The son of Alphaeus.

[B-A-C]

Title: James and Jude—Apostles, Authors, and Biological Sons of Mary


The traditional Catholic view holds that Mary remained a perpetual virgin, and that Jesus’s “brothers” were either cousins or Joseph’s children from a previous marriage. However, Scripture and logic support a different conclusion: James and Jude were biological sons of Mary, full brothers of Jesus, and also among the Twelve Apostles.

---

1. James the Less = James the Lord’s Brother = James the Son of Alphaeus

• Matthew 13:55 lists Jesus’s brothers: “James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas.”
• Galatians 1:19: Paul says he met “James, the Lord’s brother.”
• Mark 3:18 lists “James the son of Alphaeus” among the Twelve.
• Mark 15:40 mentions “Mary the mother of James the Less and of Joses.”

These names match. There is no scriptural reason to separate these identities. The simplest and most coherent conclusion is that James the Less, James the son of Alphaeus, and James the Lord’s brother are the same person—a biological son of Mary and an apostle.

---

2. Jude = Brother of James = Apostle Jude (Thaddaeus)

• Jude 1:1: “Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James.”
• Luke 6:16 and Acts 1:13 list “Judas of James” among the Twelve—likely meaning “brother of James.”
• Jude’s self-identification as James’s brother, and the fact that Mary had a son named Judas (Matthew 13:55), supports that Jude is also a biological son of Mary and an apostle.

---

3. No Need for Apostolic Sponsorship


Some argue that James and Jude needed to be “sponsored” by apostles to be canonized. But:

• They never got it—and they never needed it.
• If they were apostles themselves (as James the Less and Jude/Thaddaeus), they met the apostolic authorship requirement directly.
• Otherwise, we’d have to invent two new apostles, never mentioned elsewhere, who just happen to share names with Jesus’s brothers and Mary’s sons—an implausible coincidence.

---

4. Refuting the Adultery Argument


Some claim Mary couldn’t have had other children because it would be “adulterous” after conceiving by the Holy Spirit. But:

• Matthew 1:25 says Joseph “knew her not until she had given birth,” implying normal marital relations followed.
• Romans 7:2–3 and 1 Corinthians 7:39 affirm that remarriage or marital intimacy after a spouse’s death is not sinful.
• If Mary could marry Joseph without committing adultery, then consummating that marriage or remarrying after Joseph’s death would not be sinful either.

---

Conclusion


The evidence overwhelmingly supports that:

• James and Jude were apostles.
• They were biological sons of Mary.
• They were Jesus’s younger brothers.
• They authored canonical New Testament books without needing external sponsorship.

This view is consistent with Scripture, avoids unnecessary speculation, and affirms both the humanity of Mary and the integrity of the biblical record.

 

[B-A-C]

5. Scriptural Language Suggests Mary Had Other Children


Two key verses strongly imply that Mary did not remain a virgin after Jesus’s birth:


Luke 2:7

“And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger…”

• The term “firstborn” (Greek: prōtotokos) implies that other children followed. If Jesus were Mary’s only child, the term “only-born” (monogenēs) would have been more appropriate.
• In Jewish and Greco-Roman usage, “firstborn” was not just a title—it indicated the first among others, especially in legal and familial contexts.

Matthew 1:25

“But [Joseph] knew her not until she had given birth to a son…”

• The phrase “until she had given birth” (Greek: heōs hou) implies that after Jesus’s birth, normal marital relations began.
• While some argue that “until” doesn’t always imply a change afterward, in most biblical contexts it does (e.g., 2 Samuel 6:23, “Michal had no children until the day of her death”—clearly meaning she never had children).
• The natural reading of Matthew 1:25 is that Mary and Joseph had a normal marriage after Jesus was born, which would include the possibility of more children.

These verses, taken at face value, support the idea that Mary had other children, which aligns with the identification of James and Jude as her biological sons.

 

[B-A-C]

Closing Argument: The Case for James and Jude as Biological Sons of Mary


Ladies and gentlemen, the evidence is clear, consistent, and compelling.


The Gospels tell us plainly in Matthew 13:55–56 and Mark 6:3 that Jesus had brothers named James, Joseph (Joses), Simon, and Judas (Jude), and sisters as well. These individuals are directly associated with Mary, Jesus’s mother, and Joseph, the carpenter. There is no textual indication that these are cousins or step-siblings. The natural reading is that they are biological siblings.


Some argue that “Mary the mother of James and Joses” (Mark 15:40) is a different Mary. But this requires us to believe that two women named Mary each had sons named James and Joses, and that these other James and Jude just happen to be apostles and authors of Scripture. That’s not just unlikely—it’s implausible.


The Catholic argument that Jesus entrusted Mary to John because He had no siblings fails under scrutiny. If James and Jude were older stepbrothers, they would have been the culturally appropriate choice to care for Mary. But Jesus chose John—likely because His brothers, though believers by then, were not yet mature enough or present at the cross. This doesn’t disprove their existence—it explains why they weren’t chosen.


The claim that “brothers” means “cousins” also falls apart. The Greek word adelphoi is used consistently in the New Testament to mean biological siblings, and when the New Testament wants to say “cousin,” it uses the word anepsios (Colossians 4:10). The Gospel writers had the vocabulary to make the distinction—but they didn’t. Why? Because they meant brothers.


Finally, the appeal to early church tradition and apocryphal writings like the Protoevangelium of James is not authoritative. These are non-canonical, non-apostolic, and often contradict Scripture. The early church fathers were not infallible, and their views must be tested against the Word of God.


In conclusion, the biblical evidence overwhelmingly supports the view that James and Jude were biological sons of Mary, younger brothers of Jesus, and members of the Twelve Apostles. This interpretation is not only the most natural reading of Scripture—it is the most consistent, the most logical, and the most faithful to the text.


The case is closed.