What Happened to the Family of Jesus?

How the Relatives of Jesus Led the Earliest Church

The family of Jesus served as key leaders in earliest Christianity until the second century. While their influence waned as Christianity expanded from Jerusalem, the relatives of Jesus, known as desposynoi, remained an important group within early Christianity until at least 250 AD. We have a surprising amount of historical information in both the New Testament and other historical documents that give us some insight into the family of Jesus.

In this article, I outline the key lines of evidence for the identity and influence of Jesus’s relatives in early Christianity.

The Brothers of Jesus (James, Joseph, Simon, Judas)

Other than his mother Mary, the most famous relatives of Jesus are his brothers. Paul mentions how the brothers of Jesus travelled as missionaries during the earliest centuries of Christianity (1 Cor 9:5). Likely, he has in mind Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Mark 6:3; Matt 13:55; see also Matt 12:46; Mark 3:31; Luke 8:19; John 2:12; 7:3–10; Acts 1:14). The latter is often known as Jude, the author of the Epistle of Jude. English translations prefer to call him Jude over Judas to avoid the implication that the betrayer of Christ wrote a New Testament letter.

The most famous brother of Jesus, James, wrote the Letter of James but also presided in Jerusalem as the key leader in the earliest decades (Acts 12:17; 15:13, 19; 21:18). He is so well-known that he can write his letter by simply calling himself, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1). By contrast, Jude has to introduce himself as the brother of James so that people know who he is (Jude 1). Given his duties in Jerusalem, he may not have travelled as a missionary like the other brothers of Jesus. That said, nothing prevents him from travelling in and around Jerusalem as a missionary. So perhaps Paul does include him in 1 Corinthians 9:5.

James stands as one of the three pillars of early Christianity along with Peter and John (Gal 2:9). When Paul went to Jerusalem after his conversion, he only saw Peter and “James the Lord’s brother” (Gal 1:19). By this time, James already had a significant role in Jerusalem. At the Council of Jerusalem held in Acts 15, Paul, Barnabas, Peter, and the rest of the leaders even submit to James’s judgment regarding Gentile inclusion: “Brothers, listen to me … my judgment is…” (Acts 15:19). In this passage, James ties the reality of Gentile salvation to the Old Testament prophecy (Acts 15:13–18). Afterwards, when he makes his judgment, the church agrees, and so James’s proposal unites the church in its mission (Acts 15:22–35).

And when Paul desired to go to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles along with Barnabas, James along with Peter and John perceived the grace that was given to me” and so “they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do” (Gal 2:9. James’s emphasis on the poor also appears in his letter (James 1:27–2:7), a teaching that he almost certainly received from his brother, Jesus (e.g., Matt 5:3).

The Letter of James—while sometimes overlooked and misunderstood—may be the most Jesusy book of the New Testament outside of the Gospels. Almost every sentence in James can be traced to a saying of Jesus in the Gospel books. James’s intimate knowledge of Jesus’s teaching shines throughout this epistle. Paul provides evidence of their ongoing relationship when he specifies that Jesus appeared to James in particular after his resurrection (1 Cor 15:7).

While the brothers of Jesus became key leaders of the earliest church, they did not always believe in him as John 7:5 tells us (also Mark 3:19–35; 6:1–6). Likely, it took the resurrection for his brothers to understand that he was not just a divine messianic figure, but that he was the Christ and Word from the Father. Hence, Acts 1:14 records that Mary and the Lord’s brothers prayed in the upper room as they awaited Pentecost. Later, his brother Jude would see him as God incarnate, leading Israel out of Egypt (Jude 1:5). Anecdotally, it seems to be of great import that Jesus’s unbelieving brothers would later affirm him as the Divine Christ, something that brothers would be unlikely to do unless Jesus demonstrated his messiahship with utter clarity. I can only think of the resurrection as an event that could do just that.

Because James regularly appears at the top of the list of the brothers of Jesus in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3, it seems likely that he was the oldest brother besides Jesus. Being the eldest brother may explain how James came to take such a senior role in the earliest Church. Yet the other brothers of Jesus also played roles that seem just as important as the apostles. When spoken of together, the brothers of the Lord appear alongside the apostles with the same sort of deference given to them (Acts 1:13–14; Gal 1:19; 2:9; 1 Cor 9:5).

As travelling missionaries, the brothers of Jesus held well-known role in the early church (1 Cor 9:5). Richard Bauckham points to a letter by Julius Africanus, which outlines the scope of their ministry: “During the first half of the third century, Julius Africanus, in his Letter to Aristides, wrote of the desposynoi [‘those who belong to the Master’]—a term which, he explains, was used to designate the relatives of Jesus—that they preserved their family genealogy and interpreted it wherever they went on their travels throughout Palestine” (Relatives 60-1; HE 1.17).

Their ministry thus centred on Palestine. Given what we know of James in Jerusalem and the Palestinian context of Jude’s letter such a location tracks with the biblical data. Further, reliable records point to Jesus’s nephew Symeon/Simon as succeeding James as the primary leader in Jerusalem, further evincing the Palestinian scope of their ministry (see the section on Jesus’s nephews below).

Julius Africanus explains that the brothers of the Lord “traveled from the Jewish villages of Nazareth and Cochaba over the rest of the land and explained the aforesaid genealogy from the book of daily records as far as they extended” (HE 1.7). That the relatives of Jesus were known as desposynoi, not the “brothers of the Lord,” signifies that this group likely included a wider range of relatives than just the biological brothers of Jesus such as his uncle Clopas and cousin Symeon (Relatives, 61–2).

The Death of James

James died as a martyr in Jerusalem around 62 AD. According to the second-century historian Hegesippus whom Eusebius summarizes:

“The same author also describes the beginnings of the heresies of his time in these words: ‘And after James the Just suffered martyrdom, just as the Lord and for the same reason, Symeon, his cousin, the son of Clopas was appointed bishop, whom they all proposed because he was another cousin of the Lord.”[1] (HE 4.22)

Eusebius recounts how, along with the living apostles and other disciples, the relatives of the Lord whom he calls “the family of the Lord according to the flesh” gathered together to decide who would succeed James after his death. They “all unanimously decided that Symeon the son of Clopas, whom the writings of the Gospel mentioned was worthy of the throne of the diocese there. He was as they say, the cousin of the Saviour, for Hegesippus relates that Clopas was the brother of Joseph” (HE 3.11; see also 3.22).

In Book Five of his Memoirs, Hegesippus records in detail the martyrdom of James in the city of Jerusalem.

“The government of the Church passed to James, the brother of the Lord, together with the Apostles. He was called the “Just” by all from the time of the Lord even to our own, since many were called James, but this man was holy from his mother’s womb. He drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh; no razor passed over his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. To this man alone was it permitted to enter the sanctuary, for he did not wear wool, but linen. He used to enter the Temple alone, and be found resting on his knees and praying for forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became as hard as those of a camel because of his constant bending forward on his knees in worshiping God and begging for forgiveness for the people. Because of his excessive righteousness he was called the Just and Oblias, which in Greek is “Bulwark of the people” and “Righteousness,” as the prophets disclose about him.” (HE 2.23)

Eusebius here in the story begins to summarize Hegesippus’s account before returning to direct citation:

So, some of the seven sects among the people, which I have already described in the Memoirs, asked of him what is the “door of Jesus,” and he said that this was the Saviour. Because of these words some believed that Jesus was the Christ. But the sects mentioned previously did not believe in a resurrection or in one coming to mete out to each according to his works, but as many as did believe did so because of James.

So, since many even of the rulers believed there was a commotion among the Jews and the Scribes and the Pharisees, who said that the whole people was in danger of looking for Jesus as the Christ, they therefore came together and said to James: “We beg you, restrain the people, for they have strayed to Jesus, as though He were the Christ. We beg you to persuade concerning Jesus all who have come for the day of the Passover, for we all obey you. For we and all the people testify to you that you are righteous and that you do not respect persons. Therefore, persuade the multitude not to be led astray regarding Jesus, for all the people and all of us obey you. So, stand upon the turret of the Temple that you may be visible on high and your words may be easily heard by all the people, for because of the Passover all the tribes, with the Gentiles also, have come together.”

Thus, the afore-mentioned Scribes and Pharisees made James stand on the turret of the Temple, and they cried out to him and said, “Oh, just one, to whom we all owe obedience, since the people go astray after Jesus who was crucified, tell what is the door of Jesus?”

And he answered with a loud voice: “Why do you ask me about the son of man? He is sitting in heaven on the right hand of the great power, and he shall come upon the clouds of heaven.”

And when many were fully satisfied and glorified in the testimony of James and said: “Hosanna to the Son of David,” then again the same Scribes and Pharisees said to one another: “We have done badly in furnishing Jesus with such testimony, but let us go up and cast him down that through fear they may not believe him.” And they cried out, saying: “Oh, Oh, even the just one has erred,” and they fulfilled the Scripture written in Isaias: “Let us take away the just man, because he is troublesome to us. Yet they shall eat the fruit of their doings.”

So they went up and cast down the Just, and they said to one another: “Let us stone James the Just,” and they began to stone him, since, though he had been cast down, he did not die, but he turned and with his knees on the ground said: “I beseech thee, Lord, God and Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

And while they were stoning him thus, one of the priests of the sons of Rechab, the son of Rechabim, who are mentioned by Jeremias the Prophet, cried out saying: “Stop! What are you doing? The Just is praying for you.” And someone among them, one of the laundrymen, took the club with which he beat out the clothes, and struck the Just upon the head, and thus he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot near the temple, and his gravestone still remains near the temple. This man became a true witness to Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ.” (HE 2.23)

The Jewish historian Josephus independently records the death of James whom he rightly calls “the brother of Jesus” (Antiquities 20.200). Josephus adds that the high priest Ananus, a Sadducee, assembled the Sanhedrin to accuse James and others of law-breaking. They then sentenced James to be stoned (Antiquities 20.196–20).

Interestingly, some Jews did not find this action equitable and, Josephus records, complained to both King Agrippa and the new Procurator Albinus who had not yet arrived after the death of Festus (Antiquities 20.201–203). As Josephus tells us, Ananus lost his status as high priest over his execution sentence of James the Just, the brother of Jesus. Again, this independently confirms Hegesippus’s description of James as beloved among the people.

While we do not have similar records for the other brothers of Jesus, they remain well-known during the reign of Domitian (81–96 AD). So much so that informants report the grandsons of Judas as being guilty of being “of the race of David” (HE 3.20). Eusebius almost certainly quoting Hegesippus speaks of them as “grandsons of Judas … His brother according to the flesh.” Since they are known by the name of their grandfather, we can infer that Jude (or Judas) must have been well-known.

Are They Biological Brothers of Jesus?

In terms of how James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas are brothers of the Lord, three views explain their biological relationships to him:

· The Helvidian view: biological sons of Mary and Joseph, the view of most Protestants

· The Epiphanian view, biological sons of Joseph in his first marriage, the view of most early Greek fathers and the Eastern Orthodox Church today.

· The Hieronymian view: the first cousins of Jesus, the view of the Roman Catholic Church, associated with Jerome.

While it is not my intent to engage in polemics, only the first two views seem probable—the Helvidian or Epiphanian view. The latter has the benefit of allowing Mary to remain a perpetual virgin, a tradition venerable in the church, but one that the biblical text does not specify. Whatever view one selects, the Bible calls them brothers of the Lord, and that is how they are remembered.

One last note. Mark 15:40 may suggest that some of the brothers of Jesus were born from another Mary. But here James the Lesser is distinguished from other James, by the title “the Lesser.” The title thus distinguishes this James from the brother of Jesus. Bauckham explains, “We must conclude that for Mark it serves precisely to distinguish this James from the Lord’s brother to whom he refers in 6:3, and this James’ mother from the mother of Jesus” (Relatives, 14).

James and Jude on Jesus

While I do not intend to interpret the letters of James and Jude fully, it is worth highlighting their Christology—their view of their biological half-brother Jesus.

Jude calls himself a “slave of Jesus Christ” (Jude 1:1) and says of Jesus that he is “our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ” (Jude 1:5; 1:21). Jude sees himself as par with other Christians using the word “our” to describe his relation alongside other believes to Jesus Christ. Further, he sees himself as a mere servant or slave of “our only Master and Lord” (also Jude 1:21).

Perhaps surprisingly, Jude speaks of Jesus not only as his Lord but as one who led Israel out of Egypt during the Exodus (Jude 1:5). Jude thus sees Jesus as pre-existing in his earthy sojourn as the Lord. And it is this Lord who not only led Israel of old into salvation but also leads us now into eternal life through his mercy (Jude 1:21).

And in an act of deep worship, Jude writes, “to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever” (Jude 1:25). That this glory comes to God through Jesus follow regular patterns of New Testament worship (e.g., Rom 11:36), in ways that elevate Jesus in ways inappropriate for any mere man; but Jesus is “our Lord.”

James likewise speaks of “the Lord Jesus Christ who he later calls “our Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1:1; 2:1). He also calls Jesus “the Lord of Glory” (James 2:1). Later, James seems to speak of God the Father as Lord when he says, “our Lord and Father” (James 3:9). But since he has called Jesus “our Lord” earlier, it seems more likely that he co-relates Jesus the Lord with God our Father—a striking claim! Especially when one notices that James then speaks of us being created in the likeness of God, a reference that grammatically seems to refer to “our Lord and Father.” But since the grammatical construction of this phrase signifies that the two names refer to the same subject (τὸν κύριον καὶ πατέρα), then it appears as if James uses grammar theologically to identify God as both Lord and Father akin to how Paul does so in 1 Corinthians 8:4–6.

Shockingly, James also describes the Lord Jesus as having the attributes that God the Lord claims for himself in Exodus 34:6–7 (James 5:11). No Palestinian Jew could have missed that allusion and the association of Jesus the merciful and compassionate Lord.

When it comes to the power of Jesus, the Lord of Glory (James 2:1), James advises a mindset that can claim: “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that” (James 4:15). In context, James advises entrusting our future to the Lord instead of our own plans. But that implies that the Lord can guide our future, something appropriate for God to oversee, not a mere human.

Lastly, both Jude and James look forward to the Second Coming of the Lord (Jude 1:14; James 5:7, 8).

Much more could be said, but I will leave this brief exposition of James’s and Jude’s view of Jesus here and continue exploring the biblical and historical evidence for the family of the Lord.

Sisters of Jesus (Mary and Salome)

When one studies the names given to women in the first century in the region of Palestine, about one-half of all names were either Mary or Salome, perhaps due to their royal pedigree in the Hasmonean dynasty (e.g., Salome of Alexandra, Salome I, Mariamme the Hasmonean, Mariamne II).

According to the Gospel books, Jesus had sisters (Mark 6:3; Matt 13:56). “Of the names which later tradition gives to sisters of Jesus,” Bauckham explains, “the best attested are Mary and Salome” (Relatives, 8). It is possible that he had more sisters, but these are the two whose names we can be reasonably sure of. “These [names[ are given by Epiphanius (78:8:1; 78:9:6; cf. Ancoratus 60:1) as the names of the two daughters of Joseph by his first wife” (Bauckham Relatives, 37).

Since the names of the two sisters appear in different orders, we probably cannot be reasonably certain which of the two was the older sister.[2]

The Earthly Father of Jesus (Joseph)

Joseph is called Jesus’s father three times in the Gospels (Luke 3:23; 4:22; John 6:42), and only in one place is he called a carpenter (Matt 13:55), a trade that Jesus himself seems to have engaged in (Mark 6:3). While many assume that he died early in Jesus’s life, because he does not reappear after the birth narrative, that does not seem like a strong argument.

The Gospel writers only include what is relevant to the Gospel story they are telling. We only learn, for example, of Jesus’s uncle and aunt at the cross in John 19:25. But apparently, they had followed Jesus for some time.

The Earthly Mother of Jesus (Mary)

I will only give a few comments about Mary because she might be the most studied relative of Jesus in the Christian church, given her high status as the Mother of the Lord. And also, it would take many hours of research and many words to write. In other words, it would take a discrete article to fully explain the historical details we know of Mary. Instead, here I focus on some key elements that show how Mary relates to the disciples of Jesus in the early church.

First, Jesus brings Mary his mother into a new adoptive relationship with the beloved disciple, John, in John 19:26–27: “When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” ²⁷ Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.”

Almost certainly John includes this detail, not for sentimentalism, but to signify by this act a new spiritual reality in which Christ’s family will expand through adoption.

Second, Acts 1:14 tells us that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, remained active in the earliest Church. We can reasonably infer that she continued to do so.

The Aunt and Uncle of Jesus (Mary, Clopas)

John 19:25 names Clopas and his wife as the uncle and aunt of Jesus, probably on Joseph’s side, since it seems unlikely for Mary to have a blood sister named Mary. Hence, the two Marys would be sister-in-laws. Hegesippus confirms this interpretation by explicitly saying that Clopas was related to Jesus “according to the flesh” (HE 3.11). Of Clopas’s mention in John 19:25, Bauckham writes:

“Clopas, since he is named, must have been a known figure in the early church. There is therefore little room for doubt that he is the Clopas to whom Hegesippus refers, as the brother of Joseph and therefore uncle of Jesus, and the father of Symeon or Simon who succeeded James the Lord’s brother in the leadership of the Jerusalem church (Hegesippus, ap. Eusebius, HE 3:11; 3:32:6; 4:22:4)” (Relatives, 16).

Luke 24:18 possibly speaks of the same Cleopas (a variant of the name Clopas) mentioned in John 19:25. Cleopas and Clopas are the same name with a slightly different spelling, a normal phenomenon (Bauckham, Relatives, 17). In that case, Cleopas was Jesus’s uncle! That means Jesus appears to Cleopas his uncle on the road to Emmaus along with a biblically unnamed disciple who traditionally is remembered as having the name of Simon.

Depending on how one interprets Luke 1:36, Elizabeth and Zechariah may also be an aunt and uncle of Jesus. Their story is well-known and passed over here for that reason.

The Cousins of Jesus (John the Baptist, Symeon/Simon)

John the Baptist is the most famous cousin of Jesus. His mother Elizabeth is a relative of Mary (along with Zecharias) according to Luke 1:36. Born six months before his famous cousin, John played a key role in the early Jesus movement. While his story is known in the Bible, another cousin of Jesus, Symeon, has almost been forgotten today. Since many know the story of John the Baptist, I will skip over the bounty of information we have to focus on the lesser-known cousin of Jesus, Symeon.

As noted, Symeon succeeded James as the prime leader in Jerusalem. As Hegesippus explains, “Symeon, his cousin, the son of Clopas was appointed bishop, whom they all proposed because he was another cousin of the Lord” (HE 4.22).

Eusebius reports that he retained this role until the time of Trajan (r. 98–117 AD). Hegesippus records: “Some of these, clearly the heretics, accused Simon, the son of Clopas, on the ground that he was a descendant of David and a Christian, and so he suffered martyrdom when he was a hundred and twenty years of age, while Trajan was emperor and Atticus governor” (HE 3.32).

Since Symeon was not a Roman Citizen, he underwent torture and eventual crucifixion (HE 3.32). While not impossible that Symeon died at the age of 120, Hegesippus may simply use this number to refer to old age, someone at the upper limit of life given that 120 years represents the full life of a human (e.g., Gen 6:3).

Grandsons of Judas, the Brother of Jesus (Zoker, James)

Hegesippus records that at the end of the first century, “There still survived of the race of the Lord grandsons of Judas who was said to have been His brother according to the flesh” (HE 3.20). These would be the great-great nephews of Jesus through his brother Jude or Judas. Their names were Zoker and James. [3]

Being informed against due to their being of “the race of David,” evocatus (volunteer soldiers) arrested them and brought them before Emperor Domitian (d. 96 AD). The emperor forced them into an interview, seeking to understand what the kingdom of Christ was (its nature, location, and timing).

Zoker and James answered by saying: “it was neither of the world nor earthly, but heavenly and angelic, and would appear at the end of the world, when He would come in glory to judge the living and the dead and to give unto every one according to his works” (HE 3.20).

Due to their rural stations and relative harmlessness, Domitian released them. “Domitian did not condemn them for this, but looked down upon them as simple folk, let them go free, and by a decree put an end to the persecution against the Church” (HE 3.20).

Like other relatives of Jesus, they apparently functioned as leaders in the early Jesus movement. Hegesippus explains, “But when they were released they guided the churches, since they were witnesses and relatives of the Lord, and after peace was established they remained alive until the time of Trajan” (HE 3.20).

A number of Jewish texts also seem to refer to James, the grandson of Judas, the brother of Jesus. For example, Tosephta tractate Hullin 2:24 records R. Eliezer encountering a famous Christian by name of James (i.e. Jacob) who lived in the region of the desposynoi, those who trace their family line to Jesus.

R. Eliezer was suspected and thus arrested for heresy (mînût). Apparently, he was innocent of the charge, but he came dangerously close by encountering a man named Jacob (i.e., James). As the tractate explains:

R. Aqiba came in and said to him, ‘Rabbi, shall I say to you why you are perhaps grieving?’ He said to him, ‘Say on.’ He said to him, (C) ‘Perhaps one of the mînîm has said to you a word of mînût and it has pleased you.’ He said, ‘By heaven, you have reminded me! (D) Once I was walking along the street of Sepphoris, and I met Jacob of Kephar Sikhnin, and he said to me a word of mînût in the name of Yēšûaʿ ben Pnṭyry, and it pleased me. (F) And I was arrested for words of mînût because I transgressed the words of Torah, Keep your way far from her, and do not go near the door of her house, for many a victim has she laid low [Prov 5:8; 7:26].’ (H) And R. Eliezer used to say, ‘Ever let a man flee from what is hateful, and from that which resembles what is hateful.’ (Tosephta tractate Hullin 2:24; cited in Bauckham, Relatives, 107)

The name Yēšûaʿ ben Pnṭyry refers to Jesus, and in Jewish polemic of that time, they occasionally said he was the son of Pnṭyry—perhaps a Roman soldier (Origen, c. Cels. 1:32). The point is to discredit his birth. Jacob here would be the grandson of Jude, the brother of Jesus, because of the timeframe and location (Kephar Sikhnin). Further, that Jacob was a mînût, given his confession of Jesus, would make sense.

Ecclesiastes Rabbah 1:8:3 (a midrash on Ecclesiastes) also includes this story. But the midrashic text includes more details on what Jacob said that pleased R. Eliezer:

viz. “It is written in your Torah, You shall not bring the hire of a harlot, or the wages of a dog, into the house of the Lord your God in payment for any vow [Deut 23:18]. What is to be done with them?” I told him that they were prohibited [for every use]. He said to me, “They are prohibited as an offering, but is it permissible to destroy them?” I retorted, “In that case, what is to be done with them?” He said to me, “Let bath-houses and privies be made with them.” I exclaimed, “You have said an excellent thing,” and the law [not to listen to the words of a mîn] escaped my memory at the time. When he saw that I acknowledged his words, he added, “Thus said Yēšû ben Pndr’’: From filth they came and on filth they should be expended; as it is said, From the hire of a harlot she gathered them, and to the hire of a harlot they shall return [Mic 1:7]. Let them be spent on privies for the public,” and the thought pleased me. (trans. Bauckham, 107–8).

Babylonian Talmud tractate ‘Abodah Zarah 16b–17a also records the story in very similar ways to Ecclesiastes Rabbah 1:8:3. A key difference is that the name of Jesus here is Yēšû han-nôṣrî, not Yēšûaʿ ben Pnṭyry as in Tosephta tractate Hullin 2:24.

Each of the three accounts, however, tells almost the same story. R. Eliezer listens the words of a mîn. And even though the mîn speaks truly, one cannot find his words pleasing. That breaks a law, apparently derived from Proverbs 5:8 (and connected to 7:26).

The story works well because the mîn in question was very well known. As Bauckham explains, “That Jacob of Sikhnin was a well-known Jewish Christian teacher is the only accurate information which need be presupposed for the purpose of the story” (Relatives, 114).

While we cannot be certain that this Jacob (James) was the grandson of Jude, given the location, timeline, and assumption of fame that Jacob had, it seems possible that Jacob of Sikhnin was the grandson of Jude, the brother of Jesus.

Other Family Records

As the second century comes to a close, the story of the desposynoi slowly recedes from Christian imagination. Still, their memory lives on in the church. For example, Bauckham recounts:

“In the list, given in medieval chronicles, of the early bishops of Ctesiphon-Seleucia on the Tigris, in central Mesopotamia, the three names following that of Mari, the late first-century founder of the church, are Abris, Abraham and Yaʿqub (James). Abris is said to have been ‘of the family and race of Joseph’ the husband of Mary, while Abraham was ‘of the kin of James called a brother of the Lord’ and Yaʿqub was Abraham’s son.” (Relatives, 68–9)

The last relative of Jesus in the historical record that I know of is Conon the Gardener. During the Decian persecution of the church in 249–251 AD, Conon received his crown of glory in martyrdom. A native of Nazareth, Conon claims to be part of the family of Christ according to flesh. He claims:

"I am of the city of Nazareth in Galilee, I am of the family (συγγένεια) of Christ, whose worship I have inherited from my ancestors, and whom I recognize as God over all things" (Mart. Canon 4.2; cited in Bauckham, Relatives, 122).

We might imagine then that the desposynoi still exist in the third century, although we hear increasingly less about them. The memory of Jesus’s relatives remains important to Christians, but the church did not rely on the relatives of Jesus for its ongoing strength in later centuries.

Conclusion

The family of Jesus played a key role in earliest Christianity. As the Church grew, the desposynoi remembered their relation to Jesus according to the flesh. Some among them like the grandsons of Jude continued to lead locally the church as part of Palestinian Christianity.

While this article did not spend time on Mary and John the Baptist, it did outline details about the famous brothers of Jesus—James and Jude. Not only did their writings appear in the New Testament, but James the Just had a role similar to the apostles. His nephew Symeon would succeed James in Jerusalem before his untimely crucifixion.

Much more could be said, but suffice it to say that the relatives of Jesus followed him as their resurrected Lord and Saviour. That alone should fascinate us!

---

[1] Bauckham translates this passage more literally but to the same effect: Bauckham: “And after James the Just had suffered martyrdom, as had also the Lord, on the same account, the son of his [i.e., probably, James’] uncle, Symeon the son of Clopas, was next appointed bishop, whom, since he was a cousin of the Lord, they all put forward as the second [bishop]” (Relatives, 24).

[2] “In Epiphanius, 78:8:1 the order is Mary, Salome; in 78:9:6 the order is Salome, Mary” (Relatives, 37fn117)

[3] Richard Bauckham highlights an ancient summary of Hegesippus in which we learn that these relatives had the names of Zoker and James: “When Domitian spoke with the sons of Jude the brother of the Lord and learned of the virtue of the men, he brought to an end the persecution against us. Hegesippus also reports their names, and says that one was called Zoker (Ζωκήρ) and the other James (Ἰάκωβος).” Relatives, 97. Trans. from Paris MS 1555A, printed in Cramer (1839) 88, and Bodleian MS Barocc. 142, printed in de Boor (1889) 169. Lawlor (1917) 41–42, gives the text alongside HE 3:17–20, indicating the verbal agreements. Epiphanius Monachus, De vita B. Virg. 14 [PG 120:204] also agrees with the names are Zoker and James.