Church of Christ teaches Jesus had siblings?

[Randy_Carson]

I gave you the citations…look them up

My apologies if I missed them. I don’t think there is much need for me to go back and try to figure out how you have misused them.

So, in conclusion, here’s what you’re asking us to accept:

Although the Protoevangelium was written at a very early date, it did not accurately reflect that belief of the Catholic Church at the time it was penned. Instead, it contained a serious of false ideas and theological novelties that were invented out of whole cloth. Despite this fact, no contemporaneous record of any outrage against the work exists. Later, however, “Jerome, Aquinas and a Pope or two” rejected the Protoevangelium providing further evidence that the document contains nothing of value. Then, in a turnaround of amazing proportions, two hundred years of Jerome’s death, the Catholic Church (erroneously) declared the Perpetual Virginity of Mary to be a dogma - just as the Protoevangelium recorded centuries earlier.

Does that accurately sum up the argument you want us to accept?

 

[Randy_Carson]

there you have it…YOUR fallible conclusion (that an infallible Church must exist…which is actually an assumption likely determined by YOUR preferences) based on YOUR fallible assessment of history (which doesn’t jive with the assessment of scholars as shown in the work entitled “Mary in the New Testament”)

Heh…I wasn’t looking to become Catholic when God reached out to me.

if a credible source taught the PVof M then I would easily accept it…as has been pointed out on this thread, a number of 1st generation Protestants accepted it…acceptance of the PVofM doesn’t require me to embrace Catholicism at all…I really don’t have much of a dog in this fight

Credible? Oh, you mean Protestant.

Like Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Bullinger, Wesley?

I’m out.

 

[cheezey]

I have read, don’t remember where right now, the suggestions that since Joseph was much older, perhaps he already had children before he became a “stepfather.” Or that after his death, Jesus and His Mother took in unfortunate orphans…

 

[Randy_Carson]

to again point out what someone has already told you:

all that those posts establish is that Jesus’s uterine brothers are not included within the 12 disciples. Said another way, those posts show that the disciples within the twelve who have the same first names as Jesus’s brethern, have different parents than Jesus. This is no surprise.

A look at the three synoptic gospels would have disclosed that the brothers of Jesus are mentioned on a couple of occasions. On the one occasion (Matt 12, Mark 3 and Luke 8) the 12 are mentioned(Mark 3:13-19),…Jesus entered a house with his disciples(Mark 3:20)… after which Jesus’s mother and brothers arrive and are outside the house(Mark 3:31-35). As such, the disciples named Simon(2), James(2) and Judas(2) were inside with Jesus whilst Jesus’s brothers named James, Joseph, Simon and Judas are outside with Mary and her daughters.

For the benefit of Catholics following this thread:

Mary was outside with some of Jesus’ cousins who came to take him home because they were concerned about him and the family reputation.

The Aramaic language contained no word for cousins, so the author was prone to use the words “brothers” or “sisters” for these kinsfolk.

 

[HelenRose]

Where were His brothers when their Mother was standing at the foot of the cross? Remember the culture of the time. Can you imagine any Jewish man then or now permitting his Mother to be at her son’s crucifixion with only a few women and a man who was not a relative. It would not have happened.

She was with the apostle John when Christ entrusted her to his care. Would that have happen if she had other sons? I think not.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Where were His brothers when their Mother was standing at the foot of the cross? Remember the culture of the time. Can you imagine any Jewish man then or now permitting his Mother to be at her son’s crucifixion with only a few women and a man who was not a relative. It would not have happened.

She was with the apostle John when Christ entrusted her to his care. Would that have happen if she had other sons? I think not.

+1

Another solid argument that adds to the evidence that Jesus was an only child.

 

[cheezey]

A look at the three synoptic gospels would have disclosed that the brothers of Jesus are mentioned on a couple of occasions. On the one occasion (Matt 12, Mark 3 and Luke 8) the 12 are mentioned(Mark 3:13-19),…Jesus entered a house with his disciples(Mark 3:20)… after which Jesus’s mother and brothers arrive and are outside the house(Mark 3:31-35). As such, the disciples named Simon(2), James(2) and Judas(2) were inside with Jesus whilst Jesus’s brothers named James, Joseph, Simon and Judas are outside with Mary and her daughters.

So what of 1 Corinthians 9:5: Do we not have the right to bring a believing wife with us when we travel as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Peter?

That is if I am understanding you correctly…

 

[adrift]

For the benefit of Catholics following this thread:

Mary was outside with some of Jesus’ cousins who came to take him home because they were concerned about him and the family reputation.

The Aramaic language contained no word for cousins, so the author was prone to use the words “brothers” or “sisters” for these kinsfolk.

This exchange shows that these cousins were older than Jesus. Since Jesus was first born, they could not be His brothers.

 

[cheezey]

This exchange shows that these cousins were guess…older than Jesus. Since Jesus was first born, they could not be His brothers.

which goes back to someone’s suggestion that I read somewhere, sorry don’t remember, that Joseph, being much older than Mary, may have had children prior. Just noting; I wouldn’t hazard anything further…

 

[adrift]

Here is what Jerome had to say about Tertullian (In On Illustrious Men):

Tertullian the presbyter, now regarded as chief of the Latin writers after Victor and Apollonius, was from the city of Carthage in the province of Africa, and was the son of a proconsul or Centurion, a man of keen and vigorous character, he flourished chiefly in the reign of the emperor Severus and Antoninus Caracalla and wrote many volumes which we pass by because they are well known to most. I myself have seen a certain Paul an old man of Concordia, a town of Italy, who, while he himself was a very young man had been secretary to the blessed Cyprian who was already advanced in age. He said that he himself had seen how Cyprian was accustomed never to pass a day without reading Tertullian, and that he frequently said to him, Give me the master, meaning by this, Tertullian. He was presbyter of the church until middle life, afterwards driven by the envy and abuse of the clergy of the Roman church, he lapsed to the doctrine of Montanus, and mentions the new prophecy in many of his books.

Why did you leave out this

He composed, moreover, directly against the church, volumes: On modesty, On persecution, On fasts, On monogamy, six books On ecstasy, and a seventh which he wrote Against Apollonius. He is said to have lived to a decrepit old age, and to have composed many small works, which are not extant.

 

[adrift]

Originally Posted by adrift
This exchange shows that these cousins were guess…older than Jesus. Since Jesus was first born, they could not be His brothers.

This is an inaccurate quote. You added something to what I said without making clear you were adding. :tsktsk:

which goes back to someone’s suggestion that I read somewhere, sorry don’t remember, that Joseph, being much older than Mary, may have had children prior. Just noting; I wouldn’t hazard anything further…

 

[cheezey]

This is an inaccurate quote. You added something to what I said without making clear you were adding. :tsktsk:

say what??? and why is there no scratching head smiley!!!

 

[cheezey]

In the end, the Church’s official teaching is the only infallible guide, and at the Lateran Council in 649, Pope Martin I proclaimed solemnly: Mary is virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus.

So, 600 years, about, after the fact. I need to study this more…

 

[CaptFun]

Many good things on this thread.

An easy way to explain this to a literalist is:

Did the Holy Spirit ever overshadow Mary AGAIN? (No).

So He had no brothers or sisters.

Half-brothers and Half-sisters? Maybe not even that. Though such could be older siblings of Joseph (through a previous marriage in which he was later a widower) – in which case Mary and her virginity are not involved. Yet even that is not clarified.

Often the argument is made in opposition to the Church teaching on Mary’s perpetual virginity. And so, half-brothers and sisters from Joseph and a previous marriage would be unsatisfactory for expanding the deduction “he had brothers and sisters … so Mary must not be a virgin then.”

The imprecise language confutes the argument. A full brother would be divine with the same two parents … and no one argues that.

Beyond literalism the word “brother” takes on meanings further away than even “close relative” at times. In English it was common in the black community to call everyone ethnically connected as “brother” or “sister” for example. And a “brother” Galilean or a “brother” Judean or Levite or Nazarene might be meant too. But more likely cousin or
perhaps people who lived beneath the same roof as Jesus after Joseph died.

I think I’ll stop the speculating and possibility tally here.

Though the “cousins” or relatives argument seems plausible in that one of the two Jameses who were apostles was called “brother of the Lord” by Paul. One James was the son of Zebedee,and Solome who asked Jesus to let her sons James and John sit on his right hand and his left when He established His kingdom. The other James was called the son of Alpheus or James the less whose mother’s name was Mary but thought by some to be the one of the other women at the cross when Jesus was crucified.

Also … the Church was THERE in its apostles, and not much is made of any “brothers or sisters” of Jesus regarding any new Davidic dynasty according to the flesh … which probably would have come up as people embraced Jesus as the Messiah.

Mary’s being a perpetual virgin really bothers some people. And Joseph being a chaste protector (to some) taxes their imagination past its limits. So far has sex been elevated to
idol status.

I heard an interesting reflection on Mary being like (and greater to) the Holy Ark of the Covenant recently. And John’s visions of the Tabernacle in Heaven being opened in
Revelation 11 and a vision of the woman clothed in the sun with stars about her head and the moon at her feet.

No one would put profane things (even an Israealite battle flag) into the Ark of the Covenant … it was too holy. Neither would Christians bury another person in the Holy Sepulchre after Jesus rose. Mary’s body was considered as utterly holy too. Even more so.

Her proximity to these other relatives in this Gospel passage is about all it proves.

The controversy tends to take one’s eyes off Jesus and onto … the controversy.
But the controversy serves as “a reason” to not be one with Catholics in bringing
Christianity together as Christ prayed for.

The Catholic Church must do its part to try to unify Christianity too. Teaching things
that aren’t true cannot be part of that though. So don’t look for the Catholic Church
to teach any “much less than perpetual virginity” of Mary theories as doctrine.

 

[adrift]

say what??? and why is there no scratching head smiley!!!

It was a scolding for an inaccurate quote. Why would there be a smiley? A frown would be more accurate. Are you unaware that you quoted me than added to my quote guess…

 

[jrtrent]

This exchange shows that these cousins were older than Jesus. Since Jesus was first born, they could not be His brothers.

How does this exchange indicate the relative ages of Jesus and his brothers?

 

[jrtrent]

Though the “cousins” or relatives argument seems plausible in that one of the two Jameses who were apostles was called “brother of the Lord” by Paul. One James was the son of Zebedee,and Solome who asked Jesus to let her sons James and John sit on his right hand and his left when He established His kingdom. The other James was called the son of Alpheus or James the less whose mother’s name was Mary but thought by some to be the one of the other women at the cross when Jesus was crucified.

This point has been brought up a couple of times in this thread, but what is the source for saying that there were only two apostles named James? I’ve mentioned this source previously, but Herbert Lockyer in his book All the Apostles of the Bible lists the following apostles who were in addition to the original twelve:

II. The Other Apostles - The Wider Circle
Andronicus - The Apostle of Note
Apolos - The Apostle Who was Eloquent
Barnabas - The Apostle Most Comfort
Epaphroditus - The Apostle Who Risked His All
James, the Lord’s Brother - The Apostle Who Preached Practical Morality
Junias or Junia - The Apostle Whom Paul Praised
Matthias - The Apostle Chosen by Lot
Paul - The Apostle Extraordinary
Silas - The Apostle Who Played Second Fiddle
Timothy - The Apostle Who Was An Understudy
Two Unnamed Apostles
The Lord Jesus Christ - The Apostle of Apostles

 

[Randy_Carson]

So, 600 years, about, after the fact. I need to study this more…

Yes. Is that a problem for you?

The Canon of Scripture itself was not settled for 400 years. And there are many doctrines of the Church that have never been settled by a formal infallible statement. Stuff is addressed when the need arises or when it seems appropriate.

So, the pronouncement of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity simply formalized a long-held tradition of the Church. It wasn’t suddenly invented and announced to the shock and dismay of the faithful.

 

[Candescent]

it seems one has to be from the Middle East to understand this

yes there is no specific word for cousin in aramaic, as well as Syriac and even Arabic.

to this day, let alone 2,000 years ago, we constantly refer to cousins as brothers or sisters.

It is even applied to non-cousins.

it is a very common bonding word that not only includes cousins but friends.

As do some East Indians. To confuse things even more, every good friend, or respected personage, of the parents is called Aunt or Uncle. Americans often ask my kids ‘Just how many Uncles and Aunts do you have??’

 

[Randy_Carson]

How does this exchange indicate the relative ages of Jesus and his brothers?

Because in that culture, younger siblings would not presume to take authority over the eldest. This is lost in our modern society, but it was a big deal then and even now in Asian cultures.