Beliefnet
What's the importance of this find?

If, as seems probable, the ossuary found in the vicinity of Jerusalem anddated to about A.D. 63 is indeed the burial box of James the brother ofJesus, this inscription is the most important extrabiblical evidence ofits kind. It would confirm that James existed, was someone important, and was the brother of another early Jew who was very important--Jesus.


Above: Artists' rendering of the ossuary inscription.

Could the inscription be a forgery?

The inscription in cursive Aramaic sets a limit on the periodwhen it could have been written, and the careful checking of the characterssuggests the inscription is from the appropriate time period, not a laterforgery.

The inscription reads "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus", not"James, brother of Jesus, son of Joseph." We might have expected the latterif this was a forgery. Also, if we had the latter inscription it would raise some questions about Jesus' relationship with Joseph. As it is written, it simply tells us James' relationship to two of his close relatives--his father and his brother.

Could it be another Jesus and James? Weren't the names common?

What is unusual about the inscription is not the patronymic "son ofJoseph," but the reference to James's brother. This alone suggests that theJesus in question was someone well known and important, since it was not the usual practice to put one's brother's name on one's own ossuary.

[Biblical Archaeology Review on the frequency of the names: "The names James (Jacob), Joseph, and Jesus were all fairly common among Jews at the turn of the era. ...Rachel Hachlili has studied names used at this time in all types of inscriptions. Joseph appeared in 14 percent, Jesus in 9 percent, and James/Jacob in 2 percent of the cases. ...in Jerusalem during the two generations before 70 C.E., there were therefore about twenty people who could be called 'Jacob son of Joseph brother of Jesus.'" --Editor's note]

Do the Aramaic words for "brother" and "son" confirm that Jesus was a blood relation of both James and Joseph? Does the language leave room for the interpretation that they could have been half-brothers or stepsons?

The Aramaic word used on the ossuary, 'akhui,' certainly means brother. The order of the words in the inscription does not indicate that Jesus was the son of Joseph. The inscription intends to make clear the two closest male blood relatives of James. It is not commenting on Jesus' relationship with Joseph, but on James' relationship to Joseph and Jesus.

There is some evidence, for example in Tobit, that occasionally the word 'brother' might mean something other than full brother, but without any qualification inthe inscription the presumption must be that James was related to Jesus inthe same way he was related to Joseph.

On a related note, some scholars say the Greek word for "brother" used in the New Testament--adelphos--can mean "relative." Adelphos is the word used in Matthew 13:54-5: "Is not this the carpenter's son? ...Are not his brothers James and Jospeh and Simon and Judas?"

The Greek word adelphos has pretty much the same specific meaning as the Aramaic term, though it can occasionally be used in a wider sense. Butsince there was both a Greek and Aramaic term for cousin or a more distantkin, there is no good reason why such a term could not have been used inthe Aramaic inscription on James' ossuary.

What are some important New Testament references to 'James the brother of Jesus'?

Our earliest references to James are in Galatians 1 ("But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother" and in 1 Corinthians 15 ("After that, [Jesus] was seen of James; then of all the apostles"). Both make clearhe is the brother of Jesus.

How does he fit in with other biblical 'Jameses'?

This James was not one of the twelve apostles. New Testament references distinguish between "James, the brother of the Lord," "James, the son of Zebedee," and "James, the son of Alpheus." The latter two were of the Twelve.

James "the brother of Jesus" was the head of the Jerusalem church, as is very clear from Acts,especially Acts 15 and 21. Galatians 1-2 also confirm this to have been the case. Paul considers him one of the three pillars of the Jerusalem church (theothers being Peter and John).

Is this the James credited with writing the book of James?

Indeed, James the brother of Jesus is creditedwith the biblical book of James. It's interesting how many of thesayings in that book echo the teaching of Jesus and are in the sameaphoristic form.

So James believed Jesus was the Messiah?

James did become a believer. In the 1 Corinthians passage, Paul confirms that the risen Jesus appeared to him. After that we find him in Acts 1.14 andafterwards as a leader in the Jerusalem church.

Join the Discussion
comments powered by Disqus