. It is equally clear that the townspeople of Nazareth largely rejected Jesus’ ministry. They had no faith in him and “took offence at him” (Matthew 13:57a;
Mark 6:3b).

So how did James respond to his brother’s rise to fame? As we will see, James, like those around him, showed himself to be a true hometown boy, a son of Nazareth. He too shared in their skepticism.

2) Matthew 17:1, Mark 5:37, Mark 9:2, Mark 14:33, Luke 8:51, Luke 9:28.
3 Leon Morris, Luke—Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Eerdmans, 1984), pp. 86–87.

 

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.

It’s all about DNA

15 Sunday Feb 2026

Posted by in Books by David Kitz

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

James: the Lynchpin of Our Faith — Chapter 1

Have you ever wondered what your life would be like, if you grew up in a different family? I think we all have considered that thought. Maybe it occurred to you the first time you slept over at a friend’s house. You thought, what would it be like to grow up in this house, with this family? Would you be where you are today? Now stretch that thought a bit. What if you were born into a different nation, culture or religious tradition? Would you still be the same person? What would you be like, if you were raised by a low-caste family in southern India, or by Masai warriors in Kenya? We all know that our home and upbringing influence our adult life in a thousand different ways.

Photo by samer daboul on Pexels.com

Then there is the question of DNA. We also know that our genetic make-up impacts everything about us. Every cell and fiber in our body is programmed according to the genetic code inherited from our parents. That code determines more than just our eye colour and shoe size. It shapes facets of personality, disposition, and even subtleties such as our posture, the way we move, and the gestures we use. Of course the influences of nature and nurture, DNA, and upbringing were just as important in biblical times as they are today. We are who we are because of the complex interactions of heredity, family, and social influences. These same influences were at play in shaping the life of James

It is only natural that, following in this vein, the New Testament begins by highlighting heredity. The Gospel of Matthew starts with a recitation of the lineage of Jesus. Incidentally, since they were half-brothers by blood, this also would be the lineage of James. And to truly under stand James—to paint a portrait of him—we need to grasp the paramount role that his older brother played. With this purpose in mind, let’s examine Matthew’s account.

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham:
Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother
was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
and Jesse the father of King David. (Matthew 1:1–5)

The gospel writer’s purpose here is to establish the quintessential Jewishness of Jesus. He does this in the most organic way possible, by linking him back to the father of the Jewish nation, Abraham. Matthew’s
gospel is written to a Jewish audience and so by doing this, Matthew is saying to his fellow Jews, “Look folks, Jesus, the Messiah is one of us. Just like you, he can trace back his bloodline right to Abraham. We have
a common heritage and here it is spelled out in black and white.” With the next portion of the genealogy Matthew takes this message a step further:

David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers
at the time of the exile to Babylon. (Matthew 1:6b–11)

To the casual present-day reader, this list of names means next to nothing, but in Matthew’s time every educated Jewish boy or girl would recognize that this is the full pantheon of Jewish kings. Here are the great and not so great leaders of the Jewish nation—royal heroes and scoundrels all. By providing this list Matthew has just upped the ante. He is telling his Jewish readers, “Have a look at this. Jesus is a royal descendant from the line of David. He is no ordinary Jew. Surely, he is marked for a higher calling.”

Matthew continues:

After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,
Abihud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Elihud,
Elihud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary,
and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah. (Matthew 1:12–16)

Matthew has laid out this catalog of patriarchs to establish Jesus’ provenance. This is his royal heritage. To his Jewish audience he is saying, “We all know that the coming Messiah—the promised one—is a descendant of David. Well, here is Jesus’ family tree. He springs from the right stock. He’s got the bona fides.”

But did you notice that surprising little twist at the end? We are introduced to “Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah” (Matthew 1:16). That’s right! After that great, long, monotonous list of was the-father-of’s, there’s an abrupt change. Joseph was not the father of Jesus. The genetic link breaks down. “Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah” (Matthew 1:16).

Matthew goes on to explain:

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about:
His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph,
but before they came together, she was found to be
pregnant through the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 1:18)

 

It’s as though God is saying through Matthew that royal heritage is significant, but it isn’t good enough; the best human DNA isn’t good enough. It’s only human after all. For the Messiah we must look to a higher source—a divine source. “But before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18).

God intervened. God put some skin in the game. If the redemption of mankind was a rescue mission, then the Maker of the universe just got seriously committed. He inserted Himself into the human genome.

Divine DNA—Holy Spirit DNA. Think of that for a minute. Divine DNA, the very nature of God, is linked with human DNA in theperson of Jesus. “She [Mary] was found to be pregnant through the HolySpirit” (Matthew 1:18). If you find it difficult to wrap your mind aroundthat statement, you are not alone. Joseph had some difficulty with it too. In fact, he needed a bit of angelic dream therapy to convince him of the heavenly origin this pregnancy. Let’s return to Matthew’s account:

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about:
His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph,
but before they came together, she was found to be
pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her
husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want
to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to
divorce her quietly.

But after he had considered this, an angel of the
Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son
of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your
wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy
Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give
him the name Jesus, because he will save his people
from their sins.”

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said
through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and
give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”
(which means “God with us”).

When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of
the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home
as his wife. But he did not consummate their marriage
until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the
name Jesus. (Matthew 1:18–24)

In a normal human pregnancy, the father’s sperm, containing his DNA, unites with the mother’s DNA in the egg to form a new child (zygote). In Mary’s case, the Holy Spirit supplied the required male DNA, or its spiritual equivalent, to set the growth of the zygote (child) into motion.

Theologians have pondered and debated the topic of the virgin birth from the very foundation of the Christian faith. For unbelievers it is a huge stumbling block. How could this come about? It should not surprise us that those most intimately involved with this miracle—Mary and Joseph— would also have doubts and questions. They needed divine assurance and convincing proofs, even as many believers do today.

It’s easy for us who live in a postmodern world to assume that the ancients of biblical times lived in an age of faith where everyone was quick to believe in miracles and the supernatural intervention of God. But a careful reading of the New Testament tells quite a different story. Many struggled with their faith. There are skeptics who demand proof in every age. But how glorious it is when the skeptic has his questions answered, his doubts stripped away, and he finds himself confronted by the living God. This was the case with both Mary and Joseph.

In Luke’s gospel account, Mary’s encounter with the angel Gabriel quite logically sets off some serious questions and doubts. We are told that “Mary was greatly troubled at his [Gabriel’s] words and wondered
what kind of greeting this might be” (Luke 1:29).

Mary had just heard that she “is highly favoured,” and “the Lord is with her.” If she found that angelic greeting disturbing, or as some translations say “confusing,” I am sure she found Gabriel’s announcement
which followed even more troubling.

“Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with
God. You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you
are to call him Jesus. He will be great and will be called
the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him
the throne of his father David, and he will reign over
Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never
end.”
“How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since
I am a virgin?” (Luke 1:30b–34)

 

Evangelho — Lc 1, 26-38 AI Modified

Mary’s uncertainty is evident through her question. This girl without doubt knew about the birds and the bees and the normal ways and means that produce a pregnancy. Her question flowed logically from everything she knew about human reproduction. Would this promised-child come from her union with Joseph? That would certainly be the natural, predictable course of events, since she was already pledged in marriage to him. Can you imagine her surprise when she heard the angel’s response to her question?

The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on
you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow
you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son
of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a
child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable
to conceive is in her sixth month. For no word from
God will ever fail.” (Luke 1:35-37)

Mary is unequivocally told that God would be the father of this child, “so the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.” This echoes what she had been told before she questioned Gabriel. Mary was told, “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.” Undoubtedly, it takes time and repetition to fully grasp the implications of such statements. In Mary’s case it would take a lifetime. After all, this angelic announcement confounded her Jewish theology. How could God take on human flesh? It defied logic and the norms of human experience. While a Jewish Messiah was hoped for, even expected, who knew that it would come this way? From her own body no less?

To reassure Mary, Gabriel adds the news about Elizabeth’s pregnancy. This aged, barren woman was the last woman among her relatives that Mary would expect to be pregnant. If the miraculous pregnancy of Elizabeth was possible, then perhaps this divine conception via a virgin was possible too.

Mary’s response indicates the spark of faith was alive within her.

“I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her. (Luke 1:38)

Following this angelic visitation, Mary did not remain in her hometown, Nazareth, for long. Luke goes on to tell us that she went down to Zachariah and Elizabeth’s house in Judea. We are not told why she made this journey, but Mary probably hoped for confirmation that Gabriel’s words were true—that Elizabeth was indeed pregnant. If it was confirmation that she sought, it came upon her arrival.

When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!” (Luke 1:41–45)

Elizabeth’s words confirm that the spark of faith in Mary was sufficient. She had believed the angel’s words—the Lord’s promise to her via Gabriel—and as a result conception had become reality. As the gospel writer John puts it, “The Word [Jesus] became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14). In the coming days, God would become flesh within the womb of Mary.

Later, we see that this concept of power residing in spoken words becomes a prominent theme in Jesus’ ministry. When mixed with faith, the spoken word releases transformation, healing and the miraculous. Jesus speaks to the wind and the waves, and they obeyed him. With a simple spoken word, he heals the sick, restores sight to the blind and casts out demons. Time and again we hear him say, “Your faith has healed you,” as the afflicted walk away in perfect health (Matthew 9:22, Mark5:34, Mark 10:52, Luke 8:48, Luke18:42).

It is this potent mix of the spoken word and faith in the heart of the listener that brings forth amazing transformation. As it was at conception, so it continued through Jesus’ life—words and faith formed an astonishing blend. His words brought life; God’s word brings life.

Later we will see that James, the brother of Jesus, fully grasps this concept of power residing in the spoken word. It is a major theme in his writing, and he hammers it home like no other New Testament writer.

Is it legitimate to speak of divine DNA linking with human DNA to produce the God/man Jesus Christ? Deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA is a physical molecular structure after all, but the Bible asserts that God is a spirit. How could God, who is a spirit, have a physical component or discernible material structure?

If this question seems baffling, then consider this. For the last 50 years nuclear physicists have been trying to find the Higgs boson or ‘God particle’—that elusive element that gives everything in the universe its mass. After spending billions of dollars on the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, and then creating millions of subatomic particle collisions, scientists have concluded that what we call nothing (totally empty space) is actually something. The God particle discovery announced on July 4th, 2012, is the theological equivalent of saying that God has substance.

For more than two thousand years, Christians have been arguing that God has substance. He took on substance at the conception of Christ in Mary’s womb. In an instant God took on human form. Godly characteristics found their full expression in a human form—first as a zygote, then a fetus, an infant, a child, an adolescent, and a man named Jesus. At every stage of development, he was both God and man. The essence and nature of God took on substance—a material form—and became incarnate. God was no longer only a spirit. He had a physical structure—a human form through which the world could see the express nature and character of God. As a human father expresses his nature and characteristics genetically through his offspring, so too the heavenly Father’s spiritual code was written into every molecule and fiber of Jesus’ being.

Furthermore, it bears noting that this God/man, Jesus Christ, was not a demigod in the Greek and Roman religious tradition of that period. He was simultaneously fully God and fully man, according to sound biblical interpretation and the earliest Christian conventions.

From a biblical perspective the divine nature of the child Jesus is undeniable. Jesus’ biological father was God, as clearly stated in Matthew and Luke’s gospel accounts. But why does Matthew bother listing his earthly, adoptive father’s genealogy if, as stated, Joseph had no DNA in the mix?

The answer appears to be threefold. First, nurture matters. An all-knowing God recognized that Joseph would act as an ideal father to the boy Jesus. Joseph would raise Jesus in the faith. He would love and discipline him in a godly way and educate him in what it means to be a man in Jewish society. Everything we know about child rearing points to the importance of the father figure in the home. This is especially true in the case of boys. Joseph played a very significant role in the life of Jesus. But Joseph played a crucial role in the life of James—crucial because he was the biological father of James. As the lives of these two boys develop, we will see the pivotal role this difference in DNA played.

Secondly, family lineage matters. In Western society we downplay the importance of family heritage. Rugged individualism is highly valued. But even today in Middle Eastern culture, a person’s family name and lineage are of great importance, even paramount. An individual’s life is always viewed in the context of family and family heritage. This is why such a high premium is placed on family honor. It is also why blood feuds go on for multiple generations, as families are locked into past modes of behavior and interaction. To fully introduce a person within such a society, one needs to provide their lineage. Matthew does just that by delineating Jesus’ heritage at the outset of his gospel account.

Finally, royalty matters. The long-awaited, promised Messiah was to come from the royal line of David. This was common knowledge to all Jews of this period. Hence, Matthew begins his gospel with these words: “This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham” (Matthew 1:1). Similarly, in Joseph’s dream, recorded inthe first chapter, the angel does not address Joseph as the son of Jacob, Jacob being his immediate father, but rather as, “Joseph, son of David” (Matthew 1:29). Why jump fourteen generations back? Simply put, it’s because royalty matters.

Because royalty matters, it is the opening theme of Matthew’s first gospel narrative:

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the
time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem
and asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews?
We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”

When King Herod heard this he was disturbed,
and all Jerusalem with him. When he had called to
gether all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the
law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born.
“In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what
the prophet has written:

“‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd
my people Israel.’” (Matthew 2:1–6)

Because royalty matters, jealous King Herod had all the male infants under the age of two put to death in Bethlehem and its environs. Clearly this newborn king had the endorsement of heaven, since the appearance of a star marked his birth. Furthermore, the scriptures predicted his birth. The crafty Herod immediately sensed the threat to his dynastic rule.

In Luke’s gospel account we see that being a descendant of royalty mattered to Joseph. Why else would a resident of Nazareth make the long journey to Bethlehem for the sake of an imperial census, especially since his wife was in the final stages of pregnancy?

So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. (Luke 2:4–5)

As you can see, it’s all about DNA—royal DNA—messianic DNA. It’s all about being from the right family, the right clan, and being born in the right place at the right time as a fulfillment of ancient biblical prophecy. It’s about divine DNA or its spiritual equivalent touching the right human DNA to trigger the birth of the Messiah—the God-man who came into the world.

But the DNA that the Holy Spirit touched to trigger conception was Mary’s DNA. Luke provides us with a different genealogical list than Matthew as he traces back Jesus’ ancestors all the way to Adam and finally to God. (See Luke 3:23–38.) He does this because unlike Matthew, who is writing to a Jewish audience, Luke is writing to a Gentile audience. Luke wants his readers to understand that this Jewish Messiah is not just the Savior for Jews, but for all humankind. Of course, Luke goes on to describe the stable birth, the shepherd’s visit and the heavenly, angelic light and sound show that heralded the nativity of the Son of God.

Many Bible scholars believe that the differences between Matthew’s genealogical list and Luke’s list are due to Luke following Mary’s line of descent, while Matthew follows Joseph’s line. What is abundantly clear from both lists is that we are tracing the royal line of David, since at some point the lists merge and are identical.

Implicitly what both authors are saying by providing these lineages is that Jesus is the rightful heir of the Jewish throne. He is the long-awaited Messiah and the fulfillment of prophecy. His birth and arrival on the
scene mark a turning point in world history. God has stepped into human flesh and has come to live among us.

The gospel writer John puts it this way:

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

James was born into this family, with this heritage, with this more-than-preeminent older brother. Talk about being overshadowed by an older brother! Like no one else on this planet James had the blessing, the challenge, and the curse of being overshadowed by the Almighty. And in human form, this Almighty was none other than his living, breathing, flesh, and blood older brother.

 

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.

The Mystery in a Box

08 Sunday Feb 2026

Posted by in Psalms

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

James: the Lynchpin of Our Faith — Introduction

Dear friends,
now we are children of God,
and what we will be has not yet been made known.
But we know that when Christ appears,
we shall be like him,
for we shall see him as he is.
(1 John 3:2, NIV

Who knew that a medium-size box could create such a stir? Archaeologists, academics, journalists, and theologians were intrigued. A debate raged for weeks about the authenticity of this ancient stone box. A sceptical public grew curious and hungered for more information. What did all this mean? What were the implications?

In the fall of 2002, the typical news cycle of war, politics, celebrity missteps, and market fluctuations was briefly interrupted by word that an ancient ossuary had been discovered. The inscription on this stone box read, “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.”

Photo Credit Time Magazine, November 4, 2002

Did Jesus have a brother? Were his brother’s bones once stored in this ancient ossuary? Who precisely was this James? Experts in ancient burial customs claimed that it was common practice to have the name of the father of the deceased inscribed on the burial box, but why include the brother’s name? Jesus—Jesus? Was this the Jesus of the New Testament, the one revered by millions as the Son of God?

The list of questions grew. Scholars speculated, while public curiosity reached a peak. Israeli authorities questioned how this 25 × 50 × 30cm stone box came into the hands of Oded Golan, a private collector of antiquities. Roman Catholic theologians chafed at the very notion that Jesus had a brother. Religious skeptics dredged up a variety of imaginative apocryphal scenarios.

Time magazine, in its November 4, 2002, edition reported that “Andre Lemaire, one of the world’s foremost scholars of ancient scripts, announced that ‘it seems very probable that this [box] is the ossuary of the James in the New Testament.’”

Time Magazine Headline, Nov. 4, 2002

Arrangements were made to have the James Ossuary examined by experts and placed on display at the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) in Toronto. But alas, when the shipping container arrived by air from Jerusalem, it was discovered that the ancient stone box had fractured in transit. News outlets excitedly reported on this new ill-fated development.

Undeterred by these setbacks, repairs were hastily made to the ossuary, and the highly publicized exhibit went ahead as planned. Thousands flocked to the display at the ROM. In fact, the display curator at the time confessed to this author that no other ROM exhibit generated sucha widespread frenzy of interest in all his years of service.

This stone box—this ancient artifact—may well be the closest physical contact we have to Jesus, the subject of the gospels.

But storm clouds were brewing. Roman Catholic scholars dismissed the discovery on doctrinal grounds. According to long established Vatican teaching, Mary was a perpetual virgin. How could Jesus then have a brother? This teaching has persisted despite several passages in the New Testament which unequivocally refer to James as the brother of Jesus.

Some scholars questioned the authenticity of this discovery. Was the “brother of Jesus” portion of the inscription a forgery—a present day addition to boost the value of this artifact? Then there was the question of provenance. Where exactly was this ossuary discovered? Since the exact original location of this find was unknown, the context that archeologists rely on to ascertain authenticity was sadly missing. How did the ossuary come into the hands of Oded Golan? Was he simply an unscrupulous shyster out to make a fast buck by peddling fake or altered artifacts?

Golan’s activities and his artifacts raised the suspicion of the Israeli Antiquities Authority. For years the Antiquities Authority had been attempting to put a halt to the illegal trade in artifacts discovered in the Holy Land. Here was a high-profile case that could send a clear message to all who sought to profit from this trade. On July 22, 2003, Oded Golan was arrested in Jerusalem for allegedly forging and illegally trading in antiquities. But is the James ossuary a forgery? In a press release following Golan’s arrest, the ROM stood by its initial assessment:

Until the ROM receives convincing evidence to the contrary, we stand by our opinion that the James Ossuary is not a forgery. We had a limited amount of time to study it because of the amount of conservation work that was required after the Ossuary arrived at the Museum after being damaged in transit. The studies that were carried out on the inscription and broken fragments of the Ossuary, however, satisfied the ROM’s investigative team that it was an authentic artifact with an authentic inscription that might make it the Ossuary of James, the brother of Jesus. There is always a question of authenticity when objects do not come from a controlled archaeological excavation, as is the case with the James Ossuary.

While the authenticity of the James Ossuary remains in question, it is the life of James, the brother of Jesus, which is truly intriguing. (1 see footnote) The James of the Bible is far more than bones in a box. He was after all a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood man.

Time photo of the James Ossuary

Present-day believers and church goers view James as an obscure figure, if they know anything about him at all. If Catholics are asked who the most important figure in the early church was, most would answer Peter. If Protestants are asked the same question, they would answer Paul. Yet if we could step in a time machine and ask Peter and Paul the same question, they would both answer James.

Over the centuries the historic importance of James has been overlooked. In the great gallery of early church fathers, typically Peter, Paul, and John draw the most attention. But James’ contribution was truly foundational—even crucial.

Many may be surprised to know that the New Testament has a good deal to say about James, the man known to early Christians as the brother of the Lord. The time has come to put some flesh on those bones missing from the ossuary—to create a portrait of the biblical James—a man who had a monumental influence on the direction of the early church and by extension an impact that echoes down through world history to the present day.

It can be argued that James, known to some as James the Just, is in fact the lynchpin of the Christian faith. Without him the early church would have remained an obscure Jewish sect—an offbeat curiosity in the grand march of civilization. But due to James, the gospel message burst out of the narrow confines of the Jewish faith. It exploded across the Roman Empire and came to dominate the life and thought of the Western world for the next two millennia. Now with the rapid rise of Christianity in the nations of Africa, South America, and Asia, the time has come to take a closer look at the man who set this whole process—this train of events into motion: the man the Bible writers call James, the brother of our Lord.

1 For a thorough exploration of the James Ossuary and its implications for present-day Christianity, see Hershel Shanks and Ben Witherington III’s book The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story & Meaning of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus & His Family (Harper Collins, 2003).

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.