Tag Archives: Nazareth

The Role of James

22 Sunday Mar 2026

Posted by in Books by David Kitz

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

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

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.

Country road home — photo by David Kitz

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.

Photo by Vlad Cheu021ban on Pexels.com

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.

 

A House Divided

15 Sunday Mar 2026

Posted by in Books by David Kitz

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

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

James: the Lynchpin of Our Faith — Chapter 5

The family rift that is evident in John’s Gospel did not appear overnight. Undoubtedly, it had been growing for years. Most likely it worsened after Joseph’s death. His authority as the head of the home would certainly have had a calming effect, but with his passing, the simmering rivalry between the sons of Joseph and the firstborn son of Mary boiled to the surface.

Luke tells us that Jesus was thirty years old when he began his public ministry (Luke 3:23). All four gospel writers agree that it was his relative, John the Baptist, who lit the spark in Jesus that set the world ablaze. Jesus’ baptism by his cousin John was the starting point of the meteoric rise of Jesus’ ministry (Luke 1:36). The latent potential of his divine DNA suddenly came alive. His baptism experience marked a dramatic turning point in his life.

When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:21–22)

Photo via pastorunlikely.com

The three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke provide essentially the same description of this transformative event. The Triune God is manifest: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Father speaks words of affirmation to his Son, and the Holy Spirit descends in bodily form to empower Jesus for the mission that lay before him. The gospel writers leave no doubt that everything that follows in Jesus’ ministry had its starting point in this turning-point experience.

If Jesus the man ever questioned his own divinity, every shred of doubt was removed in that moment. This was heaven-sent confirmation. His Father had spoken—had spoken audibly. From the age of twelve, Jesus knew of his divine origin—his life source—and now he knew his destiny. He was God’s son. Though his brothers rejected him, though the world rejected him, he knew the love of his Father. And in the days that followed, nothing would deflect him from doing his Father’s will.

Called, chosen and approved by his Father, Jesus was now ready to walk out his redemptive mission.

John the Evangelist, the gospel writer, gives us a different perspective on this event. In John’s gospel we see the baptism of Jesus through the eyes of the one who performed it, John the Baptist:

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”

Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.” (John 1:29–34)

John the Baptist’s testimony adds considerably to our understanding of this life-defining event. Chiefly, he identifies for us who Jesus really is. In a moment of divine revelation, he declares, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com



John the Baptist did not live to witness Jesus’ death on the cross, but in that instant, he caught a glimpse of what lay ahead for the man he identified as the Messiah. He saw the sacrificial nature of Jesus’ mission.

In his own words, John tells us his own mission has now been fulfilled. “The reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”

John the Baptist’s ministry will decrease; the ministry of the Christ, the anointed one, will increase. The torch has been passed. The new covenant has begun.

The Baptist makes no mention of the Father’s affirming voice from heaven, but he provides more detail about the coming of the Holy Spirit. He emphasizes that the Spirit remained on Jesus. From that moment on, the miraculous power that is evident in Jesus’ life can be directly attributed to the Holy Spirit remaining on him.

John’s endorsement of Jesus’ divine calling and ministry stand in sharp contrast to the rejection Jesus would later experience from James and the other members of his immediate family. For reasons we will never fully know, this blood relative recognized in Jesus what his brothers completely missed. Those who are too close sometimes fail to grasp what is patently evident to an outsider. Undoubtedly, John’s affirmation of Jesus carried considerable weight, since he was a public figure of national renown. Yet as we will see, it did not appear to persuade James.

This raises the question of where James stood regarding John the Baptist. There is no indication in scripture that James and the other family members submitted to John’s baptism. The gospel writers and John in particular give us the impression that Jesus acted alone. He came for baptism apart from his family. This was solely his decision, without the support or presence of his family.

This seems rather unusual given that John the Baptist was a close relative, and there was a strong bond between Mary and John’s mother Elizabeth at the time of their pregnancies—a bond so strong that Mary spent three months living in the home of Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:39–56). Though the gospels are silent on this matter, it is easy to imagine these two families spending time with each other on special occasions such as the Passover. It is not unreasonable to surmise that as boys, John, Jesus, and James were playmates. Did they drift apart over time or was there a sudden rupture in relations?

In his adult life did James disapprove of John the Baptist’s message and tactics? The gospels leave the impression that John’s call for repentance and baptism was broadly accepted by the people of the time, but he raised the ire of one particular group.

But when he [John] saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.” (Matthew 3:7–9)

Later in Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees and religious authorities, it is abundantly clear that they have rejected John’s call for repentance. See Matthew 21:23–27. If James embraced the teachings of the Pharisees, it is probable that he opposed John’s message and his call for baptism. With their strict adherence to the Law and their extreme pride in Jewish heritage, the Pharisees and their teachings might have found a welcome home within the mind of James. His writings have often been described as having a legalistic bent.

If as a young man James fell under the sway of the Pharisees, he would find himself opposing both John the Baptist and Jesus, his own brother. Again, though the scriptures are silent on this topic, it seems quite likely that this was a family divided along religious lines.

The writers of the synoptic Gospels tell us that immediately following his baptism, Jesus entered a forty-day period of fasting:

At once the Spirit sent him out into the wilderness, and he was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him. (Mark 1:12–13)

Then, having overcome the temptations of the flesh and of Satan, (see Mathew 4:1-11) Jesus began his public ministry in the power of the Holy Spirit and under the watchful eye of his heavenly Father. The impact across the region is felt almost immediately.

Matthew gives us this summative overview:

Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people. News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases,
those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed; and he healed them. Large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed him. (Matthew 4:23–25)

What had come over the carpenter’s son? What did Jesus’ family think of this dramatic turn of events? Within a few months this young man, conceived out of wedlock, had become a much sought after religious teacher, a healer, and a crowd-gathering celebrity. Did they approve?

Mark’s Gospel provides us with a clear answer:

Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.” (Mark 3:20–21)

The answer is an unambiguous “No!” No, they did not approve. They thought he was insane. We know from John’s Gospel that Jesus’ brothers did not believe in him. Now we discover that they truly thought he had gone mad. Their own words best convey their rendered judgement, “He is out of his mind.”

Photo by Engin Akyurt on Pexels.com

They considered him to be a raving lunatic incapable of conducting his own affairs. Why else would they go to take charge of him? Furthermore, they were not alone in this opinion. Mark’s account continues:

And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, “He is possessed by Beelzebul! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons.”

So Jesus called them over to him and began to speak to them in parables: “How can Satan drive out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come. In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house without first tying him up. Then he can plunder the strong man’s house. Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.”

He said this because they were saying, “He has an impure spirit.” (Mark 3:22–30)

In brief, Jesus’ family thought he was insane and the teachers of the law from Jerusalem thought he was demon possessed. The opinion of these teachers of the law may have had a good deal of influence on James. It is worth noting that these would be the same religious leaders from Judea that according to John were trying to kill Jesus. See John 7:1. This can hardly be described as a resounding endorsement of Jesus’ ministry!

But then Jesus has always been a controversial figure throughout history. The great twentieth-century thinker C.S. Lewis, in his defense of orthodox Christian faith, makes this insightful statement regarding Jesus:

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (MacMillan, 1952), pp. 55–56.)

His enduring love stretches beyond the horizon — photo by David Kitz

There is no convenient middle ground concerning Jesus. It has always been thus, even for the members of his immediate family. Yet there is one thing abundantly clear from Mark’s account: this is a deeply divided family. Mary may have believed in the messianic mission of her firstborn son, but it is apparent her other sons do not. They believe Jesus is out of his mind, and, bringing their mother with them, they set off to rescue their errant half-brother from his delusion.

In his discussion with the teachers of the law, Jesus refutes the idea that he is demon possessed with the argument that a kingdom or a house divided against itself cannot stand. There is a good deal of irony at play here since his own family is divided, and now he finds himself on the outs with most of them. Do they too believe he is demon possessed? Quite possibly, though we are not explicitly told.

Mark continues his account of these events:

Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”

“Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked.

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)

Obedient Christian believers—Christ’s followers—draw a great deal of warmth and comfort from this passage. They are identified as brothers, sisters, and mothers to their Lord. What amazing words of love and embrace!

Photo by Arina Krasnikova on Pexels.com

But there is a stinging flip side to this affirmation. The members ofJesus’ own family stand excluded. Both literally and figuratively they are on the outside—on the outside of the home looking in. For them this is a backhanded rebuke of the highest magnitude. They are not deemed to be part of this happy family of followers—Jesus’ spiritual family—but neither do they want to be.

What appears to follow (though Mark provides us with no further details) is a classic standoff. We are not even told if Jesus agrees to go out and meet with his biological family; presumably he did not. If he knew their intentions, it may have been wise to not meet with them. The brothers might try to take him by force.

Were harsh words exchanged? Perhaps.

Did Jesus try to reassure them that he was sound of mind? Maybe. The silence of scripture on this matter allows some room for conjecture.

But ultimately from the three gospel accounts that record this incident, (Matthew 12:46–50, Mark 3:31–35, Luke 8:19–21) we can only reach one conclusion: Jesus continues on with his ministry, and his brothers returned to Nazareth without their wayward older sibling. They may consider him insane, but Jesus is not about to change course and yield to their will. He is doing his Father’s will. He is going about his Father’s business.

The rift between them has widened immeasurably. Can it ever be bridged? In effect Jesus has disowned them, and they in turn have abandoned him to his own will. The gulf between them is enormous.

In the days ahead the implications of this rift will play out in stunning ways.

 

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 Family Rift

08 Sunday Mar 2026

Posted by in Books by David Kitz

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

James: the Lynchpin of Our Faith — Chapter 4

One can easily assume that Jesus, and by extension James, grew up in an idyllic family. If God selected Mary to be the mother of God’s own son, then surely, she was a perfect mother—the perfect mother. Joseph too must have been a man of flawless character, a hardworking, salt-of-the-earth fellow with impeccable morals. Growing up in such a home in small-town Nazareth must have been like having your own corner of heaven in this rough and tumble, sin-stained world.

But in this fallen world there is no perfect home and no absolutely perfect family. The taint of sin and the machinations of our ancient foe are everywhere. If it were not so, this world would not need a Savior. It should come as no surprise then, that all was not always sweetness and light in the household of Joseph and Mary. God frequently uses deeply flawed characters.

Luke concludes his account of Jesus’ boyhood temple experience with this summary statement:

Then he [Jesus] went down to Nazareth with them [Mary and Joseph] and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. (Luke 2:51–52)

There is no indication of any family tension in this statement. On the contrary, the opposite appears to be true, and undoubtedly there were many happy moments of family harmony in this home. But when we examine other passages from the four gospel accounts of Jesus life, we can see that below the surface, trouble was brewing within this holy family. How soon family tension and rivalry reared its ugly head remains open to debate, but as we will soon see, it certainly was present during the time of Jesus public ministry.

Sibling rivalry is common among multi-child families. Was there rivalry between Jesus and his brothers as they grew up? Most likely there was. In fact, the very notion of living with a morally perfect, intellectually superior older brother should send shivers of dread through any thinking child. How could any sibling possibly measure up to this older brother’s exemplary standard? Here we have the textbook recipe for childhood frustration and sibling resentment.

If Jesus reached an epiphany moment in the temple at age twelve, it is reasonable to surmise that James may have had a similar epiphany in his early teens—a moment when he realized that Jesus was profoundly different, and that unlike himself, Jesus was not the son of Joseph.

The Boy Jesus in the Temple Courts

This epiphany may have occurred in a rather ordinary way. Teens his own age may have told James that his brother was the son of another man. Small-town communities have a collective memory. Mary’s initial unexpected pregnancy likely had tongues wagging. Rumors spread and gain currency with time, and in due time that rumor may have circled round to James.

James did not conclude that Jesus was the Son of God. A more natural explanation was much more logical. It is reasonable to assume that in his judgment, James came to believe that Jesus was the product of his mother’s rather unfortunate union with another man. Scripture bears witness to this verdict.

The following passage from John’s Gospel provides us with ample evidence of the tension that was rife within this family:

After this, Jesus went around in Galilee. He did not want to go about in Judea because the Jewish leaders there were looking for a way to kill him. But when the Jewish Festival of Tabernacles was near, Jesus’ brothers said to him, “Leave Galilee and go to Judea, so that your disciples there may see the works you do. No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” For even his own brothers did not believe in him.

Therefore Jesus told them, “My time is not yet here; for you any time will do. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that its works are evil. You go to the festival. I am not going up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come.” After he had said this, he stayed in Galilee.

However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret. Now at the festival the Jewish leaders were watching for Jesus and asking, “Where is he?”

Among the crowds there was widespread whispering about him. Some said, “He is a good man.”

Others replied, “No, he deceives the people.” But no one would say anything publicly about him for fear of the leaders. (John 7:1–13)

John’s observation on the brothers’ advice is very enlightening. He states, “For even his brothers did not believe in him.” There was clearly a bitter tension here that the brothers’ words alone do not convey. The brothers that this passage refers to are of course James, Joseph, Simon and Judas (Jude), as identified in the Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

And what precisely did the brothers not believe about Jesus? From the context, it appears that they did believe in his miraculous powers; in fact, they challenged him to reveal himself to the world through them. The phrase that is translated “the works you do” in the New International Version is more freely translated “see your miracles” in the New Living Translation. So, it is clear that the brothers had heard the stories of Jesus’ miracles or had witnessed them personally. Now they want Jesus to reveal himself to the world. They say, “Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.”

The brothers’ unbelief went deeper than a surface acknowledgement of the miracles. They doubted his deity—his divine origin. To his brothers, Jesus was too familiar. He was Mary’s boy—their half-brother—nothing more. But beyond that, he was their half-brother, the bastard son, putting on airs, rising above his rightful station in life. Furthermore, they were jealous of his rising popularity as a person of considerable renown.

Here we see the truth of what John said in the introduction to his Gospel, “He [Jesus] was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him” (John 1:10–11).

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Jesus was rejected by his own—by his own brothers. They did not recognize him as God or the Son of God.

As one of the three disciples within Jesus’ inner circle, John was likely a witness to this conversation between Jesus and his brothers. Now in his Gospel, John bears witness to the brother’s unbelief.

But John had another domestic source that may have enlightened him more fully on the brothers’ lack of faith. John was responsible for looking after Mary after Jesus’ death. Surely the issue of the brothers’ early rejection of the messianic Jesus was a topic of discussion at some point.

Undoubtedly, at times Mary would also have encountered the disparaging perspective that her younger sons had toward Jesus. Jesus did not easily fit into a world or even a family that prefers conformity. Those who are struggling to raise exceptional children may find some comfort in that. Often gifted children are misunderstood or not well-received socially by peers and even by adults.

Jesus sees through his brothers’ advice to their deep-seated antagonism, and consequently he responds harshly to their challenge to reveal himself to the world. But with his response, he provides a clue as to why they rejected him. “Jesus told them, ‘My time is not yet here; for you any time will do.’”

For the brothers, when they consider Jesus’ claims to deity, they see an elephant in the room—perhaps several of them. The largest problem may well be the death of their father Joseph. How could this healer of the sick, this miracle worker, this man who raised the dead to life on more than one occasion do nothing to prevent the death of their father?

The unspoken thought might go something like this, “So Jesus, you’re the Son of God! Well, why then did you let Dad die? Why didn’t you do something? Why do you go about healing perfect strangers, while your own family suffers?”

But how does Jesus respond? “Jesus told them, ‘My time is not yet here; for you any time will do.’”

That may be a fine answer for the public, but it does little to soothe an aching heart or comfort the doubting soul of a family member. Why did Jesus raise to life the son of the widow at Nain (Luke 7:11-17), but leave Joseph, his earthly father, to die?

Variations on this question confront us often. Why is one child spared in a school shooting, while others are gunned down by a madman? Why does one woman make a miraculous recovery from terminal cancer, while an equally worthy woman suffers and dies, leaving a grief-stricken family? These questions have no easy answer. None exists on this side of eternity.

Death stalks all of us, and ultimately death always claims its prize. A better question might be, “Why now? Why did this person die now? Why not later?”

“Jesus told them, ‘My time is not yet here; for you any time will do.’”

Photo by brenoanp on Pexels.com

There was no miracle for their father Joseph. Jesus’ time had not yet come. His time for doing miracles had not yet arrived. Earlier in John’s Gospel, Jesus made a similar pronouncement when Mary asked him to intervene when the wine ran out at the wedding in Cana. “‘Woman, why do you involve me?’ Jesus replied. ‘My time has not yet come.’” (John 2:4)

But despite this objection, Jesus proceeded to perform his first miracle as he turned water into wine. The question of timing remains. Why work a miracle in one situation, but not in another? Why heal one invalid at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-16), but leave many others to suffer?

Clearly, Jesus was working according to a different timetable. In the present, we tend to think as Jesus’ brothers thought. We could always use a miracle or two. For us, when it comes to receiving a miracle, “any time will do.”

At this point in John’s account, there is clearly a great gulf separating these brothers and Jesus, and Jesus does nothing to bridge it. On the contrary he expands the gulf and elaborates on it. Speaking of his brothers, he says, “The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that its works are evil. You go to the festival. I am not going up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come.”

Implied in these remarks is the idea that the brothers are worldly and complicit with the evil of the world. Jesus sees himself as being on a great redemptive mission—a mission set in motion by his heavenly Father. It is a mission of impeccable, precise timing. He will not be distracted, bated or thrown off course by his brothers. For Jesus timing was everything. He will not be hurried into doing miracles or into revealing himself to the world. He will not be hurried to his death in Jerusalem. He is not a showman, a performer or an entertainer for the crowds.

He is a redeemer on a mission—a sacrificial lamb, the Passover lamb—saving himself for slaughter at the right time, the perfect time.

Photo by Kat Smith on Pexels.com

There is a double meaning in the phrase, “My time is not yet here.” For the brothers it meant the time for Jesus to reveal himself to the world through his miraculous powers, but for Jesus it also meant the time for his approaching death. The Jewish leaders were already plotting his demise. He did not want to speed that day by following his brothers’ ill-conceived ideas.

Jesus’ brothers understood none of this. They did not believe in him. James did not believe in him. The brothers proceeded to the feast while Jesus stayed for a time in Galilee. The rift between them is clearly defined. They did not travel together. They are walking separate paths. Jesus has his followers, his disciples, but his brothers are not numbered among them.

Unbelief and a sharp division in the family are not what we would expect from the union of Mary and Joseph. We would like to believe that Mary and Joseph did a stellar job in raising their children; after all they were selected by God for this specific assignment.

But let’s be clear: this was no easy task.

Many believe that Mary and Joseph disclosed to Jesus in an age-appropriate manner the divine nature of his origin and the broad outlines of his calling. Surely this was a part of their parental responsibility, a responsibility given to them by God.

Joseph certainly would have trained Jesus in the skills of carpentry. The family would have been active in the local synagogue. A synagogue education would include learning to read and write, but also committing reams of scripture to memory.

This would all be foundational to Jesus’ later ministry.

But the parental task of educating Jesus in his messianic calling would be far easier if there were no younger brothers around. Singling out a child for special status or treatment instantly creates family tension. Anyone named Joseph should know this well.

The brothers’ rejection of Jesus bears a striking resemblance to another example of sibling rivalry and rejection recorded in the last chapters of Genesis. When he was a teenager, the patriarch Joseph (Joseph of the multicolored coat) was rejected by his brothers. But this was no mild snub. Joseph’s brothers initially wanted to kill him, but they settled for selling him to Ishmaelites, who later sold him into slavery in Egypt. See Genesis chapters 37-50.

Photo by gracefiber.com

The New Testament Joseph surely must have had his Old Testament namesake in mind as he raised his own family. The parallels run deep. Many biblical scholars have noted that there is a striking similarity between the life of Jesus and the life of Joseph, the patriarch, whose story is recorded in Genesis.

Here in brief are some of these parallels:

• Both claimed a special relationship with their father—Jesus’ father being God, while Joseph’s father was Jacob, who is also called Israel, the father of the nation. (Luke 2:49, Genesis 37:3–4)

• Both had a revelation of their divine calling at or near puberty. (Luke 2:41–52; Genesis 37:5–11)

• Both were rejected by their brothers. (John 1:11 and John 7:5; Genesis 37:12–32)

• Though both were tempted, they lived a sinless or exemplary life. (Matthew 4:11 and 2 Corinthians 5:21; Genesis 39:6–15)

• Both were wrongly accused, arrested and suffered though innocent. (Mark 14:43–15:41; Genesis 39:19–21)

• After suffering both were exalted to rule. (Philippians 2:9–11; Genesis 41:41–44)

• Both brought deliverance or salvation—Joseph for Egypt, Jesus for the world. (John 3:16; Genesis 50:20)

• Both forgave those who wronged them and were reconciled with their brothers. (Luke 23:34; Genesis 50:21)

If the New Testament Joseph showed any special favoritism to Jesus, he risked repeating the mistakes of Jacob, the father of the Joseph of the Old Testament. In that instance, special treatment led directly to fierce resentment and forced exile from the family.

This may have left Joseph in a conundrum. Too much disclosure of Jesus’ divine origin and messianic calling put him at risk of resentment and rejection by his siblings. No disclosure at all could be interpreted as a failure of parental responsibility.

Even the meaning of term Messiah is problematic. We understand this word quite differently now. How did Joseph and Mary see their son’s calling? They were looking at him through first century Jewish eyes, and they likely had expectations and perspectives that were quite different from ours today.

The desire for a Jewish Messiah to arise from among the people was pervasive during this historic period. The felt need was for a strong leader to arise and rally the people, so they could overthrow the oppressive pagan rule of Rome by means of a bloody insurrection. From the Jewish perspective the need and the vision were clear. This Messiah—the anointed one—would re-establish the throne of David and with a rod of iron he would rule over Israel and the surrounding nations in righteousness and justice.

The firstborn son in Joseph’s household had the right lineage. He was a son of David and furthermore, at his birth his messianic call was confirmed by the words of angels, prophets and magi. Surely at the right time Joseph would or should instill into Jesus the imperatives of his messianic call. Did Joseph do this?

On this topic the scriptures are maddeningly silent. Joseph dies at some point between Jesus’ boyhood visit to the temple and the emergence of his public ministry. When or how is unknown.

If Joseph and Mary followed the wisdom of the day, they would have imparted an incorrect messianic vision. Several would-be messiahs rose up in rebellion against Rome before and after Jesus’ crucifixion. Each rebellion was brutally crushed until the Jews were finally expelled from Jerusalem and their homeland in 135 AD.

The rebellion that Jesus would eventually lead was a soft power rebellion that rejected bloodshed and the use of force. See John 18:36. But ultimately the kingdom of God, which Jesus founded, would triumph over the empire of Rome. Down through the ages to the present day, his followers have submitted to his rule within a kingdom that never ends.

In matters affecting family dynamics, timing is crucial. In the right time, the dreams of the Joseph of the technicolor coat would come true. His parents and brothers would bow down to him. Joseph, the son of Israel, became the ruler of all of Egypt.

Picture by Gracefiber.com

In the right time, Jesus’ brothers beginning with James would recognize him as the Son of God and the Savior of the world. They too would bow before him as king. All would come in the right time, including reconciliation.

Prior to the disagreement with his unbelieving brothers cited in John 7, Jesus was in conflict with the Jewish leadership in Judea. This too was a conflict over timing. He had dared to heal a man on the Sabbath. See John 5. In his discourse with the Jewish leadership, Jesus gives us a glimpse into his modus operandi:

Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. (John 5:19–23)

These words leave no doubt about whose agenda Jesus is following. He is going about his Father’s business. The twelve-year-old has grown up. Joseph is dead. The thirty-year-old Jesus is moving according to the dictates of his heavenly Father. He does “only what he sees his Father doing.”

Without doubt, what Jesus does, he does in his Father’s perfect timing. As we shall see, pursuing his messianic call would bring him into direct conflict with his brother—James the unbeliever.

Did Joseph and Mary fail in their parental mandate because we see evidence of serious conflict and unbelief within their family? If these saintly parents were unable to raise their family in harmony and faith, what hope do Christian parents have today?

Concluding that Joseph and Mary somehow failed in their parental mandate is unwarranted. Right actions stemming from right motives are often misunderstood, particularly within the dynamics of a large and growing family. Children, particularly adult children, are accountable for their own attitudes and actions.

In some respects, the Genesis account of Joseph’s life serves as a template for what unfolds 1,500 years later in the family of Mary and Joseph. Division and conflict bubble to the surface, but ultimately all is resolved through salvation and forgiveness.

Interestingly, the Book of Genesis ends with this statement:

So Joseph died at the age of a hundred and ten. And after they embalmed him, he was placed in a coffin in Egypt. (Genesis 50:26)

Four hundred years later, after a great deliverance, the stone box containing Joseph’s bones was carried out of Egypt and into the land of Israel. There his bones found their ultimate resting place.

And Joseph’s bones, which the Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem in the tract of land that Jacob bought for a hundred pieces of silver from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. This became the inheritance of Joseph’s descendants. (Joshua 24:32)

Time photo of the James Ossuary

Two thousand years after the death of the New Testament Joseph, we encounter another stone burial box. In the Hebrew language it bears this inscription: “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.”

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.

 

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.

In My Father’s House

31 Wednesday Dec 2025

Posted by in Psalm 27, Psalms

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Today’s quote and prayer from
“Psalms 365: Develop a Life of Worship and Prayer

 Today’s Reading: Psalm 27:4-6

Listen to today’s reading by Jonathan Dent:


Lord Jesus,
I want to be with you.
I want to live my life close to you now
and close to you forever.
Show me how to do that.
Be near me, Lord Jesus.
I ask you to stay
close by me forever,
and love me I pray.
Amen.

— — — —


The Boy Jesus at the Temple

After the festival was over,
while his parents were returning home,
the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem,
but they were unaware of it.
Thinking he was in their company,
they traveled on for a day.
Then they began looking for him
among their relatives and friends.
When they did not find him,
they went back to Jerusalem to look for him.
After three days they found him
in the temple courts,
sitting among the teachers,
listening to them and asking them questions.
Everyone who heard him was amazed
at his understanding and his answers.
When his parents saw him,
they were astonished.
His mother said to him,
“Son, why have you treated us like this?
Your father and I
have been anxiously searching for you.”

“Why were you searching for me?”
 he asked.
“Didn’t you know
I had to be in my Father’s house?”
But they did not understand
what he was saying to them.

Then he went down to Nazareth with them
and was obedient to them.
But his mother treasured all these things in her heart.
And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature,
and in favor with God and man.
(Luke 2:43-52 NIV)*

May God bless you in 2026!

Para la publicación de Salmos 365 de hoy en español haga clic aquí.

bgbg_v4.3_1501818
* NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION, COPYRIGHT ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 BY BIBLICA

Pray for enduring peace in Israel and Gaza,
and continue to pray for peace to return to Ukraine and Russia!

Volume I of Psalms 365: Develop a Life of Worship and Prayer won the Best Book of the Year Award from The Word Guild and Volume II has won the Best Devotional of the Year Award. For those who love God’s word, this three-book series is an ideal way to daily meet with the Lord. To purchase or for a closer look click here.

Also available from David KitzIs a return-to-Jesus revival possible in our time?
This book points the way forward.
For details click here.

Filled with Wisdom

30 Tuesday Dec 2025

Posted by in Psalm 27, Psalms

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Today’s quote and prayer from
“Psalms 365: Develop a Life of Worship and Prayer

 Today’s Reading: Psalm 27:1-3

Listen to today’s reading by Jonathan Dent:


Lord Jesus,
help me to truly walk in confident faith.
I ally myself with you.
You are my light and my salvation.
Help me now to face my day
and my future with confidence
that comes from you,
my Savior.
Amen.

— — — —


The Return to Nazareth

When Joseph and Mary had done everything
required by the Law of the Lord,
they returned to Galilee
to their own town of Nazareth.
And the child grew and became strong;
he was filled with wisdom,
and the grace of God was on him.
(Luke 2:39-40 NIV)*

Para la publicación de Salmos 365 de hoy en español haga clic aquí.

bgbg_v4.3_1501818
* NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION, COPYRIGHT ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 BY BIBLICA

Pray for enduring peace in Israel and Gaza,
and continue to pray for peace to return to Ukraine and Russia!

Volume I of Psalms 365: Develop a Life of Worship and Prayer won the Best Book of the Year Award from The Word Guild and Volume II has won the Best Devotional of the Year Award. For those who love God’s word, this three-book series is an ideal way to daily meet with the Lord. To purchase or for a closer look click here.

Also available from David Kitz

Holy Week as seen from a soldier’s perspective

American readers click this link to purchase The Soldier Who Killed a King.

Canadian readers click this link to purchase The Soldier Who Killed a King directly from the author.

 

The Lord Is with You

22 Sunday Dec 2024

Posted by in Advent

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

I will praise the LORD!

50092693-d-adam

Photo by Donald Adam

In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy,
God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, 
a town in Galilee,
to a virgin pledged to be married
to a man named Joseph, 
a descendant of David.
The virgin’s name was Mary.
The angel went to her and said,
“Greetings, you who are highly favored!
The Lord is with you.”

Mary was greatly troubled at his words
and wondered what kind of greeting this might be.
But the angel said to her,
“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.”
(Luke 1:26_33, NIV) *

Para la publicación de Salmos 365 de hoy en español haga clic aquí.

bgbg_v4.3_1501818
* NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION, COPYRIGHT ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 BY BIBLICA

Please pray for peace to return to Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, and Ukraine!

Volume I of Psalms 365: Develop a Life of Worship and Prayer won the Best Book of the Year Award from The Word Guild and Volume II has won the Best Devotional of the Year Award. For those who love God’s word, this three-book series is an ideal way to daily meet with the Lord. To purchase or for a closer look click here.

RGB72PsalmsVol2

A gripping read from David Kitz. An ideal Christmas gift.
4485 SHARABLE-2

To purchase or for a closer look click here.

Bethlehem the Town of David

21 Saturday Dec 2019

Posted by in Advent, Bible

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Advent Tidings of Joy

img_20181220_1216339

The Parliament of Canada, Ottawa, ON — photo by David Kitz

In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 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 2:1-4-5 (NIV)

 

Reflection
Know this: If you are born again by the Spirit of God, you have a role in history that emperors, prime ministers and presidents cannot thwart. 

To Bethlehem

24 Monday Dec 2018

Posted by in Bible, Christmas

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Merry Christmas To All

D Adam Winter Farm

Prairie Farm — photo by Donald Adam

In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.)  And everyone went to their own town to register.

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. While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

Luke 2:1-7, NIV

The Time Came for the Baby to be Born

24 Sunday Dec 2017

Posted by in Bible, Christmas, Psalms

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

I will praise Him!

d-adam-winter-farm

Winter wonders and Christmas greetings — photo courtesy of Donald Adam

 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. While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

(Luke 4:4-7, NIV)