Brothers of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter TwinMommy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TwinMommy

Guest
I am reading the Catechism and was just reading about Mary being “ever Virgin”. In the protestant church I learned that Jesus had brothers, brothers from Mary and Joseph. From what I am gathering from the Catechism, Mary did not have any other children. If Mary had other children after Jesus, I would think that would make her being set apart as she was, not have the full meaning it should. She is the Mother of God so to me that would not make sense if she was the mother of men too. I could really use some help on this. I am just learning about Mary, only about a two weeks journey in, and I am in awe of her every time I learn something new. Really sadness me that I went so long without honoring her the was she deserves.
 
The Christian tradition has always been that Jesus was Mary’s only child. Today, with so many competing Christian sects seeking to differentiate themselves from the original Christian Church, some deny Mary’s perpetual virginity. However, there is nothing in the Bible or Christian tradition to support the idea of Jesus having various young siblings.

“Does the use of this Greek word for sibling indicate that Jesus had brothers?”
catholic.com/quickquestions/does-the-use-of-this-greek-word-for-sibling-indicate-that-jesus-had-brothers

“Who Are Jesus’ Mother and Brothers?”
catholic.com/blog/jimmy-akin/who-are-jesus-mother-and-brothers

“The Case for Mary’s Perpetual Virginity”
'catholic.com/magazine/articles/the-case-for-mary%E2%80%99s-perpetual-virginity
 
The original language of the New Testament does not have a separate word for Cousin. The same word functions for both cousin and brother. The problem stems from the translator, who uses the word brother to denote a close male relative.
Also, one must realize that St. Joseph was considerably older than Mary, and is thought to have had children from an earlier wife. Thus those who are referred to as Brothers of Christ, could very well have been, in reality, half brothers. This is further complicated by the fact that the Virgin Mary had a sister named Mary, who was the mother of a couple of the Apostles, thus making them first cousins of Christ, but also called his brothers in the New Testament.
 
Mary had no other sons except Jesus. The people they call “Jesus’ brothers” are probably the sons of Mary Heli and Mary Salome (the mother of James and John) who in tradition are held to be Mary’s half-sisters as Anne ostensibly remarried after St. Joachim’s death.
 
George_Stegmeir said:
Also, one must realize that St. Joseph was considerably older than Mary, and is thought to have had children from an earlier wife. Thus those who are referred to as Brothers of Christ, could very well have been, in reality, half brothers. This is further complicated by the fact that the Virgin Mary had a sister named Mary, who was the mother of a couple of the Apostles, thus making them first cousins of Christ, but also called his brothers in the New Testament.
Click to expand...
What are you poking at? St. Joseph had no wives before marrying Mary. They were both virgins at the time of marriage.
 
Yehuda_Dion said:
What are you poking at? St. Joseph had no wives before marrying Mary. They were both virgins at the time of marriage.
Click to expand...
There is an ancient tradition that St. Joseph was a widower when he became espoused to Mary. As for the virginity of St. Joseph,I defy you to find any passage in Scripture that states, or even implies, that St. Joseph was a virgin when he married Mary!
 
George_Stegmeir said:
There is an ancient tradition that St. Joseph was a widower when he became espoused to Mary. As for the virginity of St. Joseph,I defy you to find any passage in Scripture that states, or even implies, that St. Joseph was a virgin when he married Mary!
Click to expand...
You “defy” me? And who am I to even be “defied”? I don’t even need tradition to know that a rich, pious man such as St. Joachim wouldn’t give his precious daughter, the Mother of the Messiah, to a widower.
 
Yehuda_Dion said:
You “defy” me? And who am I to even be “defied”? I don’t even need tradition to know that a rich, pious man such as St. Joachim wouldn’t give his precious daughter, the Mother of the Messiah, to a widower.
Click to expand...
Did not set out to cause an argument. I have gotten some great resources to find out more. I didn’t know that Mary had no sin. As all these pieces come together my faith grows and that hasn’t happened in some time.
 
TwinMommy said:
I am reading the Catechism and was just reading about Mary being “ever Virgin”. In the protestant church I learned that Jesus had brothers, brothers from Mary and Joseph. From what I am gathering from the Catechism, Mary did not have any other children. If Mary had other children after Jesus, I would think that would make her being set apart as she was, not have the full meaning it should. She is the Mother of God so to me that would not make sense if she was the mother of men too. I could really use some help on this. I am just learning about Mary, only about a two weeks journey in, and I am in awe of her every time I learn something new. Really sadness me that I went so long without honoring her the was she deserves.
Click to expand...
Scripture, it seems, can be read as Jesus having real blood brothers (other sons of Mary), or close relatives, or half-brothers (sons of Joseph by a previous marriage).

What strikes me though is that from the cross Our Lord gave Mary into John’s care. That, to me, would seem to suggest no other sons to look after their mother.

Pious tradition is obviously that Jesus was Mary’s only son. It wouldn’t shake my faith, though, if something came to light to clearly show that Mary had other children - I don’t think that changes much significantly about either Jesus or Mary herself. I would have the same respect for Mary if she had gone on to to be the mother of others - my respect for her is her saying “yes” to God and then standing by our Lord for her whole life, even to the cross. I don’t see how having other children would detract from her example to us (but that itself is no reason to say she must have therefore had other children).
 
Consider this. On the cross, Jesus gave his mother over to the care of his apostle John, and she lived in his house from that hour onward. This is inconceivable, scandalous, if Mary had other children, especially other sons.

If, as Protestants often argue (without ANY evidence), none of the sons were believers on the day Christ died, or when he ascended, then to have Mary staying with John is even more impossible. From the viewpoint of the brothers in that case, their mother would be staying with an unrelated male who in addition was a leader of the very blasphemous cult that got their oldest brother executed! They would never let that stand, and would have removed her by force from John’s house. And yet we have the word of the gospel that she stayed with John from that hour on.
 
Here is a link to a good article about the matter.

In scripture, St. James the apostle is referred to as the “brother of the Lord.” And yet, scripture also shows that of the two James’s who were apostles, one was the son of Alphaeus, and one was the son of Zebedee. Neither was a natural brother of Jesus.
 
Mary was the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Together, Mary and the Holy Spirit made Jesus.

For Mary to then have had children by another spouse before the death of the first spouse would make her an adulturer, and it would make our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ the son of an adulterer. Such is not possible.

Jesus cannot be the divine Second Person of the Trinity and the product of adultery at the same time. The idea is absurd, and if it were so, would invalidate our entire faith and everything we know and believe about God.

-Tim-
 
Only Jesus is referred to as the “Son of Mary”. None of the other ‘brothers of the Lord’ ever have this title.
 
Yehuda_Dion said:
You “defy” me? And who am I to even be “defied”? I don’t even need tradition to know that a rich, pious man such as St. Joachim wouldn’t give his precious daughter, the Mother of the Messiah, to a widower.
Click to expand...
It’s really a circular argument if you think about it. After all, where do we get the idea that Mary’s parents were named Joachim and Anna? Pious tradition, of course.

Besides, the Protoevangelium of James (2nd century), our earliest literary source for all the above-mentioned traditions (yes, including the names of Mary’s parents) has Mary being entrusted by her parents to the Temple a la Samuel. When she turns twelve, the priests decide who to entrust her to (since shd might defile the sanctuary with her menstruation). Under the command of an angel, they gather all the widowers of the people to choose the perfect husband-guardian for Mary. Joseph was chosen because his staff blossomed and a dove flew over his, signs from God that he was to be Mary’s guardian. Joseph protests that he already has children and is worried that he might become a laughing-stock of the people, but the high priest convinces (or rather, scares :D) Joseph into accepting his role, citing the fate of Korah and Dathan when they rebelled against God.
 
Yehuda_Dion said:
You “defy” me? And who am I to even be “defied”? I don’t even need tradition to know that a rich, pious man such as St. Joachim wouldn’t give his precious daughter, the Mother of the Messiah, to a widower.
Click to expand...
It’s really a circular argument if you think about it. After all, where do we get the idea that Mary’s parents were named Joachim and Anna? Pious tradition, of course.

Besides, the Protoevangelium of James (2nd century), our earliest literary source for all the above-mentioned traditions (yes, including the names of Mary’s parents) has Mary being entrusted by her parents to the Temple a la Samuel. When she turns twelve, the priests decide who to entrust her to (since shd might defile the sanctuary with her menstruation). Under the command of an angel, they gather all the widowers of the people to choose the perfect husband-guardian for Mary. Joseph was chosen because his staff blossomed and a dove flew over his head, signs from God that he was to be Mary’s guardian. Joseph protests that he already has children and is worried that he might become a laughing-stock of the people, but the high priest convinces (or rather, scares :D) Joseph into accepting his role, citing the fate of Korah and Dathan when they rebelled against God.

To summarize, the East continues to hold to the opinion expressed in the Protoevangelium and some Fathers like Origen that the Desposynoi (the ‘brothers of the Lord’) were Joseph’s children by a former marriage. The West meanwhile had chosen the idea expressed by St. Jerome that Jesus’ ‘siblings’ are actually His cousins or other kinsmen.
 
JimG said:
Here is a link to a good article about the matter.

In scripture, St. James the apostle is referred to as the “brother of the Lord.” And yet, scripture also shows that of the two James’s who were apostles, one was the son of Alphaeus, and one was the son of Zebedee. Neither was a natural brother of Jesus.
Click to expand...
It’s common to conflate James of Alphaeus with James ‘brother’ of Jesus in the West, but there’s also the possibility (so in the East) that there are three distinct Jameses.
 
patrick457 said:
It’s really a circular argument if you think about it. After all, where do we get the idea that Mary’s parents were named Joachim and Anna? Pious tradition, of course.

Besides, the Protoevangelium of James (2nd century), our earliest literary source for all the above-mentioned traditions (yes, including the names of Mary’s parents) has Mary being entrusted by her parents to the Temple a la Samuel. When she turns twelve, the priests decide who to entrust her to (since shd might defile the sanctuary with her menstruation). Under the command of an angel, they gather all the widowers of the people to choose the perfect husband-guardian for Mary. Joseph was chosen because his staff blossomed and a dove flew over his head, signs from God that he was to be Mary’s guardian. Joseph protests that he already has children and is worried that he might become a laughing-stock of the people, but the high priest convinces (or rather, scares :D) Joseph into accepting his role, citing the fate of Korah and Dathan when they rebelled against God.

To summarize, the East continues to hold to the opinion expressed in the Protoevangelium and some Fathers like Origen that the Desposynoi (the ‘brothers of the Lord’) were Joseph’s children by a former marriage. The West meanwhile had chosen the idea expressed by St. Jerome that Jesus’ ‘siblings’ are actually His cousins or other kinsmen.
Click to expand...
No offense to you, friend, but that “Provoevangelium” is a load of b*ll. I have it on very good authority (the Revelations of Saint Bridget) that Mary gave birth to Jesus on her own (the infant Jesus just exited her womb without any struggle) WITHOUT the assistance of Salome.
 
It is most likely that the brothers you speak of were indeed the off-sspring of Joseph by a wife who had died. Then he became betrothed to Mary.

Your real question is why or how could Mary remain a virgin. Joseph could have been not capable or we can give him the respect due that perhaps he just didn’t want to after all, this woman he was told to marry in a dream by the angels carried the Son of God in her body.

The way i see it, if you put all the religious language aside, Mary had to maintain her virginity. That physical proof she carries with her is the physical evidence that she fulfilled prophecy. God didn’t let childbirth destroy it.

She was a virgin, is a virgin, and remains a virgin.
 
I believe there is more about Joseph in apocryphal writings. According to unreliable sources, he was a widower with 6 kids, one of whom was James. He was about 90 years old when he married the Virgin Mary. So Jesus may have had step-brothers, I guess.
 
DaddyGirl said:
The original text of the gospels were in Greek, and they name Jesus’ brother James (it mentions other siblings,too, but I don’t think by name).
Are you saying there is or was no word for “cousin” in Greek?

Also, I don’t think there is any mention at all in the bible that Joseph was much older than Mary. Where are you getting that fact from?
Click to expand...
Please read the reply of Yehuda Dion, who explains it. As for the greek, I am not talking of modern Greek, but Ancient Greek which is what was spoken at the time of Christ, and is the original language of the New Testament
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top