"Brothers" of the Lord vs. "cousin" Elizabeth

[jofa]

I’ve heard the arguments for why “brothers of the Lord” does not prove Jesus had siblings, but that the word “brother/sister” encompassed cousins, nieces, nephews, etc. too. Why, then, does the Bible call Elizabeth Mary’s “cousin”, not sister? Why didn’t translators use the word “cousin” or “relation” for “brothers of the Lord”?
Thanks!
God Bless,
jofa

 

[Scottgun]

From a Q&A here: catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0107qq.asp

**

Q: In Luke 1:36, Elizabeth is called Mary’s cousin, yet the New Testament fails to distinguish Jesus’ brethren as such. Why would the Bible call Elizabeth a cousin and mean a literal cousin, yet the Catholic position holds that when the Bible calls someone a sibling of Jesus, they really mean cousin?

A: “The Catholic position” does not hold that when the Bible refers to the brethren of Christ that they are his cousins. The Church holds only that Mary did not have any other children besides Christ. Who the brethren were is debatable-they might have been cousins (this is the most common view today), they might have been stepbrothers via Joseph (this was the common view before St. Jerome), or they might have been adoptive children.

The premise of the argument-that the New Testament says Elizabeth is Mary’s cousin-is wrong. The translation being quoted does not accurately reflect the Greek.

The New Testament does not say that Elizabeth is Mary’s cousin, the Greek word for which is *anepsios. *The word used in Luke 1:36 to describe Elizabeth is suggenes (pronounced su-gen-ace), which simply means kinswoman or relative. It tells us nothing about her exact relation within the extended family. All we can tell from the word suggenes is that Elizabeth was some kind of female relative of Mary’s. But whether she was an aunt, a cousin, or a more distant relation cannot be determined from the word.

In a few places the New Testament does use *anepsios, *but this does little to argue that the brethren of the Lord were sons of Mary. Arguments from word choice (i.e., “Why this word instead of this other word?”) are rarely decisive. New Testament word choice is especially difficult to build arguments from since it involves a mixture of Jewish and non-Jewish word preferences
**

 

[jewelz]

What about these other passages about Jesus’ own brothers?

How do you explain these verses?

John 2:12

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

John 7

3 Jesus’ **brothers **said to him, “You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your **disciples **may see the miracles you do. 4 No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” 5 For even **his own brothers **did not believe in him.

Acts 1

14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

Galatians 1

19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.

 

[scylla]

Acts 1

14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

The Bible explains them if you read the whole New Testament together.

Here is an example…
Acts 1

*"14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with **his brothers

15 During those days Peter stood up in the midst of the brothers (there was a group of about one hundred and twenty persons in the one place). He said,"**

Did Mary have over a hundred kids? No, brothers is used in the same way you are my brother or sister in Christ.

Now coming from a point of view 2000 years later there are differing opinions on this based upon ones faith tradition, up until a few hundred years ago all Christians believed mostly the same thing. So the best way to check what they really believed is to read the commentary of early Christians to see how they understood the Bible.

St Jerome wrote a commentary on this very subject which is available online, from the Christian Classics Library
(not a Catholic site so you don’t have to worry about it being Catholic biased)
Here

God Bless
Scylla*

 

[po18guy]

What about these other passages about Jesus’ own brothers?

How do you explain these verses?

John 2:12

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

John 7

3 Jesus’ **brothers **said to him, “You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your **disciples **may see the miracles you do. 4 No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” 5 For even **his own brothers **did not believe in him.

Acts 1

14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.

Galatians 1

19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.

Well, to take the Book at its word, It doesn’t say that they are Marys’ children. So, they aren’t.

A little perspective here. Scripture was not written in 21st century English. It has been translated into our admittedly limited language. In much of the world even today, those of your home town or region are called “brothers”, even though they are not blood relatives. Thus, those of Galilee whom Christ chose were called “brothers” of the Lord. Those who followed from other areas and regions were known as “disciples”. Technically, all were disciples, but those from His native area were known as His brothers.

Now, Nazareth at that time was a tiny area with an estimated 300 residents. It is easy to see that they were considered brothers and sisters, just as those of the other small communities were.

In our age, and with the split in the church, we have completely confused this, judging biblical times by our own standards.

Christ’s peace.

 

[jofa]

Thanks for the help y’all - That’s been bugging me for ages!
God Bless!
jofa:thumbsup:

 

[jewelz]

does it matter whether Jesus had siblings by Mary?

does it matter whether Mary had other children?

as long as we know who Jesus is,
that He is sent from Heaven above,
that He is the Son of God the Father,
that He is our Mediator, our Redeemer,
our Lord, our Saviour, our Healer, our High Priest,
even though physically He was born of a virgin birth by Mary,
it should not affect us, right?

In John 7:5, what bothers me is that, they call as brothers those who were believers, correct? And how is it that even His own brothers (not disciples, not brothers who were believers) did not believe him?

 

[jofa]

jewelz-
I would say it matters inasmuch as it affects the beauty and holiness of Mary, resulting in some christians thinking of her as merely an incubator. If that’s all she is then she is due no honor. But if God wants us to honor her (that’s the real question - God’s will) then that would get in the way of understanding that. Now, I’m guessing you don’t call Mary blessed (all generations shall call me blessed), nor think about the importance of her role in salvation history much. Fair enough. But this issue definitely affects peoples view of her. The ark of the Old Covenant could not be touched. Catholics see Mary as the ark of the New Covenant, Jesus. Therefore, she could not be “touched” by Joseph. See what I mean? (even though you disagree).
God Bless,
jofa

 

[Fidelis]

Great teachers of the Church from at least the fourth century spoke of Mary as having remained a virgin throughout her life:

Athanasius (Alexandria, 293 - 373)
Epiphanius (Palestine, 315? - 403)
Jerome (Stridon, present day Slovenia, 345? - 419)
Augustine (Numidia, now Algeria, 354 - 430)
Cyril (Alexandria, 376 - 444)
and others.

Martin Luther, true to Catholic tradition, wrote on the Virginity of Mary:

It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a virgin. … Christ, we believe, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact. (Weimer’s The Works of Luther, English translation by Pelikan, Concordia, St. Louis, v.11, pp. 319-320; v. 6. p. 510.)

On the perpetual virginity of Mary, Zwingli wrote,

I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin. (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424.)

In another place Zwingli professed

I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary …; Christ … was born of a most undefiled Virgin. (Stakemeier, E. in De Mariologia et Oecumenismo, Balic, K., ed., Rome, 1962, p. 456.)

“There have been certain folk who wished to suggest from this passage [Matthew 1:22-25], that the virgin Mary had other children than the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; but what folly this is! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened afterwards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph’s obedience.” ** – John Calvin, Protestant Reformer**

 

[po18guy]

Great teachers of the Church from at least the fourth century spoke of Mary as having remained a virgin throughout her life:

Athanasius (Alexandria, 293 - 373)
Epiphanius (Palestine, 315? - 403)
Jerome (Stridon, present day Slovenia, 345? - 419)
Augustine (Numidia, now Algeria, 354 - 430)
Cyril (Alexandria, 376 - 444)
and others.

Martin Luther, true to Catholic tradition, wrote on the Virginity of Mary:On the perpetual virginity of Mary, Zwingli wrote,

In another place Zwingli professed
“There have been certain folk who wished to suggest from this passage [Matthew 1:22-25], that the virgin Mary had other children than the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; but what folly this is! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened afterwards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph’s obedience.” ** – John Calvin, Protestant Reformer**

Amen! So, what has happened to opinions of Mary since then? There has appeared a strong assault against her who has enmity toward the evil one! If many sinful women among us have remained virgin all their lives, how much more likely for her who bore the Son of God? The evil one chips away at purity, his only virtues being those of fortitude and extreme patience.

Christ’s peace be with you.

 

[thistle]

does it matter whether Jesus had siblings by Mary?
does it matter whether Mary had other children?

as long as we know who Jesus is,
that He is sent from Heaven above,
that He is the Son of God the Father,
that He is our Mediator, our Redeemer,
our Lord, our Saviour, our Healer, our High Priest,
even though physically He was born of a virgin birth by Mary,
it should not affect us, right?

In John 7:5, what bothers me is that, they call as brothers those who were believers, correct? And how is it that even His own brothers (not disciples, not brothers who were believers) did not believe him?

Of course it matters. If Mary had other children it would be easier to cast doubt on the virgin birth of Jesus!

 

[Nan_S]

Here’s a little bit of trivia about Jesus’ human family that I recently discovered.

Two of the Early Church Fathers, Hegesippius and Eusebius, record additional details about James the Just, leader of the church in Jerusalem. It is this same James who Paul wrote of:

Galatians 1:18-19 - Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother.

Now, the term “Brother” is quite pointedly used by Paul when referring to James. This particular James, according to Josephus, was stoned to death by the Jews in 62 AD.

Here’s the interesting part: Hegesippius and Eusebius both recorded that James, the Brother of the Lord, was in his EIGHTIES when he died in 62 AD.

You do the math.

According the the best scholarship available, Jesus was born between 6 and 4 BC. In order for James to have reached his eighties by 62 AD, he had to have been born some 15 years BEFORE Jesus. Therefore, since Jesus was Mary’s first-born, she could not possibly have been the mother of James the Just.

Do you remember the old tradition that said Joseph was a widower with children from a prior marriage? It all fits.

 

[MarcoPolo]

What about these other passages about Jesus’ own brothers?

Scripture does not say he had “literal physical” brothers.

It is apparent if you compare Mt. 13:55 with Mark 6:3, Mark 15:40 and John 19:25, you will see that James and Joseph are the sons of Mary the wife of Clopas. Despite that, they are still called Jesus’ “brothers” in Mat. 13:55. They are not his fraternal brothers. http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/4.gif

Not even Luther, Zwingli, or Calvin taught that Jesus had siblings.

It is important to understand this about Jesus’ mother, because it teaches us about Him. Mary’s perpetual virginity is part of* Divine Revelation*, which is in its essence, Jesus Christ Himself as the essence of Truth. To reject this truth is to reject Jesus.