Is there any way that Jude, the Apostle mentioned by Luke in Acts 1:13, Luke 6:16 as the "son of James", is the Son of James, the Brother of the Lord?
ell, both the Greek Church and the Latin Church have consistently equated Jesus' brothers
"James, Jude (Judas), and Simon
" with the Apostles who carry those same names (i.e., James the son of Alphaeus, Jude the son of James [aka Thaddeus] and Simon the Zealot). For my money, I've always found it telling how these three Apostles are always grouped together in the lists of the Twelve, almost as if to mirror the grouping of the
"brothers
" in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3. That has to be more than a coincidence. Yet, whether these Apostles and brothers are one and the same guys, I think the grouping helps us in a few ways. For example, I would be careful trying to conclude that Alphaeus (the father of James the Less) is the same Alphaeus who is the father of Matthew, thereby making James and Matthew brothers. The reason I dispute this is because Matthew is never placed beside or connected to James the Less in the lists of the Twelve, and this is in stark contrast to all the other Apostolic brothers/siblings, who are always grouped together (e.g. Peter & Andrew: James [the Greater] & John). Rather, I think that the father of James the Less is a different Alphaeus than the father of Matthew. The Gospel of John helps clear this us for us by speaking of James' father (the husband of the Virgin's sister) as
"Clopas
".
If you look at Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3, and compare them to what the people of Nazareth have to say about Jesus' "sisters", something very interesting pops out. In both passages, the Nazarenes speak of Jesus' sisters being "here with us", thus implying that Jesus' brothers (at least those four mentioned by name) lived elsewhere. I'd say that this strongly implies that these four were traveling with Jesus as His disciples, thus arguing for the tradition that the brothers James, Jude, and Simon were the Apostles of those same names.
What's more, I think one needs to keep in mind that the Scriptural term "brothers" (or "brothers of the Lord") included many more individuals that only the four mentioned by name in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3. Rather, "brothers" can mean Jesus' entire family clan, and this I believe is what is meant in Acts 1:14 and also John 7, which speaks of how His "brothers" did not believe in Him. In this case, John 7 is not necessarily speaking about the four "brothers" named in Matthew 13:55, etc. Rather, it is quite possible that the four brothers mentioned in Matthew 13:55, etc. were exceptions, and John 7 is speaking about all the rest – the majority of Jesus' clan; and that it was these who did not (as yet) believe in Him. This also helps to explain how the Acts 1:13 and Acts 1:14 can both list James, Jude, and Simon as Apostles and then speak of Jesus' "brothers" in the very next verse. Needless to say, if the four brothers named in Matthew 13:55, etc. do not comprise all of Jesus' brothers, then it is quite possible to have three brothers as Apostles and then speak of others who are not in Acts 1:13-14 and also in 1 Corinthians 9:5.
Another strong argument for equating Jesus' brothers in Matthew 13:55 with the Apostles of the same names is Acts 1's account of the choice for Judas Iscariot's successor. As John 7 reveals to us, the brothers were there with Jesus' retinue from the beginning of Jesus' ministry (the requirement for election posed by Peter in Acts 1:21-22). Yet, when candidates are nominated, only two men are cited for Apostolic ministry. One of these is, of couse, Matthias and the other a certain "Joseph Barsabbas" (aka, Justus). Isn't it interesting that James the Just is never cited as a candidate, even though this "brother" of Jesus will eventually head the Jerusalem church? Nor are any of Jesus' other "brothers" nominated (even though we know that they were there: Acts 1:14). Ah! But, what if these brothers were already Apostles?! After all, Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 speak of a James, a Jude, and a Simon – all of whom have their equivalents (in that same grouping) in the Apostolic lists.
Indeed, if we compare the lists of Apostles to the lists of brothers in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3, only one name is missing; and that is Jesus' brother "Joseph" (who the Synoptic Crucifixion / Resurrection accounts depict as the sibling of James: Matthew 27:56). Yet, in Acts 1, at the election for a new Apostle, one of the two nominees is also (strangely enough) named "Joseph" – the one and only "brother" who does not have a corresponding namesake in the Apostolic lists. I, again, find this to be too much of a coincidence. And the one and only reason to assume that the Joseph of Acts 1 is not the same person as the brother in Matthew 13:55 is his appelation "Barsabbas". Yet, consider for a moment that Acts 15:22 speaks of a Judas who is **also** called "Barsabbas" (and is most likely the same as the brother named Jude in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3, and so the Apostle Jude Thaddeus???), it seems pretty darn likely that the Joseph Barsabbas of Acts 1 is the brother Joseph of Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 – that is, the one and only consistently-believing "brother" who was not named as an Apostle during Jesus' time on earth.
Mark Bonocore
December 2, 2002
