Archaeological find may be earliest evidence of Jesus
This is a fascinating find. But if it is in fact genuine, does it indicate that Jesus indeed had a sibling and that Mary’s perpetual virginity, as defined by Catholic doctrine, was only metaphorical? Not necessarily. The names James, Joseph and Jesus were common, and although it would have been unusual to name Jesus as “brother of” on the ossuary of James, son of Joseph, unless Jesus were a significant personage, that does not mean that the Joseph named on the box was the father of the Jesus named on the box (if in fact the Jesus named on the box was Jesus Christ). Another way of reading the word used for “brother” in Aramaic is “kin.” And if the Jesus named on the box is Jesus Christ and the James named on the box is St. James, often referred to as the “brother of our Lord,” it is not necessary to assume that: a.) James and Jesus were siblings and b.) that the Joseph referred to as James’ father was also Jesus’ father. It is no stretch to imagine that two prominent figures in the New Testament (referred to as brothers either because of their close association – teacher and disciple – or because they were cousins) had the fathers with the same names.