Jesus’s Adelphoi: Scripture and Early Christian Testimony

[sondring7]

Do you think the Bible confirms Mary did not have 'relations' with her husband after the birth of Jesus ?

 

[Moonwood]

To me the topic is not such a big deal.

I've read the arguments from both sides and I think it's more probable that Mary had kids with Joseph.

If Mary did choose not to love her husband then I consider that to be the actions of a bad wife.

There are “probabilities and considerations,” and then there are the actual facts. And you haven’t addressed the facts I presented.

Here is everything you have not responded to:

You did not address the adelphos evidence:​

• You did not address that the men called Jesus’s adelphoi are never called sons of Mary.
• You did not address that they are never called sons of Joseph.
• You did not address that only Jesus is called “the carpenter’s Son” (Matthew 13:55).
• You did not address that only Jesus is called “the Son of Mary” (Mark 6:3).
• You did not address that the Gospels identify the actual mother of James and Joseph — the very names listed among Jesus’s adelphoi — as Mary of Clopas/Cleopas, not Mary the Mother of Jesus.
• You did not address that John 19:25 identifies Mary of Clopas/Cleophas as Mary’s adelphe — meaning a female relative.
• You did not address that two biological sisters would not both be named Mary, which means she is Mary’s sister‑in‑law.
• You did not address that this makes her sons Joseph’s nephews, which fits the kinship category of adelphos perfectly.
• You did not address the genealogical evidence showing why “cousins by marriage” is the correct kinship category.
• You did not address that Joseph’s nephews are not Jesus’s blood relatives, which is why the Gospels can call them “brothers” without implying they were Mary’s sons.
• You did not address the earliest Christian writers — Papias, Hegesippus, Clement, Eusebius, Jerome — who independently preserve the same identification.
• You did not address that these witnesses are geographically diverse, chronologically separated, and historically consistent.
• You did not address that James the Just, James the Less, James of Alphaeus, and “the Lord’s brother” are the same person — and not a younger biological son of Mary.
• You did not address that Judas (Thaddeus) is likewise identified as a son of Alphaeus, not Mary.
• You did not address that John 7:5 cannot refer to James and Judas, since both were believers, apostles, and authors of New Testament epistles.
• You did not address that the unbelieving “brothers” in John 7:5 must therefore be Joseph and Simon — the other sons of Mary of Clopas/Cleophas.

You did not address the Scriptural evidence about Joseph and Mary:​

• You did not address that Scripture never says Mary had marital intercourse.
• You did not address that Scripture never calls Mary a “bad wife.”
• You did not address that Scripture never says Mary “refused to submit sexually.”
• You did not address that Scripture never says Joseph “left Mary.”
• You did not address that Joseph remained married to Mary for at least twelve years (Luke 2:41-43).
• You did not address that Joseph is explicitly called a righteous man (Matthew 1:19).
• You did not address that Joseph protected Mary from shame rather than accusing Her (Matthew 1:19).
• You did not address that God sent an angel to tell Joseph not to divorce Mary, and Joseph obeyed immediately (Matthew 1:20).
• You did not address that Scripture never portrays Joseph as resentful, deprived, or mistreated.
• You did not address Mary’s stated intention in Luke 1:34.
• You did not address the 3‑step exercise I gave you, which directly contradicts your “bad wife” speculation.

You did not address the central question:​

Does Joseph look like a man who abandoned Mary because she “refused to submit sexually,” or does he look like a righteous man chosen by God to protect her unique vocation?

You didn’t answer that either.


Your conclusion (“it’s more probable Mary had kids with Joseph”) isn’t based on the evidence. It’s simply a preference — because the actual Scriptural and historical data point in a different direction.

If you want to continue the conversation, you’ll need to engage the evidence itself rather than repeating a conclusion without addressing the facts that contradict it.

 

[Taken]

Mary a Virgin “forever”?
No.

Not a mystery, God instructed human husbands and their human wives to multiply.

Mary a virgin before her marriage to Joseph?
Yes.

Mary a virgin AFTER her agreed and religious requirement to abstain from sexual relations fulfilled?
No.

Fact- Mary was Pregnant before wedded to Joseph.

Agreed - Abstain from a sexual relationship with Joseph during her first pregnancy.
Yes.

Religious - Abstain from sexual relations After a delivered birth of a son…
Yes.

Mary Wedded Virgin-
Yes.

9 months Abstence from sexual relations.
Yes.

Delivery Day of First born son
+
7 days Abstence
+
33 days Abstence
+
Day she takes to the Priest an Animal offering To be Burnt by the Priest for her Cleansing.

Abstence Requirement Fulfilled for FIRST born Son…

More … multiplying of sons and daughters via sexual relations, no longer prohibited,
Rather, IN Fact…established by God, for husbands and wives…TO multiply.

Not a mystery.
God intervened… in Mary’s “FIRST Born Son”…

AFTER The birth of her First born Son…
Mary, Joseph, their children , Have VERY LITTLE signifance IN Gods intent that the Focus of ManKIND SHOULD rest:
ON Gods Offerings
OF Gods…
Lord……...Jesus
Priest…….Jesus
Son…….…Jesus
Word……..Jesus
Maker…….Jesus
Power……..Christ
Wisdom …Christ
Seed………Christ

“Debating” over the meaning of “until”…
Is simply a silly, irrelevant Deflection.

Glory to God,
Taken