The Mother Church is Jerusalem not Rome Acts 15

The Mother Church is Jerusalem not Rome Acts 15

In Christianity, a mother church is the church "considered as a mother in its functions of nourishing and protecting the believer"

a mother-church, is sometimes taken for an original church planted immediately by the Apostles, whence others were derived and afterwards spread. And in this sense the Church of Jerusalem is called 'the mother-church of all churches in the world.'"

It was in Jerusalem that the Church was established on the day of Pentecost with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the disciples of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:1-41) and the Gospel of Christ spread from Jerusalem.

Beginning in Jerusalem, the gospel creates ever-widening circles in the world, just as a stone sends out ripples in a pond.

In the first and second century, Christianity consisted of an unknown number of local Churches that in the initial years looked to Jerusalem as its main centre and point of reference

When disproving that Peter is "the first pope" it is customary to turn to Acts 15, where it is stated that James (the Lord's half-brother) was clearly the chief spokesman for the ecclesia at Jerusalem; not Peter. In ch. 8:14 there is equally indisputable proof in regard to the question. Use of the terms "the apostles" and "they" are clear indicators that Peter possessed no supremacy over his fellow apostles. The decision to send Peter and John to Samaria was the result of a consensus discussion among all the apostles. Had Peter held any special authority over his fellows, he would either have elected to travel himself, or would have ruled as to who should be deputed in his place. No such thing occurred. The situation was similar to that recorded in ch. 6:2, "Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said..." This is now the sixth time that the names of Peter and John are linked together in their work in the Truth. This is the last time that John's name is mentioned in the book of Acts.


Eusebius provides the names of an unbroken succession of thirty-six Bishops of Jerusalem up to the year 324. The first sixteen of these bishops were Jewish—from James the Just to Judas († 135)—and the remainder were Gentiles

Jerusalem was the first center of the church, according to the Book of Acts, and the location of "the first Christian church". The apostles lived and taught there for some time after Pentecost. Jesus' brother James was a leader in the church, and his other kinsman likely held leadership positions in the surrounding area after the destruction of the city
The apostles had a regular meeting place in Jerusalem, an upstairs room where they usually stayed (verse 13: τὸ ὑπερῷον; cf. Acts 9:37,39; 20:8).

The bishop’s seat, the symbol of James’ position as leader, was an object of interest, right up to Eusebius’ day. It is clear that in the first centuries of church history, the Holy See was not in Rome, but in Jerusalem: 

Now the throne of James, who was the first to receive from the Saviour and the apostles the the office of a bishop of the church at Jerusalem, who also, as the divine books show, was called a brother of Christ, has been preserved to this day; and by the honour that the brethren in succession there pay to it, they show clearly to all the reverence in which the holy men were and still are held by the men of old time and those of our day, because of the love shown them by God (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History VII 19

James the Just Was the Real Leader of the Early Church! Acts 15:13

James the Just Was the Real Leader of the Early Church!

Gospel of Thomas Saying (12) The disciples said to Jesus, "We are aware that you will depart from us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to him, "No matter where you come it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist."

The Gospel of Thomas tells us that after Jesus had departed from the disciples they were to go to James the Just as the new leader of the apostles

So who is James the Just or James the righteous?

James Greek equivalent of Jacob, meaning “One Seizing the Heel; Supplanter

Biography

James was the brother of the Lord (Gal. 1:19). A Son of Joseph and Mary, and half brother of Jesus . (Mark 6:3) He may have been next to Jesus in age, being the first named of Mary’s four natural-born sons: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas. (Mathew 13:55;)

It also appears that the Lord’s brethren, James and Jude were married. Paul speaks of the married brothers of Jesus and the oldest gospel, Mark, mentions James, Joses, Judas and Simon as his brothers and besides sisters (Mark vi. 3).
It appears that during Jesus’ ministry James was well acquainted with his brother’s activity (Lu 8:19; John 2:12), but he was not one of the disciples and followers of Christ. (Mt 12:46-50; John 7:5)

He was probably with his non-believing brothers when they urged Jesus to go up to the Festival of Tabernacles, at a time when the rulers of the Jews were seeking to kill him. (John 7:1-10)

James also may have been numbered among the relatives that said of Jesus: “He has gone out of his mind.”—Mr 3:21.

However, after the death of Jesus James was assembled for prayer together with his mother, brothers, and the apostles in an upper chamber in Jerusalem. (Ac 1:13, 14)

It was evidently to this James that the resurrected Jesus appeared personally, as reported at 1 Corinthians 15:7, so convincing this one time non-believer that He was indeed the Messiah. This reminds us of Jesus’ personal appearance to Paul.—Ac 9:3-5.

The Gospel of the Hebrews confirms the account of Paul in 1 Corinthians regarding the risen Jesus' appearance to James:

'Now the Lord, after he had given his grave clothes to the servant of the priest, appeared to James, for James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he had drunk the Lord's cup until he should see him risen from the dead.' And a little further on the Lord says, 'bring a table and bread.' And immediately it is added, 'He took bread and blessed and broke and gave it to James the Just and said to him, "My brother, eat your bread, for the Son of Man is risen from the dead."' And so he ruled the church of Jerusalem thirty years, that is, until the seventh year of Nero

Apostle and Bishop

Thereafter James became a prominent member and, an “apostle” and Bishop of the Jerusalem church.

Thus, at Paul’s first visit with the brothers in Jerusalem (about 36 C.E.), he says he spent 15 days with Peter but “saw no one else of the apostles, only James the brother of the Lord.” (Ga 1:18, 19)

Although not one of the 12 apostles, it is evidently this James who was a bishop of the Christian Church at Jerusalem (Ac 12:17)

Peter, after his miraculous release from prison, instructed the brothers at John Mark’s home, “Report these things to James and the brothers,” thereby indicating James’ superiority. (Ac 12:12, 17)

James is styled the "bishop of bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the Holy Church of the Hebrews, and all the Churches everywhere"

Clement to James, the lord, and the bishop of bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the holy church of the Hebrews, and the churches everywhere excellently rounded by the providence of God, with the elders and deacons, and the rest of the brethren, peace be always. (Epistle of Clement to James)

Fragment X of Papias (writing in the second century) refers to "James the bishop and apostle" (Papias of Hierapolis,. Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord. Fragment X).

According to Eusebius (3rd/4th century) James was named a bishop of Jerusalem by the apostles: "James, the brother of the Lord, to whom the episcopal seat at Jerusalem had been entrusted by the apostles".^[40] Jerome wrote the same: "James... after our Lord's passion... ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusalem..." and that James "ruled the church of Jerusalem thirty years".^[41]

Leadership role

What about the great church meeting in Acts 15?

About 49 C.E. the issue of circumcision came before “the apostles and the elders” at Jerusalem.

Did Peter stand out as the leader in this great meeting? No, Peter did speak, but if you read the whole of that meeting, you will see that in fact James seemed to be the chief of the elders, as he was the one who gave the final decision on the question of circumcision (see Acts 15:19).

After the apostles, James the brother of the Lord surnamed the Just was made head of the Church at Jerusalem. James "ruled the church of Jerusalem thirty years". This James, whom the people of old called the Just because of his outstanding virtue, was the first, as the record tells us, to be elected to be bishop of the Jerusalem church

These verses also demonstrate the fraudulent impostering of the Roman Catholic Church in its claim that Peter was "the first pope." It is obvious that at this crucial gathering Peter accepted a lesser role than that shown, by common consent, to James. Had Peter been "the first pope" he would unquestionably have presided over such an assembly as this.

Acts 15:13  And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men [and] brethren, hearken unto me:

James" — Not the apostle, who had been killed by Herod (ch. 12:2), but almost certainly the Lord's half-brother (ch. 12:17; Gal. 2:9), who appears to be the chief of the elders at Jerusalem (Gal. 1:19; 2:12), and president of the conference, also thought to be married (ICor. 9:5).

Acts 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

"Wherefore my sentence is" — The word krino, "to judge" (as in the Diag.), or "judgment" (RV). As leader of the Jerusalem Church, James spoke with greater authority than Peter and John (Gal. 2:9).

Acts 21:18 And the [day] following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

The Lord's half brother (Acts 12:17), who was considered the leading brother of the Church.

Righteous or Just

Why is James called the righteous or James the Just?

Hegesippus records that James was known as the "Righteous One " who continually prayed in the Temple for the forgiveness of the people

James, the Lord's brother, succeeds to the government of the Church, in conjunction with the apostles. He has been universally called the Just, from the days of the Lord down to the present time. For many bore the name of James; but this one was holy from his mother's womb. He drank no wine or other intoxicating liquor, nor did he eat flesh; no razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil. He alone was permitted to enter the holy place: for he did not wear any woollen garment, but fine linen only. He alone, I say, was wont to go into the temple: and he used to be found kneeling on his knees, begging forgiveness for the people-so that the skin of his knees became horny like that of a camel's, by reason of his constantly bending the knee in adoration to God, and begging forgiveness for the people. (Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History Book II, 23)

from this it would appear that James was a Nazarite

the Lord's brother, later wrote that "the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much" (ch. 5:16).

Early Christian Tradition 

Gospel of Thomas Saying (12) The disciples said to Jesus, "We are aware that you will depart from us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to him, "No matter where you come it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist."

This statement [logion 12] . . . is also at odds with the orthodox tradition of the succession of Peter. It represents nothing less than the lost tradition of the direct appointment of James as successor to his brother.

This saying is not in opposition to the Gospel tradition were Jesus grants Peter the "keys of the kingdom" it does not mean the keys of leadership but the key of knowledge  see saying 39 Mathew 16:19 Luke 11:52

Acts 15:13  And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men [and] brethren, hearken unto me:
14  Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
15  And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,  

It is obvious that James knew of Peter's special commission the Lord had given him ("I will give unto thee the keys [plural] of the kingdom of heaven," Mat. 16:18-19) gave him irrevocably an exclusive responsibility concerning the unlocking of the divine purpose of salvation. Peter would unlock the door of entrance to the kingdom to both Jew and Gentile; a charge which he had faithfully fulfilled (Acts chapters 2, and 10).

 But further, James not only accepted Peter's words in this matter — which would have been fully supported by the other apostles — but quoted from two Old Testament prophets (Amos 9:11-12; Jer. 12:15) to prove that a commission such as that given to Peter was inevitable, according to the divine foreknowledge.

These verses also demonstrate the fraudulent impostering of the Roman Catholic Church in its claim that Peter was "the first pope." It is obvious that at this crucial gathering Peter accepted a lesser role than that shown, by common consent, to James. Had Peter been "the first pope" he would unquestionably have presided over such an assembly as this.











"Wherefore observe the greatest caution, that you believe no teacher, unless he bring from Jerusalem the testimonial of James the Lord's brother, or of whosoever may come after him.29 For no one, unless he has gone up thither, and there has been approved as a fit and faithful teacher for preaching the word of Christ, -- unless, I say, he brings a testimonial thence, is by any means to be received. (The Recognitions of Clement. Book IV. False Apostles. Chapter XXXV)



The Lord had earlier instructed his disciples to go "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mat. 10:6; 15:24). James later wrote "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" (ch. 1:1).

The Ebionites

THE EBIONITES.

Ebionites: (from Hebrew, “the poor ones”) A Jewish-Christian sect that fl ourished up to the fourth century but probably survived in pockets for much longer. Th e Ebionites retained Jewish practices, including full observance of the law of *Moses, and had an adoptionist *Christology, treating *Jesus as a human messiah who received the *Holy Spirit at his *baptism. Works attributed to the Ebionites include the *Gospel of the Ebionites and the *Gospel of the Hebrews, which survive only in quotation, and the Clementine Recognitions and Homilies.

The Nazoræans.

Epiphanius would have it that the Christians were first called Iessæi, and says they are mentioned under this name in the writings of Philo. The followers of the earliest converts of Jesus are also said to have been called Nazoræi. Even towards the end of the fourth century the Nazoræans were still found scattered throughout Cœle-Syria, Decapolis, Pella (whither they fled at the destruction of Jerusalem), the region beyond Jordan, and far away to Mesopotamia. Their collection of the logoi was called The Gospel according to the Hebrews, and differed greatly from the synoptic accounts of the Canon. Even to this day a remnant of the Nazoræans is said by some to survive in the Mandaïtes, a strange sect dwelling in the marshes of Southern Babylonia, but their curious scripture, The Book of Adam, as preserved in the Codex Nasaræus, bears no resemblance whatever to the known fragments of The Gospel according to the Hebrews, though some of their rites are very similar to the rites of some communities of the "Righteous" referred to in that strange Jewish pseudepigraph The Sibylline Oracles.

Who the original Iessæans or Nazoræans were, is wrapped in the greatest obscurity; under another of their designations, however, the Ebionites or "Poor Men," we can obtain some further information. These early outer followers of Jesus were finally ostracized from the orthodox fold, and so completely were their origin and history obscured by the subsequent industry of heresy-hunters, that we finally find them fathered on a certain Ebion, who is as non-existent as several other heretics, such as Epiphanes, Kolarbasus and Elkesai, who were invented by the zeal and ignorance of fourth-century hæresiologists and "historians." Epiphanes is the later personification of an unnamed "distinguished" (epiphanes) teacher; Kolarbasus is the personification of the "sacred four" (kol-arba), and Elkesai the personification of the "hidden power" (elkesai). So eager were the later refutators to add to their list of heretics, that they invented the names of persons from epithets and doctrines. So with Ebion.

The Poor Men.

The Ebionites were originally so called because they were "poor"; the later orthodox subsequently added "in intelligence" or "in their ideas about Christ." And this may very well have been the case, and doubtless many grossly misunderstood the public teaching of Jesus, for it should not be forgotten that one of the main factors to be taken into account in reviewing the subsequent rapid progress of the new religion was the social revolution. In the minds of the most ignorant of the earliest followers of the public teaching, the greatest hope aroused may well have been the near approach of the day when the "poor" should be elevated above the "rich." But this was the view of the most ignorant only; though doubtless they were numerous enough.

Nevertheless it was Ebionism which preserved the tradition of the earliest converts of the public teaching, and the Ebionite communities doubtless possessed a collection of the public Sayings and based their lives upon them.

It was against these original followers of the public teaching of Jesus that Paul contended in his efforts to gentilize Christianity. For many a long year this Petro-Pauline controversy was waged with great bitterness, and the Canon of the New Testament is thought by some to have been the means adopted to form the basis of a future reconciliation; the Petrine and Pauline documents were carefully edited, and between the Gospel portion and the Pauline letters was inserted the new-forged link of the Acts of the Apostles, a carefully edited selection from a huge mass of legendary Acts, welded together into a narrative and embellished with speeches after the manner of Thucydides.

The Ebionite Tradition of Jesus.

How then did the original Ebionites view the person and teaching of Jesus? They regarded their leader as a wise man, a prophet, a Jonas, nay even a Solomon. Moreover, he was a manifestation of the Messiah, the Anointed, who was to come, but he had not yet appeared as the Messiah; that would only be at his second coming. In his birth as Jesus, he was a prophet simply. The New Dispensation was but the continuation of the Old Law; all was essentially Jewish. They therefore expected the coming of the Messiah as literally prophesied by their men of old. He was to come as king, and then all the nations would be subjected to the power of the Chosen People, and for a thousand years there would be peace and prosperity and plenty on earth.

p. 129

Jesus was a man, born as all men, the human son of Joseph and Mary. It was only at his baptism, at thirty years of age, that the Spirit descended upon him and he became a prophet. They, therefore, guarded his Sayings as a precious deposit, handing them down by word of mouth. The Ebionites knew nothing of the pre-existence or divinity of their revered prophet. It is true that Jesus was "christ," but so also would all be who fulfilled the Law. Thus they naturally repudiated Paul and his new doctrine entirely; for them Paul was a deceiver and an apostate from the Law, they even denied that he was a Jew.

It was only later that they used The Gospel according to the Hebrews, which Jerome says was the same as The Gospel of the Twelve Apostles and The Gospel of the Nazarenes, that is to say, of the Nazoræans. It should be remembered that these Nazoræans knew nothing of the Nazareth legend, which was subsequently developed by the "in order that it might be fulfilled" school of historicizers.

The Ebionites did not return to Jerusalem when the emperor permitted the new colony of Ælia Capitolina to be established in 138, for no Jew was allowed to return. The new town was Gentile. Therefore, when we read of "the re-constitution of the mother church" at Ælia Colonia, in Church historians, little reliance can be placed upon such assertions. The "mother church," based on the public teaching, was Ebionite and remained Ebionite, the community at Ælia Colonia was Gentile and therefore Pauline.

p. 130

Christianity, as understood by the Ebionites, being an essentially national doctrine, Paulinism was a necessity if any public attempt at universality was to be made; therefore it was that the true historical side of popular Christianity (the original Ebionite tradition) became more and more obscured, until finally it had so completely disappeared from the area of such tradition, that a new "history" could with safety be developed to suit the dogmatic evolution inaugurated by Paul.

The later forms of Ebionism, however, which survived for several centuries, were of a Gnostic nature, and reveal the contact of these outer communities of primitive Christendom based on the public teaching with an inner Jewish tradition, which evidently existed contemporaneously with Paul, and may have existed far earlier.

James the Just

 James the Just, Apostle Brother of Jesus 

James (Ya'aqov) the Just was the Apostle brother of Jesus (Yeshua) the Nazarene who became the leader of the early Jewish-Christian community in Jerusalem. James and the other brothers initially didn't approve of Jesus' ministry. But they did become followers later, and were members of the early community of believers who lived in Jerusalem after Jesus departed. 

James was one of the three Apostles who were always with the Savior in the most intimate moments of His inner life and exaltation (James, John and Peter). Among the three he was the more learned on the formal side. James and the other early followers in Jerusalem still regarded themselves as Jewish and followers of The Way taught by Jesus. They worshiped regularly in the main Jewish Temple, and continued to adhere to many of the old Jewish laws and traditions. Outsiders regarded them as a new Jewish sect and refered to them as Nazarenes.

After Paul began to convert non-Jews to the faith, a dispute arose over whether these new converts had to follow the old Jewish religious laws and traditions. Around 48 CE, Paul traveled to Jerusalem to try to resolve the issue. According to the Canonical 'Book of Acts', it was James who made the final decision. The fact that James made the final decision indicates that at this time he was the highest authority in the existing Christian community in Jerusalem. 

According to Apostolic tradition, James was the author of the Canonical 'Epistle of James.'

Further evidence for the importance of his role was uncovered hidden in a cave in Egypt in 1945, with the discovery of 13 leather-bound codices containing 52 Apocryphal treatises buried in a sealed jar. Written in Coptic and Greek during the 3rd and 4th centuries the leather-bound codices became known as 'The Nag Hammadi Scriptures.' A passage found in 'The Gospel of Thomas', indicates that Jesus designated his brother James to take over the leadership after he departed. And 'The Secret Book of James' (Apocryphon of James) a letter attributed to James of esoteric revelations which Jesus made only to Peter and himself. Singled out at a time when the Apostles were together writing down their books of what they remembered of Christs words and life. 

But ultimately the overall leadership gradually shifted from James to Paul. This happened because the number of converts in other cities grew rapidly, and soon far outnumbered the members of the original group in Jerusalem. James died in 62 AD, as a result of conflicts with the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem. According to the 1st century Roman Jewish historian Flavis Josephus, a Jewish council condemned him 'on the charge of breaking the law,' then had him executed by stoning. Another account of James' death was reported by 3rd-4th century early Christian historian Eusebius of Caesarea. It says that the Pharisees, upset by his teachings, threw him from the summit of the Temple, stoned him, then broke his skull with a fuller's club. 

In 2002 an ancient ossuary (stone box which Jews used as a storage vessel for the bones of dead relatives) was discovered in Jerusalem bearing an Aramiac inscription 

'Ya'aqov bar Yosef akhui Yeshua' 

(James son of Joseph brother of Jesus) 

The ossuary was discovered empty and dates between the 1st century BC and 70 CE. And currently belongs to a private antiquities collector, its authenticity is still being questioned. If aithentic as indicated, the inscription would be the earliest surviving written reference to Jesus (Yeshua) the Nazarene. 

~“The Lord imparted the gnosis (knowledge) to James the Just, to John and Peter, after His Resurrection these delivered it to the rest of the Apostles, and they to the Seventy.”

-Clement of Alexandria

~"We are aware that you will depart from us, who will be our leader?"

Jesus answered "No matter where you come from, it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist." 

-The Gospel of Thomas

~You have asked me to send you a secret book revealed to Peter and me by the master, and I could not turn you down, nor could I speak to you, so I have written it in Hebrew and have sent it to you, and to you alone. But since you are a minister of the salvation of the saints, try to be careful not to reveal to many people this book that the savior did not want to reveal even to all of us, his twelve students. Nonetheless, those who will be saved through the faith of this treatise will be blessed.

~Now, the twelve students were all sitting together, recalling what the savior had said to each of them, whether in a hidden or an open manner, and organizing it in books. I was writing what is in my book. Look, the savior appeared, after he had left us, while we were watching for him. Five hundred fifty days after he rose from the dead, we said to him, 

“Did you depart and leave us?”

Jesus said, “No, but I shall return to the place from which I came. If you want to come with me, come.”

They all answered and said, 

“If you order us, we shall come.”

He said, “I tell you the truth, no one will ever enter the kingdom of heaven because I ordered it, but rather because you yourselves are filled. Leave James and Peter to me that I may fill them.”

When he called the two of them, he took them aside and commanded the rest to keep doing what they were doing.

~Again after this we wished to send our spirits up to the majesty. When we ascended, we were not allowed to see or hear anything. The other students called to us and asked us, 

“What did you hear from the teacher? What did he tell you? Where did he go?”

We answered them, “He ascended. He gave us his right hand, and promised all of us life. He showed us children coming after us, having commanded us to love them, since we are to be saved for their sakes.”

When they heard this, they believed the revelation, but they were angry about those who would be born. Not wishing to give them reason to take offense, I sent each of them to a different location. I myself went up to Jerusalem, praying that I might acquire a share with the loved ones who are to come.

I pray that the beginning may come from you. This is how I can be saved. They will be enlightened through me, by my faith, and through another’s that is better than mine. I wish mine to be the lesser.

-The Secret Book of James

~But after Paul, in consequence of his appeal to Cæsar, had been sent to Rome by Festus, the Jews, being frustrated in their hope of entrapping him by the snares which they had laid for him, turned against James, the brother of the Lord, to whom the episcopal seat at Jerusalem had been entrusted by the apostles.The following daring measures were undertaken by them against him.

Leading him into their midst they demanded of him that he should renounce faith in Christ in the presence of all the people. But, contrary to the opinion of all, with a clear voice, and with greater boldness than they had anticipated, he spoke out before the whole multitude and confessed that our Saviour and Lord Jesus is the Son of God. But they were unable to bear longer the testimony of the man who, on account of the excellence of ascetic virtue and of piety which he exhibited in his life, was esteemed by all as the most just of men, and consequently they slew him. Opportunity for this deed of violence was furnished by the prevailing anarchy, which was caused by the fact that Festus had died just at this time in Judea, and that the province was thus without a governor and head.

The manner of James’ death has been already indicated by the above-quoted words of Clement, who records that he was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple, and was beaten to death with a club. But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his Memoirs. He writes as follows

“James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles.He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to the present day for there were many that bore the name of James.

He was holy from his mother’s womb and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel, in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God, and asking forgiveness for the people."

Because of his exceeding great justice he was called the Just, and Oblias, which signifies in Greek, ‘Bulwark of the people’ and ‘Justice,’ in accordance with what the prophets declare concerning him.

Now some of the seven sects, which existed among the people and which have been mentioned by me in the Memoirs, asked him, ‘What is the gate of Jesus?’

and he replied that he was the Saviour.

On account of these words some believed that Jesus is the Christ. But the sects mentioned above did not believe either in a resurrection or in one’s coming to give to every man according to his works. But as many as believed did so on account of James.

Therefore when many even of the rulers believed, there was a commotion among the Jews and Scribes and Pharisees, who said that there was danger that the whole people would be looking for Jesus as the Christ. Coming therefore in a body to James they said, 

‘We entreat thee, restrain the people for they are gone astray in regard to Jesus, as if he were the Christ. We entreat thee to persuade all that have come to the feast of the Passover concerning Jesus for we all have confidence in thee. For we bear thee witness, as do all the people, that thou art just, and dost not respect persons. Do thou therefore persuade the multitude not to be led astray concerning Jesus. For the whole people, and all of us also, have confidence in thee. Stand therefore upon the pinnacle of the temple, that from that high position thou mayest be clearly seen, and that thy words may be readily heard by all the people. For all the tribes, with the Gentiles also, are come together on account of the Passover.’

The aforesaid Scribes and Pharisees therefore placed James upon the pinnacle of the temple, and cried out to him and said

‘Thou just one, in whom we ought all to have confidence, forasmuch as the people are led astray after Jesus, the crucified one, declare to us, what is the gate of Jesus.’

And he answered with a loud voice, 

‘Why do ye ask me concerning Jesus, the Son of Man? He himself sitteth in heaven at the right hand of the great Power, and is about to come upon the clouds of heaven.’

And when many were fully convinced and gloried in the testimony of James, and said, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David,’ 

these same Scribes and Pharisees said again to one another, ‘We have done badly in supplying such testimony to Jesus. But let us go up and throw him down, in order that they may be afraid to believe him.’

And they cried out, saying, ‘Oh! oh! the just man is also in error.’ And they fulfilled the Scripture written in Isaiah, ‘Let us take away the just man, because he is troublesome to us therefore they shall eat the fruit of their doings.’

So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to each other, 

‘Let us stone James the Just.’ 

And they began to stone him, for he was not killed by the fall but he turned and knelt down and said, ‘I entreat thee, Lord God our Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’

And while they were thus stoning him one of the priests of the sons of Rechab, the son of the Rechabites, who are mentioned by Jeremiah the prophet, cried out, saying, 

‘Cease, what do ye? 

The just one prayeth for you.’

And one of them, who was a fuller, took the club with which he beat out clothes and struck the just man on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot, by the temple, and his monument still remains by the temple. He became a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ. And immediately Vespasian besieged them.

These things are related at length by Hegesippus, who is in agreement with Clement. James was so admirable a man and so celebrated among all for his justice, that the more sensible even of the Jews were of the opinion that this was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened to them immediately after his martyrdom for no other reason than their daring act against him.

Josephus, at least, has not hesitated to testify this in his writings, where he says,  

“These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a most just man.”

And the same writer records his death also in the twentieth book of his Antiquities in the following words “But the emperor, when he learned of the death of Festus, sent Albinus to be procurator of Judea. But the younger Ananus, who, as we have already said, had obtained the high priesthood, was of an exceedingly bold and reckless disposition. He belonged, moreover, to the sect of the Sadducees, who are the most cruel of all the Jews in the execution of judgment, as we have already shown.

Ananus, therefore, being of this character, and supposing that he had a favorable opportunity on account of the fact that Festus was dead, and Albinus was still on the way, called together the Sanhedrim, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, James by name, together with some others, and accused them of violating the law, and condemned them to be stoned.

But those in the city who seemed most moderate and skilled in the law were very angry at this, and sent secretly to the king, requesting him to order Ananus to cease such proceedings. For he had not done right even this first time. And certain of them also went to meet Albinus, who was journeying from Alexandria, and reminded him that it was not lawful for Ananus to summon the Sanhedrim without his knowledge.

And Albinus, being persuaded by their representations, wrote in anger to Ananus, threatening him with punishment. And the king, Agrippa, in consequence, deprived him of the high priesthood, which he had held three months, and appointed Jesus, the son of Damnæus high priest.”

These things are recorded in regard to James, who is said to be the author of the first of the so-called catholic epistles. But it is to be observed that it is disputed at least, not many of the ancients have mentioned it, as is the case likewise with the epistle that bears the name of Jude, which is also one of the seven so-called catholic epistles. Nevertheless we know that these also, with the rest, have been read publicly in very many churches.

-Eusebius 

-Church History

Desposyni

There is therefore little doubt that these 'Bishops' of Jerusalem were in fact a dynastic bloodline, a dynasty claiming sacred legitimacy because of a blood relationship to Jesus, a relationship which an Apostle like Peter could not claim.

From Pella the Jewish Christians remnant is thought to have moved north-eastward, eventually making their way to the Tigris-Euphrates basin. In this relatively safe area they preserved their traditions for centuries. Eusebius and Epiphanius bear witness to the fact that the Jewish Christians survived and that numbers of Jews joined them. And from the historian Julius Africanus (160-240 CE) we learn that the Jewish Christians heirs took pride in their Davidic descent and circulated the genealogy which now stands at the head of Matthew's gospel.

According to this gospel, and to the Apostle Paul, Jesus was the first born of many brothers, and had at least two sisters. In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius of Caesaria (340 CE) speaks of grandchildren of Jesus' brother Jude who were living in Galilee during the reign of the Roman Emperor Domitian (81-96 CE). (Eusebius, History, 1:7.)


According to Eusebius, the descendants of Jesus' family (termed Desposyni) became dynastic leaders of various Christian Churches, and continued so up until the time of the Emperor Trajan (98-117 CE).

Jewish Christians communities were apparently still active in north and east Palestine right up until the fifth century, the name of Jesus being used by both Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians in the interest of policy.

Further and further magnified by the Roman Christians, however, Jesus became progressively more symbolic and representative of ecclesiastical concerns. In Nazoraean eyes Jesus continued to be a naturally generated man.

According to the Jesuit historian Malachi Martin, a meeting took place in Rome between Pope Sylvester 1 and what is termed in Greek desposyni - the blood relatives of Jesus - in 318 CE. (Martin, Malachi, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, G P Putnam’s Sons, New York, 1981, p. 43). Eight in number, these Desposyni leaders (otherwise known as ‘Nazoraeans’ or 'Nazarenes') made the following demands: (1) that the confirmation of the Christian bishops of Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus and Alexandria be revoked; (2) that these bishoprics be conferred on members of the Desposyni; and (3) that Christian Churches resume sending money to the Desposyni Church in Jerusalem, which was to be regarded as the Mother Church. Having provided sea travel for these Nazoraean leaders as far as the Roman port of Ostia, Sylvester must surely have recognised them as important, but such a barefaced claim to superiority over the Roman Church by these relatives of Jesus must have come as something of a surprise.

What is important here is the fact that Sylvester felt it necessary to consult with these Nazoraean heirs of Jesus. Everything suggests that it was he who initiated the meeting, and that what he thought of as a straightforward exercise in pontifical authority sorely backfired. This suggests, in turn, a certain naivety on Sylvester's part, for from the nature of the demands made it can be deduced that his estimation of the Nazoraean Community was sadly inadequate. Facing up to Sylvester, these church leaders from the East bluntly refused to recognise the Roman Church as the central authority for the whole Christian world. Due to Constantine’s largesse, the Roman Church was certainly in a priviledged position, but as far as these Nazoraeans were concerned, that in no way changed the underlying fact that the Nazoraean Church was the Mother Church. (Ode 38:9-13)

The Apostolic Church of the Nazoraeans was virtually ignored by the early Greek-oriented Church at Rome. Dismissed in 318 with regal curtness, the representatives of this Church were informed that the centre of influence had long since shifted to Rome, that St Peter's bones were not in Jerusalem, but in Rome, and that the admittedly once powerful family dynasty of Jesus was no longer considered apostolically important.

Quite a slap in the face to those of Jesus' own family who, since the time of James the Righteous, had faithfully carried their message of Jesus as God's chosen Messiah to anyone who would listen. And this was the point, their Jesus was not Pope Sylvester's Jesus, or the Jesus of the Nicean Council which would meet with such dire consequences seven years later. Their Jesus was not divine in his own right, he was divine by way of being anointed by God’s Spirit to be the Christ, a quite different proposition from that developed by the Roman Christians.