Were the brothers in Matthew 13:55 Mary's sons?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
If I wanted to give that impression I wouldn't have put an elipsis lol.
Incorrect. Acts 1 takes place after apostle Judas Iscariot's suicide and Jesus's ascension, the election of Judas's successor by the other eleven begins in Ac. 1:15, and ends with Matthias being chosen and added unto the eleven in verse 26, thus making twelve apostles again. Following the election of Matthias is this scene in the Book of Corinthians: "He (Jesus) appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve..." (1. Cor. 15:5).
Why do you think it's not possible that the apostle James in Gal. 1:19 was the same as either apostle James of Zebedee of the Twelve or James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, and Paul called him by their title "the Lord's brother" to distinguish him from the other? Especially since the apostles James and John of Zebedee of the Twelve were called by the title "the Sons of Thunder."
BeyondET
Well-Known Member
Why didn't just post my whole statement. It's because you had a motive not present my whole statement.
I didn't need to, and I put an ellipsis to show it wasn't all you said.
Incorrect. Acts 1 takes place after apostle Judas Iscariot's suicide and Jesus's ascension, the election of Judas's successor by the other eleven begins in Ac. 1:15, and ends with Matthias being chosen and added unto the eleven in verse 26, thus making twelve apostles again. Following the election of Matthias is this scene in the Book of Corinthians: "He (Jesus) appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve..." (1. Cor. 15:5).
Why do you think it's not possible that the apostle James in Gal. 1:19 was the same as either apostle James of Zebedee of the Twelve or James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, and Paul called him by their title "the Lord's brother" to distinguish him from the other? Especially since the apostles James and John of Zebedee of the Twelve were called by the title "the Sons of Thunder."
BeyondET
Well-Known Member
K.
Incorrect. Acts 1 takes place after apostle Judas Iscariot's suicide and Jesus's ascension, the election of Judas's successor by the other eleven begins in Ac. 1:15, and ends with Matthias being chosen and added unto the eleven in verse 26, thus making twelve apostles again. Following the election of Matthias is this scene in the Book of Corinthians: "He (Jesus) appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve..." (1. Cor. 15:5). So, Jesus did appear to the eleven, incuding Matthias, after they elected him.
Why do you think it's not possible that the apostle James in Gal. 1:19 was the same as either apostle James of Zebedee of the Twelve or James of Alphaeus of the Twelve, and Paul called him by their title "the Lord's brother" to distinguish him from the other? Especially since the apostles James and John of Zebedee of the Twelve were called by the title "the Sons of Thunder."
Last edited:
Rella ~ I am a woman
Well-Known Member
All I can say is poor Joseph.
If they continued to have separate bedrooms after Jesus was born, that could be why Joseph was never mentioned after Jesus was 12.
He just might have moved on.
If they continued to have separate bedrooms after Jesus was born, that could be why Joseph was never mentioned after Jesus was 12.
He just might have moved on.
I understand you don't accept that Joseph and Mary mutually agreed to be chaste in marriage, but please don't make jokes like that about a man God chose as Mary's spouse and Jesus's earthly father.
Now, Joseph wouldn't have thought "Poor me," nor did he move on. And, just because the books that make up the New Testament lack information about Joseph past a certain point, doesn't mean he was no longer in Jesus's life, because those books don't contain every detail about Jesus's life.
Additionally, we actually do have more information about Joseph, thanks to Jesus Himself. He showed Maria Valtorta scenes of His earthly life, including that of Joseph and Mary prior to His birth, which I've read. That's how I know Joseph and Mary both had chosen to take a vow of chastity for God, and they chose to continue in that vow even in marriage, and they truly loved each other. Joseph died not long before Jesus began His three year ministry. Jesus and Mary were there at his bedside reciting prayers for him in his final moments.
Last edited:
We born again and disciple by the Holy Bible, live by faith and not by sight. Faith comes from hearing and hearing the Word of GOD. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.
So, we believe in Sola Scriptural, where firsthand eyewitnesses account, a community of kinsmen to one another and neighbors of the same faith. Even to Jesus' chosen Apostles who are Israelite, they have all clearly testified about the family of Jesus.
Mary's calling was to conceive and give birth to the Messiah, and bring him up from child, as any parent would do. But Jesus growing in wisdom and stature was entirely by Himself and the Heavenly FATHER.
That's why Joseph and Mary had hard time understanding Jesus and His calling. After the virgin birth there was no added calling for Mary, therefore they continued as normal Jewish husband and wife.
So, as GOD ordained marriage, also ordained having children, and that's holy, apart from how the children is brought up. Therefore, why not Joseph and Mary go on to have sons and daughters, moreover bringing them up under the Law of Moses?
It's ordained by GOD and is holy to GOD, and clean, as HE already given record of it even from Genesis. Now, the irony is with the doctrine for teaching the commandments of men. That perverted intend, to keep Mary virgin still and divine, in order to use her to intercede and mediate.
This is demonic, even behind every idol there is a demon, and offering done to idols are done to demons. Beware and not be deceived for the spirit of anti-Christ and their dogmas have evolved until today.
Having disciple thoroughly in the Holy Bible a true church should be able to distinguish between the 'spirit of truth' and the 'spirit of error', as witnesses.
The Apostle testified then, even though the anti-Christ have not appeared, but the spirit of anti-Christ is already here. According to Apostle Peter, these people are ignorant and unstable who twist the testament of the Apostles and so do other Scripture, to their own destruction.
It's not surprising from then and now it is still the same and are with us. Jesus disciple us by saying, "Your worst enemy will be in your own household."
False. Thanks to Jesus Himself, He showed Maria Valtorta scenes of His earthly life, including that of Joseph and Mary prior to His birth, which she described and I've read. That's how I know Joseph and Mary both had chosen to take a vow of chastity for God, and they chose to continue in that vow even in marriage, and they truly loved each other. They even understood Jesus's mission on Earth and that He would die.
Rella ~ I am a woman
Well-Known Member
A little light reading that applies somewhat to the subject of
www.neverthirsty.org
It continues on...... (see link)
Were the brothers in Matthew 13:55 Mary's sons?
When did the belief in Mary's perpetual virginity start?
The Q&A "When did the belief in Mary's perpetual virginity start?" shares references for when and how people came to believe that Mary was a perpetual virigin.
www.neverthirsty.org
It continues on...... (see link)
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
No. They were either Joseph's sons from his previous marriage, or cousins. Mary had no other children. Here's an informative article on it: Was Mary a Perpetual Virgin?
Rella ~ I am a woman
Well-Known Member
Poor , poor Joseph. 12 years is a very long time.
I am certain I can match you article for article with your proof she stayed a virgin and mine saying she did not.....
But how do you counter the translation of the Peshetta?
For those who do not know... The Peshitta is a collection of Aramaic manuscripts of the Bible. Aramaic was the most common “shared language” among people of the Near East and Middle East for many centuries. This includes the years immediately before and after the earthly ministry of Jesus. For this reason, the Peshitta was an important early translation of the Bible, widely distributed and widely used.
And it is translated
25And he did not know her sexually until she delivered her firstborn son, and she called his name Yeshua.
Are you really going to try and justify that as stated this means he did not know her sexually
ever?
Matt. 1:25 doesn't indicate whether Joseph and Mary did or didn't have sexual intercourse past a certain point, which is the savior's birth. Consider the context of the preceding verses Matt. 1:20-24, where Matthew speaks about the ways in which the long-awaited messianic prophecy has come to fruition, such as Joseph accepting as his spouse the virgin who conceived the Savior of mankind by the Holy Spirit. In Matt. 1:25, he reiterates and reinforces that the Savior was truly begotten by the Holy Spirit, and born of the virgin Mary, by referring to a specific period where Joseph didn't have sexual intercourse with Mary that would dispel any belief the Savior was conceived by him and not the Holy Spirit, nor born of a virgin: pre-birth of the Savior.
How would Matthew implying Joseph had or didn't have sexual intercourse with Mary post-birth dispel any belief the Savior was conceived by him and not the Holy Spirit, nor born of a virgin, when that's the point of verse 1:25?
As to whether or not Joseph and Mary had sexual intercourse, they never did, because Jesus made that clear to Maria Valtorta. Joseph and Mary had chosen to chaste for God, and chose to continue in that vow even in marriage.
Yup, for these are Israelite firsthand eyewitnesses, including the Apostles' account. Rather than later arose twisted scholars and theologians, even catholic church assumption, just to preserve Mary's virginity and include her a deity.
The Apostles and the church who have GOD, the Lord, and the Holy Spirit, are clear in their Gospels. Rather than historically church imposters and counterfeits have come and said otherwise. (Matthew 15:9)
When Mary visited Elisabeth, Israelite firsthand eyewitnesses witness to Luke in his research, that Elizabeth was Mary's 'cousin', and not 'sister'.
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
You can't change the Gospel to mean what you want it to mean. You have to accept it for what the writer meant at the time, in his language and culture.
Even the founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther, believed that Mary had no other children:
{Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539)}
Here is a good article that explains why Mary had no other children: The Case for Mary's Perpetual Virginity
Nope, Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins as I've proven in my thread Were they Jesus's sibllings?
Similar threads
