Were Jesus's brothers born of another woman?

[LuxMundy]

It's a forced position isn't it asoul?
I mean your doctrine drives your interpretation rather than allowing the Word to teach you, you teach the Word.
This is common across most denominations but Catholics are by far the worst offenders.

Do you have a counterargument to post(s) #4 and/or #5?

 

[Biblepaige]

You haven't presented a counter-argument to post(s) #4 and/or #5. Therefore, again, do you not have one?



I wrote posts #4 and #5, and I've posted this argument of mine on other accounts I used to use on this site and others. I've also let other people use it as well.

Matthew 13
54 Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked.
55 “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?
56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”
57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town and in his own home.”
58 And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.

 

[LuxMundy]

Matthew 13
54 Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked.
55 “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?
56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”
57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town and in his own home.”
58 And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.

I already addressed those verses back in posts #4 and #5. Therefore, again, do you not have a counterargument?

 

[face2face]

Do you have a counter-argument to post(s) #4 and/or #5?

As I said you have confirmation bias so why bother?

 

[Biblepaige]

I already addressed those verses in posts #4 and #5.

And you were in error. When God's teaching does not teach you that Mary gave birth to the siblings of Jesus I do not believe this mere blessed mortal is able to.

Therefore, again, do you not have a counter-argument?

Just this.
Good night. And God Bless.

 

[face2face]

Did Jesus Have Brothers and Sisters (Siblings)?

Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56).

In John 7:1–10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. Galatians 1:19 mentions that James was Jesus’ brother. The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.

Some Roman Catholics claim that these “brothers” were actually Jesus’ cousins. However, in each instance, the specific Greek word for “brother” is used. While the word can refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin,” and it was not used.

Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother?

There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-brothers.

A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus’ brothers and sisters were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage. An entire theory of Joseph’s being significantly older than Mary, having been previously married, having multiple children, and then being widowed before marrying Mary is invented without any biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even hint that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before he married Mary, why are they not mentioned in Joseph and Mary’s trip to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4–7) or their trip to Egypt (Matthew 2:13–15) or their trip back to Nazareth (Matthew 2:20–23)?

There is no biblical reason to believe that these siblings are anything other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical: “But he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus’ (Matthew 1:25). Jesus had half-siblings, half-brothers and half-sisters, who were the children of Joseph and Mary. That is the clear and unambiguous teaching of God’s Word

 

[LuxMundy]

As I said you have confirmation bias so why bother?

So, that means you only present any counter-arguments, if you have them, when you think the other person will agree with you.

Smh. Hmph.

And, do you have an example of me displaying confirmation bias?

 

[LuxMundy]

And you were in error.

If you have any counter-arguments to support that assertion, I'm still awaiting them.

Good night. And God Bless.

Thank you, good night, and peace be with you.

 

[face2face]

So, that means you only present any counter-arguments, if you have them, when you think the other person will agree with you.

Smh. Hmph.

And, do you have an example of me displaying confirmation bias?

It's possible there are many examples to which you would know. It's about the possibility to find agreement...you were clear you weren't looing for truth but rather wanting to further strengthen your erroneous position.
It's about discerning the spirit of who you are dealing with, right?
F2F

 

[LuxMundy]

It's possible there are many examples [...]

List one.

[...] you were clear you weren't looing for truth but rather wanting to further strengthen your erroneous position.

How so?

 

[face2face]

List one.

...only to have a copy and paste auto text reply lol, no thanks!

How so?

You are like the JW's as it matters not what evidence is presented you can't change you mind or beliefs - impossible

F2F

 

[LuxMundy]

...only to have a copy and paste auto text reply lol, no thanks!

So, you choose to leave your assertion as is without proof or evidence for it.

You are like the JW's as it matters not what evidence is presented you can't change you mind or beliefs - impossible

Why should I accept what isn't true?

 

[face2face]

So, you choose to leave your assertion as is without proof or evidence for it.

Plenty of evidence if you wish to look!

Why should I accept what isn't true?

See? Proved my point!

 

[RedFan]

I already addressed those verses back in posts #4 and #5. Therefore, again, do you not have a counter-argument?

I'll give you one, if you don't mind. You say that in Gal. 1:19

Paul indicates that James is one of the Twelve,

I disagree. We don't have the first damn clue how many people Paul considered "apostles" when he wrote to the Galatians. Readers of the gospels -- which Paul never read -- are so used to equating "apostles" with the twelve original followers that they automatically assume everyone, even a writer like Paul writing prior to the existence of those gospels, must be of the same opinion.

But we can be confident Paul was not of that view. Paul calls Epaphroditus ἀπόστολον in Phil. 2:25. Paul calls Andronicus and Junia ἀποστόλοις in Rom. 16:7 -- and says that they were apostles before Paul was. 1 Cor. 15:5-7 describes Christ's appearance, in the following order: first to Cephas, then to the Twelve, then to 500, then to James (apparently not deemed one of the Twelve by Paul!), then to all the ἀποστόλοις.

Anyone reading these three letters can only conclude that Paul did not mean "the Twelve" when using the word ἀπόστολοι. Your interpretation of Gal. 1:19 is faulty.

 

[face2face]

It's important that the deceived for now remain deceived....Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false.

We only need to contend with these for a short while and then he comes.

F2F

 

[LuxMundy]

Plenty of evidence if you wish to look!

You're repeating an assertion that remains without proof or evidence for it.

See? Proved my point!

How does having asked, "Why should I accept what isn't true?" prove your point? Would you accept what isn't true?

 

[LuxMundy]

I'll give you one, if you don't mind. You say that in Gal. 1:19

Paul indicates that James is one of the Twelve,

I disagree. We don't have the first damn clue how many people Paul considered "apostles" when he wrote to the Galatians.

As I explained in post #5, in Gal. 1:18-19, Paul mentioned that in Jerusalem he had seen Peter, one of the twelve apostles, but that he didn't see another one of the apostles, except James the Lord’s brother. The title "the Lord's brother" indicates that James was Jesus’s kinsman/relative, and the context of these verses indicates that he was also one of the Twelve. This means that he would have had to have either been apostle James of Zebedee or apostle James of Alphaeus, and neither of them were a son of Joseph and Mary, yet still a kinsman/relative of Jesus. So, which of these apostles was Jesus's kinsman/relative, and how were they related? Refer back to the opening post.

 

[RedFan]

The title "the Lord's brother" indicates that James was Jesus’s kinsman/relative, and the context indicates that James was one of the Twelve.

The context indicates no such thing. Paul didn't consider James "the Lord's brother" to be one of the Twelve -- for all the reasons I mentioned.

 

[LuxMundy]

The context indicates no such thing. Paul didn't consider James "the Lord's brother" to be one of the Twelve -- for all the reasons I mentioned.

That's not true, for the reasons I explained in posts #5;57.

 

[face2face]

Incorrect, for the reasons I explained in posts #5;57.

See what you are doing?