Josephus: James the brothers of Jesus

[Senyorico]

Recently, I’ve read some articles that accounts the existence of Christ using Josephus in order to demonstrate that there are extra-biblical evidence of Jesus’ existence. However, upon further reading, I have discovered that Josephus have always referred a James, who is the brother of Jesus. Wouldn’t this be the earliest historical account, and somehow, testimony that “James, the brother of Jesus” is not just some relative, rather, a biological brother?

 

[TMC]

Whether it is the earliest account depends on how you date the New Testament writings (and related apocrypha) I suppose. I think it likely that Josephus wrote before the Gospels, but maybe not before Paul. In any event, Catholics deal with Josephus the same way as other writings referring to Jesus’ siblings, by positing they refer to half-siblings from Joseph, or close cousins.

 

[Senyorico]

What do you mean by half-brother? My problem is this brings light on how we should interpret “brother”, historically in light with the New Testament

 

[TMC]

What do you mean by half-brother? My problem is this brings light on how we should interpret “brother”, historically in light with the New Testament

You may want to simply google “James the brother of Jesus,” this is not some rare or arcane point. I don’t know that the Church has any “official” position on the issue, but many Catholics believe (and have since the early days) that Joseph was a widower and that James was a son of Joseph’s from his previous marriage. Other Catholics believe that “brother” actually means “cousin,” and of course many Christians believe James was Jesus’ full brother (but that is not the Catholic view).

 

[Senyorico]

Do you know of any response regarding what Josephus wrote?

 

[TMC]

Do you know of any response regarding what Josephus wrote?

I’m sure there are (again, Google is your friend). Sitting here, I do not recall a specific response to Josephus as to James’ parentage, but I can’t imagine it would be different than the response to the same language being used in the near-contemporaneous Pauline materials, or the Gospels. Why does the Josephus source trouble you, while the others apparently do not?

 

[neophyte]

Do you know of any response regarding what Josephus wrote?

One has already been given you. Ancient Hebrew had no word for cousin; the word commonly translated as “brother” actually indicates kinsman, which includes extended family such as cousins. Jews at the time weren’t in the habit of distinguishing extended family members by a different word, even when using languages other than Hebrew.

 

[John_Martin]

One has already been given you. Ancient Hebrew had no word for cousin ; the word commonly translated as “brother” actually indicates kinsman , which includes extended family such as cousins.

And not only cousins, but also uncle’s and nephews - Lot was Abraham’s brother (both Hebrew and Greek) though he was the son of Abraham’s brother.
American English “brother” has no narrow equivalence in Hebrew or Greek but rather our word “brother” is a small subset of “adelphos”.

 

[SeekSalvation]

John 19:

“Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother
and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas,
and Mary of Magdala.”

I suggest you study why there are 3 Mary’s at the foot of our Lord’s cross? I suggest you research “Clopas”. I suggest you research the 1st century Jew’s understanding of the word “Brother” which included relatives such as “Cousins”. Remember, Christ called many people, not just relatives, “Brother” in the Gospels. Perhaps then you shall have your answer to your question.

 

[TMC]

One has already been given you. Ancient Hebrew had no word for cousin ; the word commonly translated as “brother” actually indicates kinsman , which includes extended family such as cousins.

I have heard this, but I don’t have any idea if it is true. The problem is that Josephus wrote in Greek, as I recall. The Gospels were also written in Greek. So the idea is that the statements were originally made in Aramaic (or maybe Hebrew), but recorded in Greek, suggesting that the translation into Greek was imperfect. At least that is how I think the argument goes. I am not sure that argument works with Josephus, given that he wrote in Greek. It does leave open the question of Josephus source materials, of course.

None of this is to suggest the Church is wrong, but I do think it is fair to say that this is a controversial topic and that scholars reasonably disagree on it. The Catholic Church’s opinion is rooted in Tradition, of course, so Catholics naturally weigh the evidence in that light.

 

[neophyte]

The problem is that Josephus wrote in Greek, as I recall. The Gospels were also written in Greek.

Jews at the time weren’t in the habit of distinguishing extended family members by a different word, even when using languages other than Hebrew.

 

[TMC]

Jews at the time weren’t in the habit of distinguishing extended family members by a different word, even when using languages other than Hebrew.

I have no idea if this is the case, or how anyone would know it was the case. There are a couple of actual professional historians that post here, maybe one of them will chime in.

 

[billsherman]

From Msg. John P. Meier, “A Marginal Jew: Volume I,” page 327:

" . . . Josephus was not dependent on any NT writings for his assertions about Jesus and James. Speaking independently, Josephus, who knows full well the distinction between ‘brother’ and ‘cousin’ in Greek and who even corrects the Hebrew usage in the Bible in favor of Greek precision on this point, clearly calls James the brother, not the cousin, of Jesus. The import of the NT usage thus receives independent confirmation from a Greek-speaking Jew who knows full well when and how to avoid ‘brother’ and write ‘cousin’ when that is the precise relationship under discussion."

Meier’s book carries the imprimatur, for anyone who is concerned. His colossal work has also been praised by Pope Benedict XVI.

He is correct that historically speaking, there is no real debate. Theologically however, the debate has been going on for much of the previous 2,000 years.

 

[billsherman]

Jews at the time weren’t in the habit of distinguishing extended family members by a different word, even when using languages other than Hebrew.

Josephus does routinely make the distinction in his books, even translating the Hebrew into far more precise Greek in several places.

 

[Medawlinno]

A half-X (half brother, cousin, etc.) means that the two individuals share a common ancestor, but not the spouse of that ancestor.

Half-brothers would share either the same father or the same mother, but not both. In this case - same father, different mothers.

 

[Dan_Defender]

Josephus refers to James the Less, who was most likely Jesus’ cousin, and who is also referred to in Galatians 1:19.

 

[Thom18]

I would presume that Josephus used the same word to describe James’ relationship to Jesus that the gospel writers used, presenting no issue.

 

[BartholomewB]

My problem is this brings light on how we should interpret “brother”, historically in light with the New Testament

The passage in Josephus is the Antiquities, Book 20, section 200. Josephus uses the same Greek word for brother, adelphos, that is found in the New Testament, e.g. Matt 13:5, Mark 6:3, Gal 1:19. It is generally understood that Josephus uses the word to convey the same meaning that it has in the Gospels and Epistles. Do you disagree with that?

 

[TMC]

I would presume that Josephus used the same word to describe James’ relationship to Jesus that the gospel writers used, presenting no issue.

Well, I believe the word used in the Gospels means “brother,” as in, sharing the same parents. What is postulated is that was a mistranslation from Hebrew. I think what Bill is saying is that we know Josephus did not have a translation issue because he wrote in Greek without translation.

 

[billsherman]

I think what Bill is saying is that we know Josephus did not have a translation issue because he wrote in Greek without translation.

Msg. Meier, and most other historians, make a persuasive argument that Josephus was unaware of the NT Gospels, was clearly very aware of the difference between “brother” and “cousin” (because he uses precise Greek words to mean exactly what he means), and that he uses the word “brother” to link James and Jesus.

Josephus believed that James and Jesus were actual biological brothers.

Please note: this does NOT mean Josephus was correct. That is obviously a matter of great theological debate among Christians.