James ...

[MrMacSon]

.
There are several James tied to the New Testament narratives.

The beginning of James,_brother_of_Jesus (Wikipedia) is a start.

• "James (Hebrew: יעקב Ya'akov; Greek Ἰάκωβος Iákōbos, also could be anglicized as Jacob), who died in martyrdom in 62 or 69 AD, was an important figure of the Apostolic Age. His usual epithets are James, the Lord's brother and James the Just. It is agreed by most that he should not be confused with either James, son of Zebedee, or – as it sometimes happens – with James, son of Alphaeus."

Though, the Catholic Encyclopedia has, somewhat confusingly

• a James the Less (starting, seemingly, with a list of all the James); and
  
  a St James the Great/er,
  
  but not a James the Just (doesn't come up on a search).

It's quite confusing.

In the Catholic Encyclopedia -

The identity of 'James', Jude and Simon

'James' is without doubt the Bishop of Jerusalem (Acts 12:17, 15:13, 21:18; Galatians 1:19; 2:9-12) and the author of the first Catholic Epistle. His identity with James the Less (Mark 15:40) and the Apostle James, the son of Alpheus (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18), although contested by many Protestant critics, may also be considered as certain. There is no reasonable doubt that in Galatians 1:19: "But other of the apostles [besides Cephas] I saw none, saving James the brother of the Lord", St. Paul represents James as a member of the Apostolic college.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htm

Note Origen, Against Celsus 1.47.

... Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brother of the Lord, not so much on account of their relationship by blood, or of their being brought up together, as because of his virtue and doctrine.

I'll leave it there, for a start.

[MrMacSon]

.
From the on-line Catholic Encyclopedia St James the Less page -

The name "James" in the New Testament is borne by several:

1. James, the son of Zebedee — Apostle, brother of John, Apostle; also called "James the Greater".

2. James, the son of Alpheus, Apostle — Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13.

3. James, the brother of the Lord — Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Galatians 1:19.

• without a shadow of doubt, he must be identified with the James of Gal 2:2 and 2:9; Acts 12:17, 15:13 sqq. and 21:18; and 1 Cor. 15:7.

4. James, the son of Mary, brother of Joseph (or Joses) —

• Mark 15:40 (where he is called ò mikros "the little", not the "less", as in the DV, nor the "lesser"); Matthew 27:56. Probably the son of Cleophas or Clopas (John 19:25); where "Maria Cleophæ" is generally translated "Mary the wife of Cleophas", as married women are commonly distinguished by the addition of their husband's name.

5. James, the brother of Jude — Jude 1:1.

• [/color] Most Catholic commentators identify Jude with the "Judas Jacobi", the "brother of James" (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13), called thus because his brother James was better known than himself in the primitive Church.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08280a.htm

On the whole, although there is no full evidence for the identity of James (2), the son of Alpheus, and James (3), the brother of the Lord, and James (4), the son of Mary of Clopas, the view that one and the same person is described in the New Testament in these three different ways, is by far the most probable. There is, at any rate, very good ground (Galatians 1:19, 2:9, 2:12) for believing that the Apostle James, the son of Alpheus is the same person as James, the brother of the Lord, the well-known Bishop of Jerusalem of the Acts. As to the nature of the relationship which the name "brother of the Lord" is intended to express, see BRETHREN OF THE LORD.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08280a.htm

James in the Scriptures

Had we not identified James, the son of Alpheus with "the brother of the Lord", we should only know his name and his Apostleship. But the identity once admitted, we must consequently apply to him all the particulars supplied by the books of the New Testament [??]

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08280a.htm

[Peter Kirby]

A wonderfully pedantic volume (the first of four volumes), A Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity, vol. 1, has a pertinent set of tables, particularly on pages 56 and 57.



This is based on a fairly exhaustive survey of various documentary (epigraphic, etc.) and literary sources dating between 330 BC and 200 AD, which includes 2509 male names and 317 female names.

We can take it and put the percentages in, then:

[/tr]

Name	Count (out of 2509)	Percentage
Simon	257	10.2%
Joseph	231	9.2%
Judah	179	7.1%
Eleazar	177	7.1%
Yohanan	128	5.1%
Joshua	103	4.1%
Hananiah	85	3.4%
Jonathan	75	3.0%
Mattathias	63	2.5%
Menahem	46	1.8%
Jacob	45	1.8%
Hanan	39	1.6%
Alexander	31	1.2%
Dositheus	31	1.2%
Zachariah	31	1.2%
Ishmael	31	1.2%
Levi	29	1.2%
Saul	29	1.2%
Onias	27	1.1%
Samuel/Ezekiah	26	1.0%
All Other Jewish Male Names	820	32.7%

Nota bene:
Simon (alternate form, Symeon)
Joseph = Joses = Josephus
Judah = Jude = Judas
Yohanan = John
Joshua = Jesus
Mattathias = Matthew (alternate form, Mathias)
Jacob = James
Hananiah = Ananias = Ananus

Name	Count (out of 317)	Percentage
Mariam	80	25.2%
Salome	63	19.9%
Shelamzion	25	7.9%
Martha	20	6.3%
Joanna	12	3.8%
Shiphra	12	3.8%
Berenice	10	3.2%
Sarah	9	2.8%
Imma	7	2.2%
Mara	7	2.2%
All Other Jewish Female Names	72	22.7%

(Mariam = Mary)

Returning to the topic --

According to most traditional interpreters, there are three named "James" (Jacob) in the NT, one which is related to Jesus (apparently a brother 'according to the flesh') [your 3 and 5], and two which are among the Twelve, one of which is the son of Zebedee [your 1] and the other of which is the son of Alphaeus & Mary [your 2 and 4]. Consequently, traditional interpreters identify Alphaeus and Cleophas with each other as being two names for the same father (a harmonization) or sometimes two different husbands to the same mother (another harmonization).

Further --

It can be kept in mind that the letters of Paul, if they haven't been adulterated in this regard, make reference to James and John and Cephas (reputed to be pillars, in Galatians) and also to the "Twelve" (in 1 Corinthians, which mentions a James separately from 'the Twelve'). Some view this as an interpolation, but if it isn't, then this suggests that there were actually some group called "the Twelve" that also claimed to have seen Jesus. They may have had Cephas as their leader, which would explain the subsequent tradition as well as their close mention together in 1 Cor 15. But James doesn't appear to be associated with the Twelve, even though Peter (in the Gospels and, loosely, in 1 Cor 15) is, and James is sometimes associated with Peter (in the letters of Paul). Nothing more than this could have motivated Mark to put a James (or two) in the circle of the Twelve--certainly this explains the sons of Zebedee, James and John, who were among the three 'pillars' (along with Cephas, i.e. Simon Peter).

The most difficult pill to swallow for traditional interpreters --

Acts has the special three shrink by one James, martyred in the 40s, and expand by one James, who takes his place. Weird. The name of James isn't -that- common.

[MrMacSon]

Cheers, Peter.

Yes, it's quite confusing.I get the impression most people think there is or was only one James, and that the churches are happy for people to believe that.

The concept of harmonization is interesting: I wonder if it suggests conflating or confabulating various texts or stories, by way of redaction.

As you say -

The most difficult pill to swallow for traditional interpreters --

Acts has 'the special three' shrink by one James, martyred in the 40s, and expand by one James, who takes his place. Weird. The name of James isn't -that - common.

[Tenorikuma]

Figuring out who all the different Jameses were is a big headache, because even the earliest Christian writers were confused. The Gospels and Acts never suggest that either of the disciples named James nor the James who takes over the Jerusalem church in Acts was related to Jesus. That seems to be a later innovation, maybe to harmonize with Galatians' reference to James as "the brother of the Lord" (though that is probably an interpolation); and the reference in Antiquities becomes further grist for the mill.

There's also the matter that Alpheus and Cleopas/Clopas were probably the same name originally.

[MrMacSon]

"the reference in Antiquities becomes further grist for the mill" until one starts to look at who that James might have been and who all the NT James are, as well as the other extra-NT references to James.

Trying to look at extra-biblical references to James might help work out the NT more than extra-biblical references to Jesus (?)

[Tenorikuma]

I tried that…searched all the patristic fathers and apocrypha for references to anyone named James and put it in a big word processing file. I'm still confused as hell.

What stood out, though, is the absence of anyone named James in almost every pre-150 text. Nothing in 1 Clement, 2 Clement, Hermas, Polykarp, Papias, Eugenostos, Pistis Sophia, Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Melito of Sardis, etc. Then James suddenly becomes the hero of the mid-2nd-century Gnostic texts, the Apocryphon of James and two Apocalypses of James. After that, he's a fixture of Christian writings about the early apostolic church.

Thus my suspicion that "James the Just" is a second-century invention based on unclear references in the canonical Gospels, Josephus, and Gnostic traditions. Edit: I should note that both Hegesippus and Hippolytus use details from 1 and 2 Apoc James in their descriptions of James the Just.

Of course, in the Gospels, the James related to Jesus (only barely mentioned) is not associated with the two disciples by that name, nor with whichever James it is who takes over the church in Acts. That conflation (James the brother of Jesus = James son of Alphaeus = James the Just) seems to be a later attempt to harmonize these texts with each other and the myth that Christianity originated in Jerusalem.

[MrMacSon]

How relevant are Robert Eisenman's works? Some listed here - http://roberteisenman.com/

[Tenorikuma]

His books are useful for tracing some of the James references in early writings, but I don't buy his thesis that James was the Teacher of Righteousness.

[Peter Kirby]

Edit: I should note that both Hegesippus and Hippolytus use details from 1 and 2 Apoc James in their descriptions of James the Just.

Interesting. Show us?

BTW, how we judge Gospel of Thomas might make a difference. (e.g., if we think James 'the Just' is late tradition, then Gospel of Thomas is late?)

Gospel of Thomas 12
The disciples said to Jesus: We know that you will depart from us; who is it who will be great over us? Jesus said to them: Wherever you have come, you will go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being.

(I also have occasion here to mention the hypothesis that 'Hegesippus' and Papias were the same person and wrote in the 140s AD.)