James the Brother of Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls I (17 page)

Aside from being a tradition incorporating the long-lost direct appointment of James by Jesus as Leader of the early Church, it also bears on the idea of ‘the
Zaddik
’. Yet it is a thousand years earlier than the above description in the
Zohar
, which was purportedly written in Spain in the 1200s–1300s. Thomas’ description of James as ‘for whose sake Heaven and Earth came into existence’ is related to the one in the
Zohar
about the
Zaddik
being ‘the Pillar that upholds the world … a Perfect copy of the Heavenly ideal’. Not only is it a statement about the pre-existence of the
Zaddik
, it bears on Paul’s allusion to ‘those reputed to be Pillars’ in Galatians 2:9 and later allusions in early Church tradition like the mysterious ‘
Oblias
’ or ‘
Bulwark
’ applied to James. That ‘James the Righteous One’ is someone for whose sake ‘Heaven and Earth came into existence’ means that not only are Heaven and Earth predicated on his existence but, as ‘the
Zaddik
’, he precedes them or is pre-existent.

Noah the First
Zaddik
and Abraham’s
Ten Just Men

There is another tradition associated with the pre-existent
Zaddik
or ‘Standing One’ in Jewish
Kabbalah
, that is, the legend of ‘the Ten Just Men’, augmented in later tradition to thirty-six.
5
The tradition is, in fact, a
Noahic
-style one, similar to the one about James as ‘Pillar’. Its implications are that the world is supported upon the existence of ‘Ten Just Men’ –
the Ten primordial Righteous Ones
– and, just as in the
Zohar
tradition about the first
Zaddik
Noah, it is their existence that
upholds the world
.

Actually, in Genesis, there are two ‘escape’ and ‘Salvation’ episodes of this kind related to ‘Righteous Ones’. The first is the Noah episode where Noah is designated as ‘Righteous and Perfect in his generation’ (Gen. 6:9). This allusion is also the basis of the ‘Perfection’ ideal so important, for instance, in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:48) and for Dead Sea Scroll ideology. It is, no doubt, related to the perception of James’
Perfect Righteousness
and
Piety
as well. Because Noah is so
Perfect
and a
Righteous One
, God is portrayed as saving him and, through this Salvation, allowing him to save the world through his progeny – ‘the world below’ as the
Zohar
would have it.

The second ‘escape’ and ‘Salvation’ episode in Genesis is that of Lot. This is a famous episode, but not everyone realizes it is an episode having to do with the role and nature of ‘the
Zaddik
’ again. After having encountered three Angels who announce that he and Sarah are going to have a son, Abraham remains with one of these Angels (who later turns out to be God – Gen. 18:22). The other two go down to see how Abraham’s nephew Lot is doing in the plain below in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Finding these cities to be full of fornication and illicit sexual behaviour – the sexual emphasis in relation to a story about
Zaddikim
(Hebrew plural for
Zaddik
) is important – God determines to destroy these cities. At this point there transpires a bargaining scene between Abraham and God. Abraham asks God to withhold destruction from the city, that is, he intercedes with God on behalf of mankind. God agrees, but only on the basis that there should be found there fifty Just Men, that is, fifty
Righteous Ones
. Abraham asks for forty. God agrees. The bargaining goes on. Finally, it is determined that for the sake of ‘Ten Just Men’ God will withhold destruction from the city. This number becomes proverbial. In time it also becomes the minimum number required for Jewish communal prayer, the two, no doubt, being seen as connected, that is, the prayer of
Ten Righteous Men
can in some manner provide sustaining power to the world.

Somehow the number here is augmented in Jewish mystical tradition to thirty-six (the numerical value in Judaism of the word
life
). Its bearing, however, on the situation of James and, later, his relationship to the city of Jerusalem, will become clear. James in his role as ‘Pillar’, ‘Wall’, or ‘Bulwark’/‘Shield’ will provide the sustaining ‘Protection’ required to guarantee
Jerusalem’s
continued existence – Jerusalem being substituted for Sodom.

The concomitant to this is, of course, that once ‘the
Zaddik
’ – in this case James – was removed, existence of the city could no longer be sustained and its destruction was assured. Even in the circumscribed materials that have come down to us, the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem some seven-and-a-half years later by Roman armies was tied by exegetes to his death. In the context of ‘
Zaddik
’ theorizing, the sense of this is not punishment, as per later
Christian
reformulation, but once the requisite ‘Shield’ or ‘Protection’, James, had been removed, Jerusalem could no longer remain in existence.

Paul’s Picture of the Central Three, James, Cephas, and John

In one of the most meaningful statements in Christian religious history, Paul describes a stay he made in Arabia and his later return to Damascus – whatever might be meant by these geographical notations at this point – and identifies James as follows:

But when it pleased God, who
chose me from my mother’s womb
and called me by His Grace to
reveal His son in me
, that I should announce him as the Gospel among the Nations, I did not immediately confer with
any human being
, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were Apostles before me. Rather
I went away into Arabia
and again
returned to Damascus
. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to make the acquaintance of Peter and I remained with him
fifteen days
. Nor did I see any of
the other Apostles except James the brother of the Lord
. Now the things I write you are
true, for before God, I do not lie
. (Gal. 1:15–20)

We have in these sentences some of the most important historical data of early Christianity. First of all, in counter-indicating Acts’ presentation, they reveal that document to be defective on these points and a not very artfully concealed rewrite. Secondly, they introduce
the really important James
in no uncertain terms, not only placing him, as someone Paul knows, on a level with Peter, but also
among
the Apostles, another fact that the Gospels and Acts are most anxious to disguise. As we proceed, we shall also be able to show that Jesus’ brothers were, indeed,
reckoned as Apostles
. But let us take these points one at a time.

We can say from Paul’s testimony that the James he is talking about here – whom he calls ‘the brother of the Lord’, whether this ‘
brothership
’ is to be taken as real or symbolical – is on the same level as the Peter whose acquaintance he appears to be making
for the first time
. Again, it is not clear whom he means by this ‘Peter’ as in the next chapter he also speaks about someone he calls ‘Cephas’ (Gal. 2:19 – ‘Cephas’ is an Aramaic appellation, usually taken as meaning ‘Rock’, just as Peter means ‘Rock’ in Greek). By speaking of ‘the other Apostles’, it is quite clear that Paul means that
both
James and Peter are to be reckoned among the Apostles, whatever may be meant by the term at this point. This is surprising, as most would not reckon James or the brothers of Jesus generally among the Apostles. Nor, at this point, is Paul speaking of ‘Twelve’ Apostles as part of a fixed scheme.

As we shall see below, this idea of ‘Twelve Apostles’, as the Gospels and the Book of Acts would have it, is somewhat formal and even rather childish. As we shall also see, in 1 Corinthians, too, it is pretty clear that not only was James among the original Apostles, this
Twelve Apostle
scheme was one that aided the historiographical and doctrinal approach of books like the Gospels and Acts. Stemming from the ideas of those either unsophisticated in Palestinian history or purposefully trying to archaize or dissemble, it is not at all certain that such a scheme was ever really operative in the Palestine of the time.

In its favour – apart from the rather tendentious Apostle lists in the Gospels and Acts – is the reference in the Community Rule to a central Council made up of ‘Twelve Israelites’. This, too, probably archaizes to a certain extent, being based on a no longer extant biblical framework of
twelve
Israelite Tribes. In this reference in the Community Rule, there is allusion as well to ‘Three’. But here, too, there are difficulties and it is not possible to tell from the allusion in the text whether we have Twelve plus Three or whether ‘the Three’ are meant to be included in ‘the Twelve’, this being the presentation of the Gospels, though not necessarily Galatians. The probability is in favour of the former.
6

‘The Three’ being spoken about in the Scrolls are specifically referred to as ‘Priests’. The imagery being used here with regard either to ‘the Twelve’ and ‘the Three’ is similar to that in the New Testament. In fact, the former are referred to in the Community Rule as ‘a House of Holiness for Israel’, that is, the Twelve Tribes; the latter, ‘a Holy of Holies for Aaron’, that is, the Central Priestly Triad.

There can be no doubt that what we have here is what – following Paul’s vocabulary in 1 Corinthians 2:13 – should be called ‘spiritualized Temple’ imagery, both a
spiritualized Temple
and
spiritualized Holy of Holies
within the Temple. In the Community Rule, this is accompanied by
spiritualized sacrifice
and
spiritualized atonement
imagery as well, that is, this Council governing the Community is referred to not only as ‘making atonement for the land’ and ‘atoning for sin by
doing Righteousness
’, but ‘a sweet fragrance’, ‘a well-tested Wall, that Precious Cornerstone, whose Foundations shall neither rock nor sway in their place’.
7

It is when treating these ‘Three’ that we run into difficulties in the New Testament, because the enumeration of them is not the same in the Gospels as it is in the Letter to the Galatians.
8
We have already heard in Galatians that
the Central Three
, that is, ‘those of repute’ or ‘reputed to be Pillars’, are James, Cephas, and John. James and John, here, are not specified as being brothers as they are in the Gospels, and, indeed, whoever this John is, the James reputed to be his brother in Acts and the Gospels had long since disappeared from the scene. However, in the Gospels it is quite clear that the Central Three are supposed to be Peter, James, and
John his brother
, meaning Peter, James, and John ‘the two sons of Zebedee’ (Matt. 10:2, 17:1, 26:37 and pars.).

It should be apparent that these are slightly different enumerations. In the Gospels, Jesus is pictured as transfiguring himself before the latter Three ‘on a high mountain’, but, all such recitals in the Gospels must be taken with a degree of skepticism. The rule of thumb we suggested above should apply here. Where there is a conflict between data in these and reliable passages from Paul’s letters, the latter are to be preferred. Not only this, but it is the ‘brother’ theme, when inspected carefully, which will be seen to be causing the difficulties – whether, for instance, with regard to ‘Andrew
his brother
’ (in this case Peter’s ‘brother’ – Mark 1:18 and pars.), ‘John his brother’ (Mark 1:19 and pars.), ‘James the brother of John’ (Acts 12:2), or Jesus’ brother, so much so that the movement of this phrase, ‘his brother’, has all the earmarks of a shell game.

The Post-Resurrection Appearances of Jesus to the Apostles in the Gospels

The reference to Cephas as one of the ‘Pillars’ in Galatians 2:9 is interesting. In chapter 1, Paul preceded this by referring to someone he calls Peter whose acquaintance he made along with James fourteen years before in Jerusalem (1:18). He follows with his description of the confrontation, when he and Peter meet once again in Antioch and are forced to respond to ‘some from James’ over the issue of ‘table fellowship with Gentiles’ (2:11–12). It is not at all certain, as we have suggested, that we are dealing with the same individual in these three separate notices and the problem has been worried over by scholars with little result.

The point is that there may be another individual with this name
Cephas
. Paul refers to him as such in 1 Corinthians on several occasions, particularly regarding disputes in Asia Minor with someone called Apollos (1 Cor. 1:12 and 3:22) – who, according to Acts, ‘knew only John’s baptism’ (Acts 18:25) – or regarding the fact that ‘Jesus’ brothers travel with women too’ (1 Cor. 9:15). But the main reference he makes to ‘Cephas’ in 1 Corinthians – never Peter – is in the list of post-resurrection appearances by Jesus in chapter 15, where Cephas is listed as the first person to whom Jesus appeared after his death (15:5).