Were they Jesus's siblings?

[EclipseEventSigns]

This is a really silly discussion. Bible study 101. The simplest explanation is correct unless there is evidence in the text otherwise. Both passages are talking about the "son of Mary". Then it refers to "brothers", "sisters" "his own home". Simplest explanation is that the words are referring to actual related siblings in the household of Mary and Joseph. There are no hidden secrets here.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

It's not stated in Scripture that Jesus had siblings, but rather "brothers." The words "brother" and "sister" have multiple meanings throughout Scripture, e.g., fellow-countryman, disciple/follower, one of the same faith, and "kinsman," e.g., sibling, cousin, aunt, uncle, etc. It can't be indicated from the words "brother" or "sister" themselves which type of relationship is being referred to in any given scriptural verse. Therefore, more information is required to determine the type of relationship that applies to it. In the OP, I've provided evidence that confirms Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's brothers, and shows that the type of brothers all four men were to Jesus were kin, specifically cousins. This was accomplished primarily by identifying James.

As I stated. Basic reading comprehension in context. There is no secret "multiple meanings".

 

[Ghada]

The words "brother" and "sister" have multiple meanings throughout Scripture, e.g., fellow-countryman, disciple/follower, one of the same faith, and "kinsman," e.g., sibling, cousin, aunt, uncle, etc. It can't be indicated from the words "brother" or "sister" themselves which type of relationship is being referred to in any given scriptural verse. Therefore, more information is required to determine the type of relationship that applies to it. Do you have evidence that shows siblings were the type of brothers Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 were to Jesus?

Already shown the difference between His physical family, and them He calls mother, sister, and brother in the familhy of God.

Once again, one purposed error always leads to something even more foolish. You're teaching says Mary was not His mother, in order to say they are not sisters and brothers by Mary and Joseph.

For reasons explained, the word "until" in Matt. 1:25 isn't evidence that Joseph and Mary had or didn't have intercourse or that they had or didn't have children after Jesus's birth.

Little children know that being forbidden to do something they want to do, until a certain point, means waiting until afterward to do it.

Such as being forbidden to go out and play, until their homework is done.

This is why we ought continue coming to Jesus and His words as little innocent and sensible children. We should never 'grow up' into adults with pseudo scholarship that craftily tries to dismiss the words of the Bible, for the soul purpose of teaching one's own agenda and tradition.

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Not only are foolish questions used to lead to strife in the churches, so does changing the simply word meanings, such as what does 'until' really mean.

He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

This is what you are doing, and that's perfectly fine with me. I only show how that some Christian teaching is not the Bible. And in this case being warned how you go about it.

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

A leading question followed by changing word meanings, equals direct contradiction of God's words.

Until Jesus was born, Joseph and Mary did not come together as husband and wife, and later give birth to brothers and sisters of Jesus. So simple that any normal innocent child can easily understand it.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

The words "brother" and "sister" have multiple meanings, e.g., fellow-countryman, disciple/follower, one of the same faith, and "kinsman," e.g., sibling, cousin, aunt, uncle, etc. Pull out a dictionary and see for youself. It can't be indicated from the words "brother" or "sister" themselves which type of relationship is being referred to in any given scriptural verse. Therefore, more information is required to determine the type of relationship that applies to it. In the OP, I've provided evidence that confirms Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's brothers, and shows that the type of brothers all four men were to Jesus were kin, specifically His cousins. This was accomplished primarily by identifying James. What evidence do you have that shows Jesus's brothers Joseph, Simon, James, Judas (Jude/Thaddeus), and unnamed sisters in Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 were His siblings?

You can keep stating the same thing over and over. It doesn't make it right. And your view is not correct according to Scripture.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

In the OP, I've provided evidence that confirms Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's brothers, and shows that the type of brothers all four men were to Jesus were kin, specifically cousins. This was accomplished primarily by identifying James. You haven't provided anything to support your belief yet. Do you have evidence that shows Jesus's brothers Joseph, Simon, James, Judas (Jude/Thaddeus), and unnamed sisters in Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 were His siblings?

LOL. Support my belief? Reading comprehension - in context.

 

[dev553344]

Reader, do you believe Jesus's brothers Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were His siblings?

If so, consider the following:

(i) It's not stated in Scripture that Jesus had siblings, but rather "brothers."
...​

Mary was not a perpetual virgin as she had children with Joseph. God would not have forbid them that after using her to carry his son Jesus. Whether or not Jesus had brothers and sisters according to his DNA is another topic. As the bible only states that Mary was found with child from the Holy Ghost. Was that child entirely conceived from the Holy Ghost, or was Mary's eggs used in the process? It's unclear and leads to only speculation which isn't wise to do. Never the less, Jesus did have brothers and sisters as the bible spells out, but they may have been brothers and sisters of the mother that carried Jesus. So that counts the same.

 

[Sigma]

LOL. Support my belief? Reading comprehension - in context.

The words "brother" and "sister" have multiple definitions, e.g., "fellow-countryman," "disciple/follower," "one of the same faith," and "kinsman," etc. The context of Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 does show the meaning "kinsman," e.g., sibling, cousin, nephew, uncle, etc., applies to Jesus's brothers Joseph, Simon, James, Judas (Jude/Thaddeus), and unnamed sisters. However, information needed to determine the type of kinship between Jesus and His kinsmen is lacking in those same verses and others.

In the opening post, I've provided evidence that confirms Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's brothers, as in kinsmen, and shows that the type of kinship between them and Jesus was that of cousins, not siblings as you believe. This was accomplished primarily by identifying James.

 

[Rockerduck]

You didn't even know the words "brother" and "sister" have multiple meanings until I told you 5 min ago, so how good can your reading comprehension be?

Again, the words "brother" and "sister" have multiple meanings, e.g., fellow-countryman, disciple/follower, one of the same faith, and "kinsman," e.g., sibling, cousin, aunt, uncle, etc. It can't be indicated from the words "brother" or "sister" themselves which type of relationship is being referred to in any given scriptural verse. You need to provide evidence that shows the type of brothers Joseph, Simon, James, Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55-56/Mk. 6:3-4 were siblings. In the OP, I've provided evidence that confirms Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's brothers, and shows that the type of brothers all four men were to Jesus were kin, specifically His cousins. This was accomplished primarily by identifying James.

You sound brainwashed and you have no thought of your own for critical thinking. I pray your mind is made open by Jesus Christ.

 

[Windmillcharge]

Where and how does the context show which individuals were Jesus's siblings?

Read the passages, they tell us that Jesus had brothers a d sisters.
To get them to read that he didn't you have to start with the idea that he didn't and with the false idea that Mary didn't have other children.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Why is it so important that she remained a married woman who was denied motherhood to other children? Why would God deny Joseph his marital rights and the ability to have his own children?

There was NO valid reason for Mary to have remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus....unless there is an unscriptural reason to insist on it? Do you have one?

I can address those and your other inquiries, but to do so here would be deviating from the thread topic, and I believe there's a rule against that on this forum.

Since this is about Mary and Joseph and their having other children, how is this a violation of forum rules? Scripture is scripture, so unless you can provide solid biblical evidence for these two having restrained themselves from a normal and honorable marriage, with a view to having a large family (as was the norm in Jewish society) your vain attempts as proving otherwise will only work on other indoctrinated Catholics who have little education in Bible knowledge, having relied on a book written by Catholics, not God.

It is scripture that is “inspired of God” and to be used to dispel false teachings, (2 Tim 3:16-17) so scripture alone will answer you empty claims. No one else will accept what your Catechism teaches.

 

[Aunty Jane]

This thread topic is about the belief that Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's siblings, not the perpetual virginity of Mary. Therefore, to discuss the latter would be off-topic and thus a violation against forum rules. If you want to discuss Mary's perpetual virginity with me, create a thread about it or wait until I do.

It has everything to do with the topic because only the RCC teaches that Jesus had no siblings. Those mentioned are the family of Joseph "the carpenter" whose wife was Mary and their four other sons and at least two sisters who were present on that occasion. (Luke 3:23; Luke 4:22; John 6:42)

Perhaps John 2:12 may clarify the situation...?
"After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days."
His "brethren" and his disciples are spoken about separately.....so if it states that these "brothers" did not yet put faith in him, how does this scripture make sense? (John 7:2-5)

The only reason why this is even being discussed is because your church adopted mother goddess worship and disguised it as "Christianity" when it never was. You have repeated the same nonsense over and over in the vain hope that someone will believe you. I can tell you now, only indoctrinated Catholics will.....you will be preaching to the choir.

 

[face2face]

The RCC believes Mary was allegedly given a free life (unable to sin) though born of two sinful parents, while Jesus was allegedly born of two sinless parents, but was capable of sin.

RCC dogma is a right mess and pity those innocent folk who have drunken of her wine.

F2F

 

[face2face]

I've only provided evidence in the OP that confirms Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3 were Jesus's brothers, and shows that the type of brothers all four men were to Jesus were kin, specifically His cousins, not siblings as you believe.

In my previous post, I addressed your claim that Scripture "plainly states" in Matt. 1:25 that Joseph and Mary didn't have intercourse and more children until after Mary gave birth to Jesus, but it doesn't; rather, it states they didn't have intercourse "until she brought forth her firstborn son." The word "until" has multiple meanings, not only the one you're inferring by your insertion of the word "after." For the sake of argument, say the word "until" was used to mean Joseph and Mary had intercourse after Jesus's birth, that in itself wouldn't mean Mary bore more children because, for example, having vaginal intercourse doesn't lead to procreation for some men and women. Your interpretation that the gospel writer, after writing about the long-anticipated messianic prophecy coming to fruition, basically threw in the tidbit, "After the birth of the Savior, Joseph had intercourse with Mary and 6+ more kids," at the end is quite random. It also isn't in line with the context of Matt. 1:20-25:

"But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled that which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: Behold, a virgin shall be with child and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. And Joseph, rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took to him his wife. And he knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn son, and he called his name Jesus."

The context of Matt. 1:25 is Joseph's accepting as his spouse the virgin who conceived the Savior of mankind by the Holy Spirit. The gospel writer concludes the passage by stating that Joseph didn't have intercourse with Mary until Jesus's birth, to dispel any belief that he was the father. Therefore, the meaning of the word "until" that applies in "And he knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn son" is "up to the time that," because it only informs us what Joseph didn't do up until a certain point, not what occurred after that point. For reasons explained, the word "until" in Matt. 1:25 isn't evidence that Joseph and Mary had or didn't have intercourse or that they had or didn't have children after Jesus's birth. The importance of Matt. 1:20-25 is that it primarily pertains to the messianic prophecy, not the sexual relationship, or lack thereof, between Joseph and Mary.

How's Jesus being called "firstborn Son" evidence that shows He had siblings?

You understand why you need to take this approach to the Word of God, its not like you have a choice if you hold to RCC dogma. You need to come out to widen your gaze.
F2F

 

[face2face]

This is why you must believe Mary was not a sinner and that she had no other children. It's called Idolatry and its most offensive in the eyes of the Father.

 

[face2face]

Re-posting the same response makes you look a little desperate.

Out of interest, can you see the issue here?

After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples. There they stayed for a few days. John 12:2

It would later become obvious. His natural family and spiritual family would become a little uncomfortable being together wouldn't it?

It's obvious Mary took her children back to Nazareth and Jesus went on without them...they would meet up again and what an incident that was!

Mary would make many mistakes on her journey to discipleship...had to let go of her claim to motherhood!

F2F

 

[face2face]

So you plan to copy and paste your post over and over until you annoy Jane? Like that is going to work lol. It's also against the rules to do this!

And you offer nothing above that speaks to the truth in her reply.

After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples. There they stayed for a few days. John 12:2

Notice the relationships?

 

[face2face]

I just can't help myself

 

[face2face]

(i) It's not stated in Scripture that Jesus had siblings, but rather "brothers."
​

Hmmm

Adelphoi is the Greek word can mean “brothers” or “siblings.”

 

[face2face]

Do you have evidence that shows Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters?

I'm interested to know the answer to this question.

If you were given undeniable proof that Jesus had brothers would you leave the RCC?

And what if you were shown other truths which contradicted RCC dogma?

Would you leave?

Where would you go?

F2F

 

[BlessedPeace]

The anointed Apostles of Jesus never referred to Paul as Apostle.
Instead they called him brother.

If Jesus had siblings how then would we know that? Given the terms brother and sister relate to fellow believers as well as are terms used to identify family.