All the opinions on these points are fully given and discussed by Michaelis, in his Introduction to the epistle of James. He states five different suppositions which have been advanced respecting the relationship borne to Jesus by those who are in the New Testament called his brothers. 1. That they were the sons of Joseph, by a former wife. 2. That they were the sons of Joseph, by Mary the mother of Jesus. 3. That they were the sons of Joseph by the widow of a brother, to whom he was obliged to raise up children according to the laws of Moses. 4. That this deceased brother of Joseph, to whom the laws required him to raise up issue, was Alpheus. 5. That they were brothers of Christ, not in the strict sense of the word, but in a more lax sense, namely, in that of cousin, or relation in general, agreeably to the usage of this word in the Hebrew language. (Gen. xiv. 16: xiii. 8: xxix. 12, 15: 2 Sam. xix. 13: Num. viii. 26: xvi. 10: Neh. iii. 1.) This opinion which has been here adopted, was first advanced by Jerome, and has been very generally received since his time; though the first of the five was supported by the most ancient of the Fathers. Michaelis very clearly refutes all, except the first and the fifth, between which he does not decide; mentioning, however, that though he had been early taught to respect the latter, as the right one, he had since become more favorable to the first.
The earliest statement made concerning these relations of Jesus,
is by John, who, in giving an account of the visit made by
Jesus to Jerusalem, at the feast of the tabernacles, mentions, that
the brethren of Jesus did not believe in him, but, in a rather
sneering tone, urged him to go up to the feast, and display himself,
that the disciples who had formerly there followed him, might have
an opportunity to confirm their faith by the sight of some new
miracle done by him. Speaking to him in a very decidedly commanding
tone, they said, "Depart hence, and go into Judea, that
thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest. For there
is no man that does anything in secret, while he himself seeks to
be widely known; if thou do these things, show thyself to the
world." The whole tenor of this speech shows a spirit certainly
very far from a just appreciation of the character of their divine
brother; and the base, sordid motives, which they impute to him
as ruling principles of action, were little less than insults to the
pure, high spirit, which lifted him so far above their comprehension.
The reply which Jesus made to their taunting address,
contained a decided rebuke of their presumption in thus attacking
his motives. "My time is not yet come, but yours is always
ready. The world can not hate you, but me it hates, because I
testify of it that its works are evil. Go ye up to this feast; but
I am not going yet; for my time is not yet fully come." They
might always go where mere inclination directed them, nor was
there any occasion to refer to any higher object. But a mighty
scheme was connected with his movements, to which he directed
every action. In his great work, he had already exposed himself
to the hatred of the wicked, and his movements were now checked
by a regard to the proper time for exposing himself to it; and
