The James's in Scripture.

[Bible Highlighter]

The scriptural verses and crossover agreement between all my sources, even if not every surname is listed by each individual source, collectively show "James" in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3, "James the brother of the Lord," "James the Bishop of Jerusalem," "James the Less," "James the Just," and the author of the Epistle of James, were the same person as Apostle James of Alphaeus (Cleophas/Clopas), the son of Joseph's brother [sibling], which confirms he was the brother, as in "kinsman," specifically a cousin, of Jesus.​

Why is it really important to know this? How does it affect my life as a believer if I don't get this one fact correct? Will not getting this information correct affect my loving God or my neighbor? Is knowing this truth edifying to the body of believers? If so... how? What is your endgame and point to all this? Why is it so important to push outside sources on such a matter? Is it to get us to move away from the Holy Bible as our sole final Word of authority? Those who are born again of water (i.e. the Scriptures) and know the power of God's Word and it's divine nature and know that men can lie about historical documents (that is not Scripture) will just chock up this extra biblical sources as what ifs and or possibilities. But if it is the Word of God... oh... now your talking because it is God breathed. Where is your proof that these sources are God breathed and or reliable? Even if they are reliable, what is to be gained by looking to outside sources to the Bible? Is it to shift our thinking to look to church traditions like the traditions of the Catholic church? Sorry. It's not gonna happen for those of us who have had a born again experience with God's Word.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 basically says ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine and instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect unto every good work.

So if I can be perfect unto every good work by Scripture alone, then what do I need for these extra biblical writings?

Answer: Absolutely nothing.

Catholicism is idolatry because it promotes praying and the kissing and bowing down before statues.
Catholicism promotes contacting the dead (like praying to Mary and the dead saints). This is Necromancy and it is condemned in the Bible.
Catholicism is about uplifting holy men in long robes as if they are holy when they really are not.
Catholicism teaches Mary is a co-redeemer when that is not what the Bible teaches. Oh, but your traditions and extra biblical documents that makes that possible. Is your document sources divine like the Bible? I don't think so.

In other words, we are all going to face our Maker some day and explain to Him why we believed the way we did. You don't have to convince me, but you have to convince the One who died for you. It's not Mary who died for you. It's Jesus Christ alone. He is the One you need alone.

We will be judged on whether we received the words of Jesus or not (and not church traditions).

John 12:48
“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

To put it to you another way, this verse says that if we do not receive Christ's words, those words will judge us on the last day.

For example: Jesus condemns the idea of praying in vain repetition (Matthew 6:7), and yet the Catholic church's Rosary is praying in vain repetition. Jesus says to call no man your father (Matthew 23:9), and yet the Catholic church violates this by calling men their father. So Catholics are not receiving all of the words of Jesus and those words they are not receiving by Him will judge them on the last day. I am sure Catholic apologetic sources have done backflip twists on these verses, but that would be changing what we all know is the obvious and plain reading of what is written in Scripture.

 

[Anima]

Matthew 12:46, "While Jesus was still speaking to the crowds, his mother and brothers came and stood outside, asking to speak to him." Do you think that Mary came with someone else's children???

Matthew 27:56, "Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee."

Matthew 28:10, "Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee. They will see me there.” Do you think that Jesus didn't know who His brothers were???

Luke 8:19, "Now Jesus’ mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not get near him because of the crowd."

John 7:3, "So Jesus’ brothers advised him, “Leave here and go to Judea so your disciples may see your miracles that you are performing.

John 20:17, "Jesus replied, “Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father. Go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Again, do you think that Jesus didn't know who His brothers were???

Acts 1:14, "All these continued together in prayer with one mind, together with the women, along with Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers."

Either the Bible -- the word of God! -- is lying or you are!!!

One meaning of the word "brother" is "kin," e.g., siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. So, reading Jesus had brothers and automatically concluding they were siblings, or any type of kin, is asinine. One needs more to go on, and I presented evidence that supports those believed to be Jesus's siblings were actually His cousins. You have yet to present counterevidence.

 

[Anima]

Why is it really important to know this? How does it affect my life as a believer if I don't get this one fact correct? Will not getting this information correct affect my loving God or my neighbor? Is knowing this truth edifying to the body of believers? If so... how? What is your endgame and point to all this? Why is it so important to push outside sources on such a matter? Is it to get us to move away from the Holy Bible as our sole final Word of authority? Those who are born again of water (i.e. the Scriptures) and know the power of God's Word and it's divine nature and know that men can lie about historical documents (that is not Scripture) will just chock up this extra biblical sources as what ifs and or possibilities. But if it is the Word of God... oh... now your talking because it is God breathed. Where is your proof that these sources are God breathed and or reliable? Even if they are reliable, what is to be gained by looking to outside sources to the Bible? Is it to shift our thinking to look to church traditions like the traditions of the Catholic church? Sorry. It's not gonna happen for those of us who have had a born again experience with God's Word.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 basically says ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine and instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect unto every good work.

So if I can be perfect unto every good work by Scripture alone, then what do I need for these extra biblical writings?

Answer: Absolutely nothing.

Catholicism is idolatry because it promotes praying and the kissing and bowing down before statues.
Catholicism promotes contacting the dead (like praying to Mary and the dead saints). This is Necromancy and it is condemned in the Bible.
Catholicism is about uplifting holy men in long robes as if they are holy when they really are not.
Catholicism teaches Mary is a co-redeemer when that is not what the Bible teaches. Oh, but your traditions and extra biblical documents that makes that possible. Is your document sources divine like the Bible? I don't think so.

In other words, we are all going to face our Maker some day and explain to Him why we believed the way we did. You don't have to convince me, but you have to convince the One who died for you. It's not Mary who died for you. It's Jesus Christ alone. He is the One you need alone.

We will be judged on whether we received the words of Jesus or not (and not church traditions).

John 12:48
“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

To put it to you another way, this verse says that if we do not receive Christ's words, those words will judge us on the last day.

For example: Jesus condemns the idea of praying in vain repetition (Matthew 6:7), and yet the Catholic church's Rosary is praying in vain repetition. Jesus says to call no man your father (Matthew 23:9), and yet the Catholic church violates this by calling men their father. So Catholics are not receiving all of the words of Jesus and those words they are not receiving by Him will judge them on the last day. I am sure Catholic apologetic sources have done backflip twists on these verses, but that would be changing what we all know is the obvious and plain reading of what is written in Scripture.

Accuracy is important. The teaching Jesus had siblings is heresy, and I have provided evidence to support that. You have yet to present counterevidence.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Accuracy is important. The teaching Jesus had siblings is heresy, and I have provided evidence to support that. You have yet to present counterevidence.

Right, this would be best addressed in my future thread on refuting Catholicism. Right now I am too busy working on other thread ideas that are quite lengthy and time consuming. But Lord willing I would like to do a thread on why I believe Catholicism is unbiblical and I would love to address this false line of thinking you have here.

In either case, we can agree to disagree in love.
May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you and your family (Despite my lack of love for the Catholic religion).
Again, I love the soul of the Catholic, I just don’t love their religion because it is false (based on my study of Scripture and history).

Peace and blessings be unto you in the name of the LORD Jesus Christ.

 

[Jim B]

One meaning of the word "brother" is "kin," e.g., siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. So, reading Jesus had brothers and automatically concluding they were siblings, or any type of kin, is asinine. One needs more to go on, and I presented evidence that supports those believed to be Jesus's siblings were actually His cousins. You have yet to present counterevidence.

Despite your lawyerly tone you are wrong. The Bible clearly says that Jesus had brothers and sisters; they were not cousins.

Matthew 12:46, "While he was still speaking to the crowds, his mother and his brothers were standing outside, wanting to speak to him."

Matthew 13:55, "Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?

John 2:12, "After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother, his brothers, and his disciples, and they remained there a few days., and his disciples, and they remained there a few days.

James 1:18-19, "Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days, 19 but I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother."

... and other places.

And your comment about being asinine only shows your character, not the truth. You can deny what Scripture clearly says, but that doesn't change the truth.

JESUS HAD BROTHERS!!!

 

[Jim B]

Further thoughts...

When Jesus' mother and brothers came to Him, He didn't say "these are my cousins". He never denied having brothers.

More... John 7:3-5, "So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea so that your disciples also may see the works you are doing, for no one who wants to be widely known acts in secret. If you do these things, show yourself to the world.” (For not even his brothers believed in him.) This last sentence would have no impact if it said "cousins".

Claiming that Jesus didn't have brothers is just a rationalization to bolster the false idea that His mother, Mary, was a perpetual virgin. Clearly, she wasn't. She had intercourse and gave birth to Jesus' brothers and sisters. That is the reality.

 

[Jim B]

One meaning of the word "brother" is "kin," e.g., siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. So, reading Jesus had brothers and automatically concluding they were siblings, or any type of kin, is asinine. One needs more to go on, and I presented evidence that supports those believed to be Jesus's siblings were actually His cousins. You have yet to present counterevidence.

Reading that Jesus had brothers and automatically concluding they were not His siblings is insane. I believe what the Bible clearly states in several places. I have shown you where, and I won't repeat myself for your sake.

Show me anywhere in Scripture that proves otherwise.

Is your aunt really your brother? You must have a very, very strange family!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Further thoughts...

When Jesus' mother and brothers came to Him, He didn't say "these are my cousins". He never denied having brothers.

More... John 7:3-5, "So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea so that your disciples also may see the works you are doing, for no one who wants to be widely known acts in secret. If you do these things, show yourself to the world.” (For not even his brothers believed in him.) This last sentence would have no impact if it said "cousins".

Claiming that Jesus didn't have brothers is just a rationalization to bolster the false idea that His mother, Mary, was a perpetual virgin. Clearly, she wasn't. She had intercourse and gave birth to Jesus' brothers and sisters. That is the reality.

Can you show me where the BIBLE makes this claim?
Show me where it says that Mary gave birth to ANYBODY other than Jesus.

Chapter and Verse please . . .

 

[Anima]

Reading that Jesus had brothers and automatically concluding they were not His siblings is insane.

I didn't read Jesus had brothers and automatically conclude they weren't His siblings, or any other type of brotherly relationship, because the word "brother" has multiple meanings, and that word itself in a verse cannot indicate which type applies.

I believe what the Bible clearly states in several places. I have shown you where, and I won't repeat myself for your sake.

Scripture doesn't state Jesus had siblings, rather states He had brothers, and the word "brother" has multiple meanings. Yes, one of its meanings is "kin," which has been used to refer to siblings, but also cousins, aunts, uncles, etc, in Scripture as well.

Furthermore, again, it cannot be indicated from the word "brothers" itself which type of brotherly relationship is being referred to in any given verse. Therefore, one needs more to go on in order to learn the type of relationship that applies in it.

You merely cited certain verses with the word "brothers," assume it's referring to siblings, and thus state as fact Jesus had siblings, without giving evidence that shows why that relationship applies in those verses. An assumption is not evidence.

I have not assumed, nor stated my position as fact, without evidence. I've given evidence that shows why Joseph, Simon, James, and Jude were Jesus's brothers, as in cousins, not as in siblings.