MARK 6:3 DID JESUS HAVE BROTHERS AND SISTERS ?

[BreadOfLife]

Amazing how little some read their Bible, and then speak as if with authority...

You guys haven't read this?

Mark 6:2-4
2 And when the sabbath day was come, He began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing Him were astonished, saying, "From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?"

3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

4 But Jesus said unto them, "A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house."
KJV

What is truly amazing is how so many amateurs in the 21st century think they understand what the original languages and cultures were talking about and read into Scripture what is NOT there. YOURS is a perfect example of this . . .

Let's start with the names of the "Adelphoi" you mentioned - James and Joses (Joseph) - and the women standing near the foot of the cross with Mary, Mother of Jesus:

The “other Mary” at the foot of the cross is described as being the mother of James and Joses. She is also described as being Mary’s (mother of Jesus) “sister” (adelphe) (John 19:25). She cannot be Mary's uterine sister because she is also named "Mary", so she must be some other relation - making her children some distant relation of Jesus.

James is elsewhere described as the son of "Alphaeus" (Matt. 10:3), which would mean this other Mary, whoever she was, was the wife of both Clopas and Alphaeus. However, Alphaeus and Clopas are the same person, since the Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek either as "Alphaeus" or as "Clopas".

Matt. 27:56 says, "…among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".

Mark 15:40 states, "There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome".

Finally, John 19:25 states, "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene".

When you compare the different accounts of the crucifixion, they clearly show the mother of James and Joseph to be the wife of Clopas (also called, Alphaeus) – not Mary, the Mother of Jesus. ANY attempt to connect these people as uterine brothers of Jesus are squashed by the Bible.

Finally - The Aramaic word, “ach”, encompasses the meanings for brother of same parents, half-brother (same father), relative, kinship, same tribe, and even a fellow countryman. The SAME is true for the Greek work for "Brother", "Adelphos".

- In Gen. 14:14, Lot is called Abraham’s "brother", even though he was the son of Haran, Abraham’s brother, making him Abraham's NEPHEW (Gen. 11:26–28).

- In Gen. 29:15, Jacob is referred to as the "brother" of his UNCLE Laban.

- Brothers Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar’s daughters married their "brethren”, the sons of Kish - who were actually their COUSINS (1 Chr. 23:21–22).

The case against Jesus having uterine siblings and Mary having had "other children" is FAR more overwhelming than ANY evidence to the contrary.

PS - I challenge ALL of you to find ONE SINGLE Early Church writing about Mary having "other children".
Just ONE . . .

 

[marks]

The Christians of the early 2nd century did not believe that. Why do you, 2000 years later?

It looks to me like the Apostles who wrote of Him believed that. Why should I not accept how they wrote?

And who didn't believe it then?

With the certain exception of a few writings, we don't actually know what they believed. And those most immediate to the time speak of them as family.

Yes, we look at context. But it's that context that tells me they are His actual immediate family. The context is immediate family.

You claim you've refuted this context. Just the same, you've not replied to my objection. And when we read the gospels, there doesn't seem to be any problem with understanding who was related to whom. With one notable objection. It seems all the rules go out the window when it comes to Jesus.

Why would we treat the way Jesus is written about in relation to His family in some different way, suddenly wanting to parse this and that, differently from the other people in the Bible?

Unless, that is, there were some reason to do so.

Is there some essential reason why Jesus cannot have had immediate family brothers and sisters?

Much love!

Much love!

 

[Doug]

this is exactly what I'm saying. and get this, Mary nor Joseph was his biological mother or father. Mary was only the birth mother, meaning she was only the surrogate mother to that body of FLESH.

Joseph did not have sex with Mary until she brought forth her firstborn son:. Matthew 1:24 "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.”

PICJAG.

Hello
Ok ....so please look at these verses in light of your assertion:

Mark 3:31 There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

So his brethren was not his sibling brothers..... his mother was not his mother but a believer.....

3:32 And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

Now this was not his biological mother, nor his biological brethren according to you.

So why would the multitude call them that? And why call them that before Jesus told the multitude that it was those who do the will of God that is his brother, sister, or mother? How was it they somehow knew what he would say before he said it? How was it that they called them his brothers and his mother in verse 32 before he said this to them?

3:33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren
3:34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

Jesus didn't tell them what to call them until the next verse.

3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

 

[tzcho2]

Purports to give the Catholic view is a good way to put it. Not sure why people quote non-Catholic websites when giving an example of what Catholics believe.

@tzcho2 should correct that post and link to this

Re the Catholic Encyclopedia:
Talk about making up cr$p....it never ceases to amaze how much effort is put in to these made up doctrines. Either these Popes or RC clergy were deceiving the masses for $$$ or they were being deceived by demonic spirits that were enthralling them.
Where is all of this Mary dogma in the Bible scripture??---No where to be found. The RC excuses for their dogma have been revamped somewhat because of the blow back they have received, trying to make it more palatable for 2019 consumption.

 

[tzcho2]

Sorry, but no where does the bible teach the Mary dogma that the RCC teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Where in the bible does it say Mary kept her virginity?
It is a sin against God, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and the RCC commits a sin against the real mother of the Lord Jesus, Mary using her person to invent false dogma elevating the RC Mary to some level of holy divine being & placing her as a Co-mediator etc ....

CCC 966 "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."508 The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son's Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.509
. . . she is our Mother in the order of grace

CCC967 By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus)510 of the Church.

CCC968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace."511

969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512

 

[BreadOfLife]

Sorry, but no where does the bible teach the Mary dogma that the RCC teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Where in the bible does it say Mary kept her virginity?
It is a sin against God, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and the RCC commits a sin against the real mother of the Lord Jesus, Mary using her person to invent false dogma elevating the RC Mary to some level of holy divine being & placing her as a Co-mediator etc ....

CCC 966 "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."508 The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son's Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.509
. . . she is our Mother in the order of grace

CCC967 By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus)510 of the Church.

CCC968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace."511

969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512

As I laid out in post #21 - the case for Mary's Perpetual Virginity is OVERWHELMING.
In fact - the Scriptural, historical and linguistic is so overwhelming that ANY evidence that she had "other" children" is pretty much nonexistent.

Post #21 shows that there is not ONE SHRED of Scriptural evidence of:
- Mary's having other children.
- Jesus having uterine siblings.

So, instead of your usual impotent anti-Catholic rants - try to present a case to the contrary . . .

 

[tzcho2]

As I laid out in post #21 - the case for Mary's Perpetual Virginity is OVERWHELMING.
In fact - the Scriptural, historical and linguistic is so overwhelming that ANY evidence that she had "other" children" is pretty much nonexistent.

Post #21 shows that there is not ONE SHRED of Scriptural evidence of:
- Mary's having other children.
- Jesus having uterine siblings.

So, instead of your usual impotent anti-Catholic rants - try to present a case to the contrary . . .

Yes , I'm sure my posts are annoying to you. I don't need a priest to tell me what is in the Bible, far from that.
The Catholic Church Catechism exposes the false teachings nicely, thanks.

 

[101G]

GINOLJC, to all.

first thanks for the reply, second, our assertion still stand.

So why would the multitude call them that?

for they assume that they was his brothers and sisters, but the scriptures are clear. Luke 3:23 "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was [the son] of Heli".

see, they didn't know, but the scriptures are clear on this. and two, Matthew 1:24 "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: Matthew 1:25 "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS".

so clearly he was not the carpenter son, listen, Matthew 13:55 "Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?.

so clearly he's not the carpenter's son?, and not are they his biological sisters or brothers. for Mary was only the BIRTH Mother of the flesh that Jesus came in. for the Lord Jesus is without natural Mother without natural Father. Matthew 1:20 "But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost".

so the Holy Ghost, if you want to use the term "Father" in it's natural use, is the conceiver of that child/flesh".

understand something. only flesh is conceived and spirits are given, (see Isaiah 9:6). the only thing a woman can produce is flesh, not spirit. for the spirit comes from God, which returns to God when death occures. so biologically speaking no connection. only by "BIRTH" ... RIGHT, not by blood or flesh do he have the right to the throne, only by being made of a Woman ... "Born" or "Birthed" he have the right to the throne. another thing, he came out of the tribe of Juda, not "come from it". big difference.

PICJAG.

 

[tzcho2]

The scripture is clear, Jesus had siblings, several brothers & sisters who were born from the marriage of Joseph & Mary.

 

[Marymog]

Hello
I said that the use depends on common sense and context and not tradition.

Thank you Doug. I agree, you did say that.

It is true that we must put the passages that talk about Jesus brothers/sisters in context. The entire context of the NT Scripture shows that there is NO definitive statement that Mary had other children. Not once does the NT mention the “sons of Mary” or “a son of Mary,” but only the son of Mary. Scripture does allow for Jesus "brothers" or "brethren" (depending on the translation) to be cousins by the use of the word adelphos, however, when one takes the entire context of the NT Scripture and tries to make them blood brothers it just isn't there.

For you to suggest that the person who wrote The Protoevangelium of James 1,900 years ago (closest to the life of Christ) didn't use common sense and that 500 years ago the men of the Reformation did use common sense is not logical.

The big three Reformation leaders, Calvin, Zwingili and Luther all believed in Mary's perpetual virginity sooooo you accept the "common sense" of the men who were the Reformers of the Reformers. They started a new traditional teaching of Scripture based on their interpretation of Scripture and they rejected the teachings of The Reformers. I accept the "common sense" of the men who lived closest to the life of Christ who had the ringing of the Apostles teaching still in their ears.


Mary

 

[Marymog]

Is there some essential reason why Jesus cannot have had immediate family brothers and sisters?

Much love!

Much love!

hi,

Yes, there is an essential reason why Jesus DID NOT have immediate family brothers and sisters. Because Scripture doesn't support it.

First: Scripture does not say that these "brothers and sisters" of Jesus were children of Mary.
Second: The word for brother (or sister), adelphos (adelpha) in Greek, denotes a brother or sister, or near kinsman.
Third: Luke 2:41-51 describes Mary and Joseph taking Jesus to the temple at the age of twelve soooo if there were up to five or more siblings
why is there no hint of them at all in this account?
Fourth: Never, ever, anywhere does Scripture refer to the “sons of Mary” or “a son of Mary,” but only the son of Mary.
Fifth: In Scripture Mary is ONLY referred to as a Virgin.
Sixth: In John 19:26 Jesus gave his Mother to the care of John even though by law the next eldest sibling would have that responsibility.
Seventh: Post #16 shows how Scripture places these "brothers" as cousins which is in line with the word "adelphos".

The other essential reason is because if Scripture does not support it and one teaches opposite of Scripture they are a false teacher.

Mary

 

[tzcho2]

Mark 3: 31-35 " 31 Then His mother and His brothers arrived, and standing outside they sent word to Him and called Him.32 A crowd was sitting around Him, and they said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are outside looking for You.” .”

The context of the verse is explicit, it is not vague, no misunderstanding, nothing out of context, it's glaringly obvious Jesus had siblings from mother Mary & her husband Joseph. The scripture reads -- "Hey Jesus ! LOOK and SEE!! Your mother and your brothers are here and they want to talk to YOU!!

No it doesn't say ," Your neighbors", not "Your cousins" , not Your relatives" , not "Some strangers" but Your mother and your brothers are outside Looking for YOU.

 

[Enoch111]

TRUE, as for believers, but Not biological brothers and sisters.

That contradicts Scripture. Which is one of your favorite sports.

 

[Marymog]

Sorry, but no where does the bible teach the Mary dogma that the RCC teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Where in the bible does it say Mary kept her virginity?
It is a sin against God, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and the RCC commits a sin against the real mother of the Lord Jesus, Mary using her person to invent false dogma elevating the RC Mary to some level of holy divine being & placing her as a Co-mediator etc ....

CCC 966 "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."508 The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son's Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.509
. . . she is our Mother in the order of grace

CCC967 By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus)510 of the Church.

CCC968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace."511

969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512

Hi,

Where in the bible does it say she lost her virginity?

Curious Mary

 

[Enoch111]

First: Scripture does not say that these "brothers and sisters" of Jesus were children of Mary.

Yes Scripture does say Mary had other children. So we have another naysayer. But the RCC never believed that Scripture was supreme.

 

[tzcho2]

Hi,

Where in the bible does it say she lost her virginity?

Curious Mary

WHY on earth would the Bible talk about Jesus mother having SEX??? The bible mentions Jesus had siblings in several scriptures.
And, Guess what? The bible is not about His mother.

 

[Marymog]

PS - I challenge ALL of you to find ONE SINGLE Early Church writing about Mary having "other children".
Just ONE . . .

I found one.....Franz Pieper wrote about it

Havin' fun....Mary

 

[Marymog]

Yes Scripture does say Mary had other children.

What Scripture verse says that the "brothers and sisters" of Jesus were children of Mary?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

WHY on earth would the Bible talk about Jesus mother having SEX??? The bible mentions Jesus had siblings in several scriptures.
And, Guess what? The bible is not about His mother.

It doesn't talk about her having sex.....virgins don't/didn't have sex.....that has been my point all along.

Mary

 

[tzcho2]

Yes Scripture does say Mary had other children. So we have another naysayer. But the RCC never believed that Scripture was supreme.

Ya, that is true, clearly illustrated in the rc writings that made up myths about mary.

What Scripture verse says that the "brothers and sisters" of Jesus were children of Mary?

Mary

Does your forum name begin with the letter "m" ??? I mean no where have YOU stated that so.... it's just as possible that it starts with a "Z" !! Because That is the type of logic you use.
and we ain't falling for it.