False Teaching: Mary died a virgin. Biblical Proof Mary had children.

[Moonwood]

Mary was obedient unto GOD = God rewards obedience unto His Word
A Jewish women's greatest Blessing is to have children in holy matrimony = God Says: Be fruitful and multiply.
God blessed Mary to have children.


Straightforward and easy to understand: Michal had no children because of her sin = up to her death.
Once your dead your DEAD.
FYI = The Dead cannot "be fruitful and multiply"



"Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with us?"

Once again, EASILY understood and received.

What you NEED to find out is why Joseph is not mentioned here in Mark 6:3

You’re offering theological generalities (“God rewards obedience,” “Jewish women are blessed with children”), but none of those claims identify any children of Mary. The question is not whether children are a blessing — the question is who the Gospels identify as the mother of the men named in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3.

Your argument assumes that “God rewards obedience with children,” but Scripture contradicts that assumption. Righteous, obedient women — Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, Hannah, Elizabeth — all experienced periods of infertility despite marital intercourse. So obedience does not guarantee conception, and intercourse does not guarantee children. You are treating intercourse as if it automatically produces children, but Scripture itself shows that this is not how conception works. You cannot use a theological generality to override what Scripture actually says about who the mother of James and Joseph was.

Scripture explicitly identifies Mary of Clopas/Cleophas as the mother of James and Joseph (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; John 19:25). These are the same names listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. Early Christian writers for centuries preserve the same identification. So unless you can show a verse that says Mary the Mother of Jesus bore these men, the Gospels themselves tell us whose mother they actually had.

Your reply about Michal does not address the linguistic point: if “until” always implies a later reversal, then 2 Samuel 6:23 would imply Michal had children after death. Since that is impossible, your rule cannot be universal, and Matthew 1:25 cannot be used to prove later sexual relations.

And Joseph’s absence in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 is irrelevant — Joseph is absent from every scene of Jesus’s adult ministry, which is why the townspeople refer to Jesus as “the carpenter’s Son.”

So I’ll ask again:

Do you have a verse that actually says Joseph and Mary had children together and identifies them?

Because Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 list names — and the Gospels identify another woman as their mother.

 

[David in NJ]

You’re offering theological generalities (“God rewards obedience,” “Jewish women are blessed with children”), but none of those claims identify any children of Mary. The question is not whether children are a blessing — the question is who the Gospels identify as the mother of the men named in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3.

Your argument assumes that “God rewards obedience with children,” but Scripture contradicts that assumption. Righteous, obedient women — Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, Hannah, Elizabeth — all experienced periods of infertility despite marital intercourse. So obedience does not guarantee conception, and intercourse does not guarantee children. You are treating intercourse as if it automatically produces children, but Scripture itself shows that this is not how conception works. You cannot use a theological generality to override what Scripture actually says about who the mother of James and Joseph was.

Scripture explicitly identifies Mary of Clopas/Cleophas as the mother of James and Joseph (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; John 19:25). These are the same names listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. Early Christian writers for centuries preserve the same identification. So unless you can show a verse that says Mary the Mother of Jesus bore these men, the Gospels themselves tell us whose mother they actually had.

Your reply about Michal does not address the linguistic point: if “until” always implies a later reversal, then 2 Samuel 6:23 would imply Michal had children after death. Since that is impossible, your rule cannot be universal, and Matthew 1:25 cannot be used to prove later sexual relations.

And Joseph’s absence in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 is irrelevant — Joseph is absent from every scene of Jesus’s adult ministry, which is why the townspeople refer to Jesus as “the carpenter’s Son.”

So I’ll ask again:

Do you have a verse that actually says Joseph and Mary had children together and identifies them?

Because Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 list names — and the Gospels identify another woman as their mother.

You are offering theological unbelief.

The only cure is to listen and obey Christ = Matthew 18:1-5 and Matthew 4:4

 

[Moonwood]

You are offering theological unbelief.

The only cure is to listen and obey Christ = Matthew 18:1-5 and Matthew 4:4

Appealing to “unbelief” does not answer the question of who Scripture identifies as the mother of the men named in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3. I am asking a textual question, not making a theological claim. The issue is parentage, and Scripture itself provides the relevant genealogical information.

Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, and John 19:25 identify Mary of Clopas/Cleophas as the mother of James and Joseph — the same names listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. Early Christian writers for centuries preserve the same identification. If you believe Scripture, then you must take seriously the fact that the Gospels assign these men another mother, not Mary the Mother of Jesus.

Appealing to Matthew Matthew 4:4 or 18:1-5 does not identify any children of Mary, nor does it show that Joseph and Mary had children together. It simply avoids the question.

So I’ll ask again:

Do you have a verse that actually says Joseph and Mary had children together and identifies them?

Because Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 list names — and the Gospels identify another woman as their mother.

 

[David in NJ]

Appealing to “unbelief” does not answer the question of who Scripture identifies as the mother of the men named in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3. I am asking a textual question, not making a theological claim.

Sure it does as the Scripture CLEARLY identifies "Jesus as the son of Mary, who has the named brothers & sisters"

SEE - Mark 6:1-3
Jesus went on from there and came to His hometown, accompanied by His disciples.
When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard Him were astonished.
“Where did this man get these ideas?” they asked.
“What is this wisdom He has been given? And how can He perform such miracles?
Isn’t this the carpenter, the son of Mary and the brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? Aren’t His sisters here with us as well?”
And they took offense at Him.

Are you offended that JESUS has step-brothers & sister = like the pharisees?

 

[Moonwood]

Sure it does as the Scripture CLEARLY identifies "Jesus as the son of Mary, who has the named brothers & sisters"

SEE - Mark 6:1-3
Jesus went on from there and came to His hometown, accompanied by His disciples.
When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard Him were astonished.
“Where did this man get these ideas?” they asked.
“What is this wisdom He has been given? And how can He perform such miracles?
Isn’t this the carpenter, the son of Mary and the brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? Aren’t His sisters here with us as well?”
And they took offense at Him.

Are you offended that JESUS has step-brothers & sister = like the pharisees?

You have now repeatedly ignored every textual, linguistic, and genealogical point I’ve raised. Repeating Mark 6:3 does not answer any of them, because the Gospels and early Christian writers themselves identify Mary of Clopas/Cleophas as the mother of James and Joseph — the same names listed among Jesus’s adelphoi.

So I’ll ask again:

Do you have a verse that actually says Joseph and Mary had children together and identifies them?

 

[Moonwood]

The gospels say that Jesus had siblings.

Refer to post #493.

...there is another word for cousin in classical Greek, anepsios, and it appears elsewhere in the new testement

I'm not 100% sure but I tend to believe that they would of used that word if they meant to say cousin...

The Koine Greek language can distinguish “brother,” “relative,” and “cousin,” but Scripture does not consistently use those distinctions—especially in the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek Old Testament that shaped New Testament vocabulary.

Koine Greek includes:

• ἀνεψιός (anepsios) — cousin (Colossians 4:10); also used more broadly in Greek for “nephew”
• συγγενίς (syngenis) — female relative (Luke 1:36)
• συγγενής (syngenes) — relative/kinsman, fellow countryman (Mark 6:4; Luke 1:58; 2:44; 14:12; 21:16; John 18:26; Acts 10:24; Romans 9:3; 16:7, 11, 21)
• ἀδελφός (adelphos) — brother, kinsman, relative, fellow Israelite, fellow believer
• ἀδελφή (adelphe) — sister, kinswoman, female believer

These distinctions exist, but Scripture does not use them with modern English precision.

The LXX routinely uses adelphos to translate the broad Hebrew term ’ach, which covers many kinds of kinship. As a result, adelphos often refers to relatives who are not biological siblings:

1. Abraham and Lot (uncle–nephew)

• Genesis 13:8 (LXX): “We are adelphoi.”
• Genesis 14:14 (LXX): Lot is called Abraham’s adelphos.

2. Jacob and Laban (uncle–nephew)

• Genesis 29:15 (LXX): Laban calls Jacob adelphos.

3. Eleazar’s daughters and their cousins

• 1 Chronicles 23:22 (LXX): their cousins are called their adelphoi.

This is not an anomaly—it is the standard LXX pattern. In scriptural Greek, adelphos has a much wider semantic range than modern English “brother.”

So in scriptural Greek, adelphos has a much wider semantic range than modern English “brother.”

Even when a more specific term existed, NT writers did not always use it. For example, when Luke identifies Elizabeth as Mary’s relative, he uses syngenis, not anepsios, even though Christian tradition understands them as cousins (Luke 1:36). This shows NT writers were comfortable using broader kinship terms, just as the LXX did.

More importantly, the Gospels explicitly identify another Mary—not Mary the Mother of Jesus—as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi:

• Mary Magdalene, Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James (the Less), and Salome (Mark 16:1).
• Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James (the Less) (Luke 24:10).
• Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James (the Less) and Joseph (Matthew 27:56).
• Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James the Younger (the Less) and of Joses (Joseph) (Mark 15:40).
• His Mother and His Mother’s sister, Mary (the mother of James the Less and Joseph) the wife of Clopas/Cleophas (John 19:25).

So yes, Greek can say “cousin.” But:

• Scripture often uses broader family terms instead of the narrowest one.
• Adelphos frequently includes relatives who are not biological siblings.
• NT writers did not feel obligated to use anepsios even when a cousin‑type relationship was involved.
• And Scripture itself identifies two of Jesus’ “brothers” as the sons of another Mary, not Mary the Mother of Jesus.

 

[Moonwood]

Why would you be offended that Mary had children AFTER the birth of Jesus???

I’m not “offended” by the idea of Mary having other children; I’m pointing out that the New Testament doesn’t say She did, and the individuals called Jesus’s adelphoi are textually, linguistically, and genealogically identifiable as the sons of Mary of Clopas/Cleophas — Jesus's Mother’s sister‑in‑law — not children of Mary. None of the evidence I laid out has been addressed by you, so the question of my emotions is a distraction from the actual data.

 

[David in NJ]

I’m not “offended” by the idea of Mary having other children; I’m pointing out that the New Testament doesn’t say She did, and the individuals called Jesus’s adelphoi are textually, linguistically, and genealogically identifiable as the sons of Mary of Clopa/Cleophas — His Mother’s sister‑in‑law — not children of Mary. None of the evidence I laid out has been addressed by you, so the question of my emotions is a distraction from the actual data.

You keep repeating this, when in fact, the Gospel records Mary the mother of Jesus having other children.

Throughout Jewish History, it is considered a curse from God to not bear children.

Mary submitted to the Holy Spirit and Salvation came into the world in the "form" of a man - Philippians ch2

God would of punished Joseph's faithfulness if God did not keep His word to Joseph and Mary!

 

[Moonwood]

You keep repeating this, when in fact, the Gospel records Mary the mother of Jesus having other children.

Throughout Jewish History, it is considered a curse from God to not bear children.

Mary submitted to the Holy Spirit and Salvation came into the world in the "form" of a man - Philippians ch2

God would of punished Joseph's faithfulness if God did not keep His word to Joseph and Mary!

You’re asserting that “the Gospel records Mary having other children,” but you haven’t shown a single verse that actually identifies Joseph, Simon, James, or Judas as Her children. I’ve already demonstrated—textually, linguistically, and genealogically—that the men called Jesus’s adelphoi are the sons of Mary of Clopas/Cleophas, His Mother’s sister‑in‑law. None of that evidence has been addressed by you.

Appealing to general statements about Jewish history, curses, or obedience doesn’t identify any children of Mary. Scripture itself records righteous, obedient women who experienced infertility (Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, Hannah, Elizabeth), so your theological generality cannot override the actual genealogical data the Gospels provide.

If you want to argue that Mary had other children, you need to produce a verse that explicitly says Joseph and Mary had children together and identifies them. Until then, the combined witness of the Gospels and the earliest Christian writers still points to Mary of Clopas/Cleophas — not Mary the Mother of Jesus — as the mother of the men listed in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3.

 

[Armour of God]

Refer to post #493.



The Koine Greek language can distinguish “brother,” “relative,” and “cousin,” but Scripture does not consistently use those distinctions—especially in the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek Old Testament that shaped New Testament vocabulary.

Koine Greek includes:

• ἀνεψιός (anepsios) — cousin (Colossians 4:10); also used more broadly in Greek for “nephew”
• συγγενίς (syngenis) — female relative (Luke 1:36)
• συγγενής (syngenes) — relative/kinsman, fellow countryman (Mark 6:4; Luke 1:58; 2:44; 14:12; 21:16; John 18:26; Acts 10:24; Romans 9:3; 16:7, 11, 21)
• ἀδελφός (adelphos) — brother, kinsman, relative, fellow Israelite, fellow believer
• ἀδελφή (adelphe) — sister, kinswoman, female believer

These distinctions exist, but Scripture does not use them with modern English precision.

The LXX routinely uses adelphos to translate the broad Hebrew term ’ach, which covers many kinds of kinship. As a result, adelphos often refers to relatives who are not biological siblings:

1. Abraham and Lot (uncle–nephew)

• Genesis 13:8 (LXX): “We are adelphoi.”
• Genesis 14:14 (LXX): Lot is called Abraham’s adelphos.

2. Jacob and Laban (uncle–nephew)

• Genesis 29:15 (LXX): Laban calls Jacob adelphos.

3. Eleazar’s daughters and their cousins

• 1 Chronicles 23:22 (LXX): their cousins are called their adelphoi.

This is not an anomaly—it is the standard LXX pattern. In scriptural Greek, adelphos has a much wider semantic range than modern English “brother.”

So in scriptural Greek, adelphos has a much wider semantic range than modern English “brother.”

Even when a more specific term existed, NT writers did not always use it. For example, when Luke identifies Elizabeth as Mary’s relative, he uses syngenis, not anepsios, even though Christian tradition understands them as cousins (Luke 1:36). This shows NT writers were comfortable using broader kinship terms, just as the LXX did.

More importantly, the Gospels explicitly identify another Mary—not Mary the Mother of Jesus—as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi:

• Mary Magdalene, Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James (the Less), and Salome (Mark 16:1).
• Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James (the Less) (Luke 24:10).
• Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James (the Less) and Joseph (Matthew 27:56).
• Mary (of Clopas/Cleophas) the mother of James the Younger (the Less) and of Joses (Joseph) (Mark 15:40).
• His Mother and His Mother’s sister, Mary (the mother of James the Less and Joseph) the wife of Clopas/Cleophas (John 19:25).

So yes, Greek can say “cousin.” But:

• Scripture often uses broader family terms instead of the narrowest one.
• Adelphos frequently includes relatives who are not biological siblings.
• NT writers did not feel obligated to use anepsios even when a cousin‑type relationship was involved.
• And Scripture itself identifies two of Jesus’ “brothers” as the sons of another Mary, not Mary the Mother of Jesus.

I don't see the gospels explicitly referring to another Mary.

But if Mary really did refuse to submit to her husband as scripture demands then I would consider Mary to be a bad wife for creating an unhealthy relationship and defying Gods word

 

[Moonwood]

I don't see the gospels explicitly referring to another Mary.

But if Mary really did refuse to submit to her husband as scripture demands then I would consider Mary to be a bad wife for creating an unhealthy relationship and defying Gods word

The Gospels do explicitly refer to another Mary. Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, and John 19:25 all identify Mary the wife of Clopas/Cleophas as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. John even calls her Mary’s “sister,” which shows the Evangelists are distinguishing two different women named Mary.

As for the claim that Mary “refused to submit” or was a “bad wife,” Scripture never says anything of the sort. Mary is consistently portrayed as obedient to God, and Joseph as righteous and protective. There is no biblical conflict between them.

If we’re going to argue from Scripture, then we need to stick to what Scripture actually says—not introduce accusations that the text never makes.

 

[Armour of God]

As for the claim that Mary “refused to submit” or was a “bad wife,” Scripture never says anything of the sort

Yes there are other Mary's but they are not referred to when people claim that Jesus has siblings.

Scripture says that she must love her husband. Not doing so would be a sin. So if she actually never let her husband love her she would indeed be bad wife. That would be a toxic marriage to be in.

All the ifs buts and maybes just look like excuses to protect the perpetual virginity dogma
To me it looks much more probable that Joseph did love Mary and they did have more children.

If not then Mary was a bad wife

 

[Moonwood]

Yes there are other Mary's but they are not referred to when people claim that Jesus has siblings.

Scripture says that she must love her husband. Not doing so would be a sin. So if she actually never let her husband love her she would indeed be bad wife. That would be a toxic marriage to be in.

All the ifs buts and maybes just look like excuses to protect the perpetual virginity dogma
To me it looks much more probable that Joseph did love Mary and they did have more children.

If not then Mary was a bad wife

There is no verse anywhere in the Gospels that portrays Mary as refusing Joseph’s love, resisting him, creating a toxic marriage, or failing in Her duties as a wife. Nothing in Scripture suggests conflict between them. In fact, every biblical scene involving Mary and Joseph shows the opposite: Mary is obedient to God, Joseph is righteous and protective, and their household is marked by faithfulness.

But none of this addresses the actual point.
The question here is whether the Gospels identify another Mary as the mother of James and Joseph — the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, and John 19:25 all identify Mary the wife of Clopas/Cleophas as their mother. John even calls her Mary’s “sister,” which shows the Evangelists are distinguishing two different women named Mary.

If you want to argue from Scripture, then we need to stay with what Scripture actually says — not introduce imagined marital problems that the text never mentions. And Scripture explicitly assigns the mother of James and Joseph to another Mary, not to Mary the Mother of Jesus. If you want to claim these men were Mary’s biological sons, you need to explain why the Gospels repeatedly say their mother was someone else.

 

[Armour of God]

There is no verse anywhere in the Gospels that portrays Mary as refusing Joseph’s love, resisting him, creating a toxic marriage, or failing in Her duties as a wife

Your asserting that Mary remained a virgin. Scripture never says that. That's refusing to love and refusing to be loved. That's a sin.
A man doesn't marry a woman to work for her and remain unloved, that would be absurd

If you want to argue from Scripture, then we need to stay with what Scripture actually says — not introduce imagined marital problems that the text never mentions.

But your not arguing from scripture. It clearly says that Joseph had sexual relations with Mary and clearly says that Jesus had siblings

As for being different Mary's, so what, it means nothing. None of them are mentioned when scripture refers to Jesus's siblings

 

[Moonwood]

Your asserting that Mary remained a virgin. Scripture never says that. That's refusing to love and refusing to be loved. That's a sin.
A man doesn't marry a woman to work for her and remain unloved, that would be absurd

But your not arguing from scripture. It clearly says... Jesus had siblings

As for being different Mary's, so what, it means nothing. None of them are mentioned when scripture refers to Jesus's siblings

You keep asserting that I’m “claiming Mary remained a virgin,” but I haven’t made that argument. What I have argued — and what you still haven’t addressed — is that the Gospels identify another Mary as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. That is a textual claim, not a doctrinal one.

The moral accusations you’re making about Mary are not found anywhere in Scripture. There is no verse that portrays Mary refusing Joseph’s love, resisting him, creating a toxic marriage, or failing in her duties as a wife. Every biblical scene involving Mary and Joseph shows the opposite: Mary is obedient to God, Joseph is righteous and protective, and their household is marked by faithfulness. You are introducing sins the text never mentions.

But all of this still avoids the central issue.
The Gospels explicitly identify the mother of James and Joseph as Mary the wife of Clopas/Cleophas — not Mary the Mother of Jesus.

• Matthew 27:56
• Mark 15:40
• Mark 16:1
• Luke 24:10
• John 19:25

All five passages say the same thing. John even calls her Mary’s “sister,” showing the Evangelists are distinguishing two different women named Mary.

So the question remains:

If James and Joseph — two of the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi — were Mary’s biological sons, why do the Gospels repeatedly say their mother was someone else?

That is the textual problem you still haven’t answered.

 

[Titus]

You keep asserting that I’m “claiming Mary remained a virgin,” but I haven’t made that argument. What I have argued — and what you still haven’t addressed — is that the Gospels identify another Mary as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi. That is a textual claim, not a doctrinal one.

The moral accusations you’re making about Mary are not found anywhere in Scripture. There is no verse that portrays Mary refusing Joseph’s love, resisting him, creating a toxic marriage, or failing in her duties as a wife. Every biblical scene involving Mary and Joseph shows the opposite: Mary is obedient to God, Joseph is righteous and protective, and their household is marked by faithfulness. You are introducing sins the text never mentions.

But all of this still avoids the central issue.
The Gospels explicitly identify the mother of James and Joseph as Mary the wife of Clopas/Cleophas — not Mary the Mother of Jesus.

• Matthew 27:56
• Mark 15:40
• Mark 16:1
• Luke 24:10
• John 19:25

All five passages say the same thing. John even calls her Mary’s “sister,” showing the Evangelists are distinguishing two different women named Mary.

So the question remains:

If James and Joseph — two of the same individuals listed among Jesus’s adelphoi — were Mary’s biological sons, why do the Gospels repeatedly say their mother was someone else?

That is the textual problem you still haven’t answered.

God had the book of Matthew written in greek.
adelphos means brother.
The Greek new testament has a specific word for cousin: anepsios.

There is  no unambiguous new testament passage where adelphos means cousin.

The distinction,
adelphos = brother or used figuratively for fellow believer or broadly in certain texts kinsmen.

anepsios = cousin it is used in Colossians 4:10, Mark is Barnabas' cousin.

 

[Moonwood]

God had the book of Matthew written in greek.
adelphos means brother.
The Greek new testament has a specific word for cousin: anepsios.

There is  no unambiguous new testament passage where adelphos means cousin.

The distinction,
adelphos = brother or used figuratively for fellow believer or broadly in certain texts kinsmen.

anepsios = cousin it is used in Colossians 4:10, Mark is Barnabas' cousin.

The Koine Greek lexicon can distinguish “brother,” “relative,” and “cousin,” but Scripture doesn’t consistently use those distinctions—especially because New Testament Greek inherits the kinship patterns of the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek Old Testament.

Koine Greek includes:

• ἀνεψιός (anepsios) — cousin (Colossians 4:10), also used more broadly for “nephew” in Greek literature
• συγγενής / συγγενίς (syngenes / syngenis) — relative, kinsman, countryman (Mark 6:4; Luke 1:36; etc.)
• ἀδελφός / ἀδελφή (adelphos / adelphe) — brother/sister, but also kinsman, fellow Israelite, fellow believer

The categories exist, but Scripture does not use them with modern English precision.

The LXX regularly uses adelphos to translate the broad Hebrew ’ach, which covers many kinship relationships. As a result, adelphos often refers to relatives who are not biological siblings:

1. Abraham and Lot (uncle–nephew) — Genesis 13:8; 14:14 (LXX)
2. Jacob and Laban (uncle–nephew) — Genesis 29:15 (LXX)
3. Eleazar’s daughters and their cousins — 1 Chronicles 23:22 (LXX)

This is not an exception; it is the standard LXX pattern. New Testament writers grew up on this usage, and they follow it.

Even when a more specific term existed, NT authors did not feel obliged to use it. For example, Luke calls Elizabeth Mary’s syngenis (Luke 1:36), even though Christian tradition understands them as cousins. He does not use anepsios, showing that NT writers were comfortable with broader kinship terms.

So yes, Greek can say “cousin.” But:

• Scripture often prefers broader family terms over the narrowest possible one.
• Adelphos frequently includes non‑sibling relatives in biblical Greek.
• NT writers do not consistently use anepsios even when a cousin‑type relationship is involved.
• And the Gospels identify another Mary—not Mary the Mother of Jesus—as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s "brothers."

The existence of anepsios does not settle how adelphos is used in Scripture, because biblical Greek follows the LXX’s broad kinship patterns, not classical Greek’s stricter distinctions.

 

[Titus]

The Koine Greek lexicon can distinguish “brother,” “relative,” and “cousin,” but Scripture doesn’t consistently use those distinctions—especially because New Testament Greek inherits the kinship patterns of the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek Old Testament.

Koine Greek includes:

• ἀνεψιός (anepsios) — cousin (Colossians 4:10), also used more broadly for “nephew” in Greek literature
• συγγενής / συγγενίς (syngenes / syngenis) — relative, kinsman, countryman (Mark 6:4; Luke 1:36; etc.)
• ἀδελφός / ἀδελφή (adelphos / adelphe) — brother/sister, but also kinsman, fellow Israelite, fellow believer

The categories exist, but Scripture does not use them with modern English precision.

The LXX regularly uses adelphos to translate the broad Hebrew ’ach, which covers many kinship relationships. As a result, adelphos often refers to relatives who are not biological siblings:

1. Abraham and Lot (uncle–nephew) — Genesis 13:8; 14:14 (LXX)
2. Jacob and Laban (uncle–nephew) — Genesis 29:15 (LXX)
3. Eleazar’s daughters and their cousins — 1 Chronicles 23:22 (LXX)

This is not an exception; it is the standard LXX pattern. New Testament writers grew up on this usage, and they follow it.

Even when a more specific term existed, NT authors did not feel obliged to use it. For example, Luke calls Elizabeth Mary’s syngenis (Luke 1:36), even though Christian tradition understands them as cousins. He does not use anepsios, showing that NT writers were comfortable with broader kinship terms.

So yes, Greek can say “cousin.” But:

• Scripture often prefers broader family terms over the narrowest possible one.
• Adelphos frequently includes non‑sibling relatives in biblical Greek.
• NT writers do not consistently use anepsios even when a cousin‑type relationship is involved.
• And the Gospels identify another Mary—not Mary the Mother of Jesus—as the mother of James and Joseph, the same individuals listed among Jesus’s "brothers."

The existence of anepsios does not settle how adelphos is used in Scripture, because biblical Greek follows the LXX’s broad kinship patterns, not classical Greek’s stricter distinctions.

You need to go to old testament Hebrew to make your argument seem credible.
Again no new testament passage uses adelphos as cousin.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT
All you have accomplished is the septuagint quoting the old testament can mean brother.
But what you will never be able to prove is that adelphos means Jesus' cousins.

You must prove the new testament passages being discussed means cousins by the context.
Not that it could be interpreted as cousins.

Also it's a strange doctrine to promote Mary never had children.
You must also give the verses that prove she never had other kids.
That's impossible.

 

[Moonwood]

You need to go to old testament Hebrew to make your argument seem credible.
Again no new testament passage uses adelphos as cousin.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT
All you have accomplished is the septuagint quoting the old testament can mean brother.
But what you will never be able to prove is that adelphos means Jesus' cousins.

You must prove the new testament passages being discussed means cousins by the context.
Not that it could be interpreted as cousins.

Also it's a strange doctrine to promote Mary never had children.
You must also give the verses that prove she never had other kids.
That's impossible.

Your objection misunderstands the actual issue. I’m not appealing to Hebrew to “make the argument credible”; I’m explaining why New Testament writers use adelphos the way they do. The NT authors grew up on the Septuagint, and the LXX consistently uses adelphos for a wide range of kinship relationships. That background shapes NT usage. This is standard lexical method, not a detour.

You keep insisting that “no NT passage uses adelphos as cousin,” but that’s not the claim I’m making. The issue isn’t whether the New Testament ever uses adelphos to mean “cousin,” but whether adelphos in biblical Greek requires biological siblings. It doesn’t. The NT writers inherit the kinship patterns of the Septuagint, where adelphos regularly covers a wide range of family relationships, including non‑sibling relatives. This is why NT authors freely use broader kinship terms even when more specific ones exist. The lexical categories are real, but Scripture does not use them with modern precision.

The contextual evidence you’re asking for actually points away from biological siblings. The men called Jesus’s “brothers” are named—Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas. The Gospels identify their mother as Mary the wife of Clopas/Cleophas, not Mary the mother of Jesus. Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, and John 19:25 all make this identification. John even calls Mary of Clopas/Cleophas “Mary’s sister.” Since two biological sisters would not both be named Mary, this indicates a sister‑in‑law relationship. On that reading, Mary of Clopas/Cleophas belongs to Joseph’s extended family, and her sons are Jesus’s close relatives within that household—exactly the kind of kinship the NT regularly expresses with adelphoi.

This genealogical relationship explains perfectly why the NT calls these men Jesus’s adelphoi. In biblical Greek, following the LXX, adelphos is the standard term for close kin within the extended household, not just strict, modern‑sense siblings. The NT usage is not an anomaly; it is exactly what you would expect given the family structure the Gospels themselves describe. You’re demanding proof that adelphos means “cousin,” but the text only requires showing that these men are not Mary’s children, and the NT explicitly names another mother and another household.

As for your request to “give verses proving Mary never had other children”: I haven’t made any claim about Mary’s perpetual virginity here. I’ve simply pointed out the relevant biblical data. Only Jesus is ever called “the Son of Mary,” and the men called Jesus’s adelphoi are identified as the sons of another Mary. No verse identifies additional children of Mary, and the contextual identifications point to a different mother entirely.

Taken together, the lexical, contextual, and genealogical data show that the NT’s use of adelphoi reflects extended‑family kinship, not additional children of Mary.

 

[Titus]

Taken together, the lexical, contextual, and genealogical data show that the NT’s use of adelphoi reflects extended‑family kinship, not additional children of Mary

Wrong.
If those passages you posted were strictly to be interpreted as cousins the Greek would use anepsios.

Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, and John 19:25 all make this identification

None of these passages use anepsios or adelphos.
The Greek reads,
- now there stood by the cross of Jesus  His mother and His mothers sister Mary the wife of Clopas and Mary Magdalene

Only Jesus is ever called “the Son of Mary,” and the men called Jesus’s adelphoi are identified as the sons of another Mary

Wrong.

Big problem with your argument is none of these passages refer to Mary's children as cousins.
That's what you must prove by the context.

New Testament writers use adelphos the way they do. The NT authors grew up on the Septuagint, and the LXX consistently uses adelphos for a wide range of kinship relationships. That background shapes NT usage. This is standard lexical method, not a detour

NT Greek scholars do not interpret adelphos as Jesus' cousins.
They say it can have a broader meaning.
Not what you're claiming that it means cousins.

Give the context to prove your belief.
Claiming what men think doesnt prove anything really.
Scripture is what proves who's correct.