Could Jesus have had actual brothers and sisters?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bmaj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This attack on Mary always seems to overlook three things:
On “attacking” Mary:

First, many (and I hope most) Protestants have no desire to attack Mary, but to legitimately question the basis for the doctrines surrounding her. I am not offended by those who ask questions about the divinity of Christ, virgin birth, etc., even though I believe those are foundational doctrines of our faith. However, we who desire to spread the Gospel of Christ must be willing to anwer questions about our faith. I would expect the same of your beliefs regarding Mary.

Second, regarding your statement,
“What on earth could an unknown and unwritten about (except Isaiah 7:14) Jewish teenage girl have accomplished in her short life to be visited by the Archangel Gabriel, who addressed her even at that point as “full of grace” and “you have found favor with God”, if it was not grace from her conception by God’s will?”

Are you implying that the virgin birth was more about Mary’s worth/merit than about God’s passionate desire to send His Son to redeem fallen humanity? I don’t doubt that Mary was chosen for her humble and virtuous heart, but some of the doctrines flowing out of the virgin birth seem to misplace emphasis, thereby blurring the real focus of the virgin birth: Jesus Christ as the gift of our loving Father for the sake of the world. Also, I do not see any foundation to say that her womb was “holier than the Ark of the Covenant”.

Third, my goal would not be to prove that “Mary was nothing special”, but rather that some of the doctrines surrounding her are unbiblical and unsubstantiated.
 
“When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.” Matthew 1:24-25 (emphasis mine). Words have meanings. The meaning of “until” necessarily includes the fact that he knew her sexually after the birth of the Bless Son. When Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek etc. say brothers and sisters it usually means literal brothers and sisters unless there is a good reason within the context to doubt it. That her virginity was necessary up until the birth and likely weaning is accepted universally. But, why is it necessary for you to think of her as an eternal virgin? It is special pleading to deny the plain meaning of these scriptures. Special pleading is understandable when faith necessitates it. Why is this reading necessitated by your faith?

You spoke of James not being referred to as Son of David or seen as a direct threat to Agrippa. Since thousands were of the lineage of David, being of the line is no threat to anyone other than in the fact that Agrippa was Idumean. Son of David was a term specific to messianic figures of which James is not. If Jesus were the only Davidic descendant Herod would not have indiscrimately killed every baby of Bethlehem, He would have said, go find the child of Joseph for he is the only Son of David. Every child in Bethlehem was a descendant of David.
 
I cannot interact with someone who so consistently demonstrates such a distinct and peculiar aversion to history.
What you really mean is history that is different than what you have been told. If you had any history to refute what I said then you would be glad to list it—but you do not. You probably know what I say is true but don’t want to admit it even to yourself. You have suppositions and conjecture—no history!

C’mon—level with us. If you can prove what you say, then do so—otherwise stop criticizing those who can prove what they say.
 
What you really mean is history that is different than what you have been told. If you had any history to refute what I said then you would be glad to list it—but you do not. You probably know what I say is true but don’t want to admit it even to yourself. You have suppositions and conjecture—no history!

C’mon—level with us. If you can prove what you say, then do so—otherwise stop criticizing those who can prove what they say.
My brother, this thread is related to whether or not Jesus had blood relatives, thus implying that there are people walking this earth who have a genetic tie to Christ. That is a shocking claim. The burden of proof is upon YOU. Bring it.
 
On “attacking” Mary:

First, many (and I hope most) Protestants have no desire to attack Mary, but to legitimately question the basis for the doctrines surrounding her. I am not offended by those who ask questions about the divinity of Christ, virgin birth, etc., even though I believe those are foundational doctrines of our faith. However, we who desire to spread the Gospel of Christ must be willing to anwer questions about our faith. I would expect the same of your beliefs regarding Mary.
However, it is the manner in which they come that is tiring to Catholics. They arrive as accusations, rather than as questions. There is almost a mania to “prove” from scripture that Christ had blood brothers and sisters - that Mary was just a nobody who happened to have a womb. This almost implies that we have a random God who just makes things up as He goes. You surely don’s believe that - yet we get it from non-Catholics here.

You do understand that the CC views Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant. Good. Would not God choose a special mother for His only Son? Was she not created especially for this purpose? God sent the Archangel Gabriel to her specifically. That reveals part of His Divine plan. He is not a random God.
Second, regarding your statement,
“What on earth could an unknown and unwritten about (except Isaiah 7:14) Jewish teenage girl have accomplished in her short life to be visited by the Archangel Gabriel, who addressed her even at that point as “full of grace” and “you have found favor with God”, if it was not grace from her conception by God’s will?”
Are you implying that the virgin birth was more about Mary’s worth/merit than about God’s passionate desire to send His Son to redeem fallen humanity?
No! It is specifically BECAUSE of God’s desire to redeem mankind that He created and prepared a suitable mother for our Lord. Mary’s eternal purpose was and is obedience to God and to carry Christ into this world. She is not worshipped, and she remains a creation, just as you and I. Her purpose ever after Christ’s birth and childhood, was to point others to Him. She is our model of human, rather than divine (Christ) humility.
I don’t doubt that Mary was chosen for her humble and virtuous heart,
Rather, she was conceived of and created specifically for God’s own purpose. We look at creation history as man does. We must try to imagine it from God’s view.
But some of the doctrines flowing out of the virgin birth seem to misplace emphasis, thereby blurring the real focus of the virgin birth: Jesus Christ as the gift of our loving Father for the sake of the world.
Rather than to blur it, she brings it into sharper focus. Her entire purpose is Christ, and she tells us that even today. She is horrified, as any truly humble person is, if she is worshipped.
Also, I do not see any foundation to say that her womb was “holier than the Ark of the Covenant”.
Consider: the Ark was man made. It contained created, non-living matter which was evidence of a covenant between God and man - a covenant that was destined to be replaced by a new and eternal covenant. How much more valuable is a living, breathing, God-created Ark, than one made by man’s hands? The Ark perished, but Mary’s soul is eternal.

Please understand that Christ is the source and summit of our lives. God could easily have created Christ’s human body from a stone, as John Baptist told the Pharisees - or from nothing. But, the Lord chose to prepare a special mother, a special womb, in which to bring His Son to mankind. A mother whose heart was so humble that she was not afraid at the arrival of the Angel Gabriel; a mother who said “Let it be done to me according to thy word”, even though an unmarried pregnancy would have subjected her to death by stoning. A mother who was with Christ for His entire life. A mother at whose words Christ performed His first recorded miracle. A mother who followed Him long after that age at which he would have gone off on His own. A woman who was with Him through His agony and death, without fleeing like the Apostles did. A mother who stood at the foot of the cross, to fulfill what the prophet Simeon told her at the presentation in the temple.
Third, my goal would not be to prove that “Mary was nothing special”, but rather that some of the doctrines surrounding her are unbiblical and unsubstantiated.
Absolutely some of the doctrines are “unbiblical”! Just as Christ intended. The bible was not the basis of the Christian faith - Christ was and is. The bible came along later, the words of God, but the work of man. It is our helper, not our foundation.

The Luther-made doctrine of sola scriptura, which is 100% non-biblical, is the source of your trouble. Eastern Orthodox Christians are not Catholic, yet share the same foundation of their faith. They have no such confusion over Mary, as they do not rely upon the bible alone, but rather upon the teaching authority of their Church, their sacred traditions, as well as the bible.

Since your faith community does not have the Apostle’s sacred traditions, the doctrines on Mary appear unsubstantiated to you. They, in fact, go back to the very early pre-bible Church. The doctrines are not all in the bible, as the bible was never intended to be the sole basis of faith. It is a great part of it, but by no means complete.
 
My brother, this thread is related to whether or not Jesus had blood relatives, thus implying that there are people walking this earth who have a genetic tie to Christ. That is a shocking claim. The burden of proof is upon YOU. Bring it.
This answer doesn’t surprise me. You have no evidence at all for your beliefs. As I have stated before, suppositions with a lot of “could have’s”,maybes, probablies, etc.

It is not my faith that is making the claims of Mary. You are the one that is making statements with no support for them. Can’t you list something that may help to prove your case? At least I have the scriptures and your early church fathers made the claim that if it was not supported by scripture, then it could not believe. Do you denounce them as well?

I hope you are not saying that I am making “accusations” brother, and we are brothers in Christ if you are a Christian, because I am only responding to questions with scripture because no one on your side has given anything to support your beliefs. You seem to be a good bloke but I would appreciate it more if you could give us something for support. Couldn’t you at least show what some of your church fathers from the 1st and 2nd century had to say? I can certainly list plenty of writings by the early fathers that say that if a dogma or doctrine can’t be found in scripture, then it is not true.

And contrary to your belief that you are being attacked falsely, I am only trying to learn more and the best way to do that is with a good discussion. When we get to the point that we can’t discuss, then we aren’t really very sincere are we?

If you don’t get an answer from me when you reply, please wait. I am waiting on the rains to stop in order to leave for our beach flat for a week or so. My laptop is down and I don’t have a computer there but will be glad to continue with you when I get back. Maybe 10 days or so.

Cheers and may God bless.
 
Re: Jesus had siblings? Once you know the parents of the “brethren”, then you know they cannot be His Siblings.

(To save reposting the entire thread, I am attempting to take parts out of it which support what some of us are trying to teach you. There is so much more to the thread “Jesus Had Siblings”, but these are just a few samples.)

What we have attempted to do, on this thread, was respond to the original post as to whether “Jesus had siblings?”.

To answer the question, we have to show whether He did, or did not. Many of us have posted sources as to why those given as “brethren” are actually not direct siblings. That, and how it would have been impossible, given the perpetual virginity of Mary and Joseph (in any case, Joseph’s virginity is not Church Dogma, but is certainly represented in these posts as to the position of Chuch Fathers and Tradition, esp. Western Church versus Eastern Orthodox, and Saint Jerome). It is so that you can clearly see that in numerous posts, both Scriptural and historical, that those four brothers whose names are questioned in Matthew are actually the first cousins of Jesus, while yet brothers to each other; and two other brothers are His second cousins, by a sister of the four brothers. This, and the other incomplete descriptions given elsewhere of the relationships.

I have always been a little tickled with the questions in Matthew, … “Are not ‘so-and-so’ His brothers?” Isn’t He the Carpenter’s son?" They did not understand that Jesus was not really Joseph’s son. And, given the interpretation of “brethren”, lacking language for “cousins”, isn’t it just a stretch for anyone to take as “gospel” that persons asking the question, “aren’t they the brothers” are seeking clarification as to whether indeed these four were actually brothers to Jesus? So, maybe they really didn’t know that these four were not Jesus’s actual brothers. Did they understand that the four were brothers to each other, and a different parent? And clearly, we just don’t know, they might be referring to His “followers”. It is, after all, a question. We don’t know the full context of the questions. Nor is it a definitive statement that they ARE IN FACT His brothers.

Another obvious position, regarding those questioning the “brothers” of Jesus, which indicate the crowd’s lack of understanding of The Holy Family: Clearly, all through the upbringing of Jesus, those nosy neighbors were “allowed” to believe that Jesus was the son of Joseph, the carpenter. Why? Had they even tried to reveal that Joseph was his “foster” father, the Son of Mary alone, in fact, the Son of God, Jesus would have been murdered, and those who perpetrated the heresy, Joseph and Mary, would have also. So, if they wanted to live in this little town of Nazareth in safety, the truth would have to be revealed in its own time, and it never happened in Joseph’s time; in fact, not until after Joseph’s death.

Please see my next post …
 
Continued from Previous Post …

To Jesus’s first and second cousins, growing up, it was also likely kept mum, for the same reasons. You can imagine it might have been whispered with Joseph’s brother, Saint Cleophas, and his wife, Mary of Cleophas, in secrecy; perhaps with others of Joseph’s four other brothers, we don’t know. The adults had to be pretty fearful of what would happen, and would want to protect their families. They were a pretty tight group, as we discuss on the “Siblings” thread. It wasn’t until John and James, Jesus’s second cousins, became disciples of Saint John the Baptist (Jesus’s second cousin), and word got out during His baptism at the Jordan, as to the fact that He was the Messiah, and then they recognized Him as Such when He called them to be His Apostles while they were fishing, and the Ministry began, that it was ever recorded as being discussed. See our discussions about this on the thread, “Jesus had Siblings?”.

At that time, He surrounded himself with His most trusted friends, five of whom were His first and second cousins, and two more who were business partners of the second cousins (Peter and Andrew), as His Apostles. The choosing of the Apostles was no random event among strangers. He knew for whom He was looking, and where they would be, that Eventful Day at the Lake (also discussed on the “Siblings” thread). After that, in numerous references, it was always James, John, and Peter (their fishing partner), to whom Jesus was closest.

This also explains, at times, the cousins’ seemingly lack of understanding or belief, and Jesus’s frustration with them, as they come to grips with Who Jesus Is. And that the prophesy has come to pass in their lifetimes, and among their own family. And, when they call Him “crazy” and suggest He’d have better luck starting His Ministry in another town, since everyone knew them all already in this one. Everyone knows the definition of an “Expert” is someone over 100 miles from home.

Revelations to the Cousins: Jesus as the Messiah was only recorded as being revealed to Saint Elizabeth by God/The Holy Sprit, and to her son, Saint John the Baptist, Jesus’s second cousin, who leapt in her womb at the recognition of the Savior in the womb of Mary at the Visitation.

John the Baptist knew who Jesus was, hence “One is coming who is greater than I, and I will not be fit to untie the strap of His sandal …”, but could not, dared not, reveal it, until Jesus asked him to, at the Baptism at the Jordan, when He was ready to begin His Ministry. And then, when the Heavens parted, and God spoke, the Ministry began. And then, John the Baptist pointed out Jesus, as the Messiah, to John. A second cousin reveals the truth to another second cousin, on the other side of the family. More than likely the two Johns had originally gotten to know each other at Jesus’s family events, and John had already become a disciple of John the Baptist, but the revelation of Jesus as Messiah wasn’t recorded until those passages. By the way, Peter and Andrew were also followers of John the Baptist, and everyone was awaiting John the Baptist’s revelation. (See the thread.)

Once the Ministry began, all were the followers, aka disciples, aka “brothers and sisters” of the Lord, and by extension sons and daughters of His mother, Mary, who traveled with them, for her safety, after that.

Please see my next post …
 
Continued from Previous Post …

For those of you who haven’t read all the way through the thread, the issue of these “brothers” of Jesus are revealed post by post throughout it, as we identify all of the characters supposedly “brethren”.

"First, go to Matthew 27:56…

55 There were many women there, looking on from a distance, 33 who had
followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to him.
56 Among them were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and
Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee. Matthew 27:55-56.

Note well that the women listed, and probably their children, too, were with Jesus in
Galilee, and that the children of one of these women NOT Jesus’ mother (despite her
name Mary) are named James and Joseph. Mark 15:40 makes it clear that Joseph
was also called Joses."

The identies of the characters in these Bible passages:

We know that “Mary, the Mother of James and Joseph”, is Mary of Cleophas, meaning “wife of” Cleophas, who is Saint Joseph’s brother, hence the brother- and sister-in-law of Our Lady. That would make Cleophas and Mary Jesus’s Aunt and Uncle on Joseph’s side, and James and Joseph His first cousins, along with Simon and Judas, listed in the following passage from Matthew … “James, Joseph, Simon and Judas”.

One would think in the Bible references that these two brothers, James and Joseph/Joses, traveled together, as they are often referenced together. Perhaps they were closer in age, we just don’t know.

Some Protestants and Eastern Orthodox sometimes try to make these four brothers the step-brothers of Jesus, and Salome Saint Joseph’s first wife, but these theories were thrown out by Saint Jerome and others, if you read all the way back through the thread and follow back all of the links. Now, it’s going to take a minute, because the thread has grown so large, but it is so worth it to have the understanding. A must read!

The next person listed in the passage from Matthew “and the mother of the sons of Zebedee”, oftentimes also named as the famous “third Mary” in other passages describing those present at the crucifixion (the other two being the above-named Mary of Cleophas and Mary Magdalene) is Saint Mary Salome, sometimes just named “Salome”, but also known as the wife of Zebedee, also known as the sister of the four brothers in the passage above, the fifth child (though we don’t know any of their birth orders) of Saint Cleophas and Saint Mary of Cleophas. This sister, Mary Salome, and her husband, Zebedee, are Jesus’s relatives then, in that she would also be His first cousin, and their two children, Saint John, the Beloved Apostle, and Saint James the Greater, are His second cousins.

As we have discussed throughout this thread, five of the first and second cousins also become His Apostles: James the Less, Judas, and Simon, of the four brothers, first cousins; and John and James the Greater, second cousins. Joseph, the fourth brother, is later known as Saint Joseph of Barsabas, and is later considered as one of two candidates for the replacement by the remaining 11 Apostles for Judas the Traitor, but Matthias is chosen instead. That is some fascinating reading further back in the thread, if you missed it.

The relationship of the two Marys, to Our Lady, is sometimes confused also, in the lack of proper language for “sister-in-law” and “niece”. Some of the Bible verses call them her “sisters”, while in fact Mary of Cleophas is Our Lady’s sister-in-law, and Mary Salome is her niece. These two Marys are mother and daughter to each other, and are Jesus’s Aunt and Cousin.

"Now, go to one of the verses talking about Jesus’ adelphos, or “brothers”…

55 Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers
James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? Matthew 13:55."

Many of these posts also describe most eloquently the use of the Greek usage “brother” versus “cousin”, and the traditional usage of “brethren” in the Jewish customs. So fascinating!

You will find it very interesting reading if you follow the thread all the way through, as well as follow back all of the links to the various articles posted. Your Faith becomes all the more RICH once you have the history contained in the posts and the background of the various characters! If you haven’t made it all the way through, you simply must take it a few stretches at a time. This is one of the best threads I have read, or been a part of, on the Catholic Answers Forum. Bless all who have added and made it so.

Love,

nevadagardener

Please see my next post …
 
Continued from Previous Post …

As to the Apostles, it is simply not coincidence, or similar names; the posts throughout the thread reference back the relationships from many different sources, as to who they actually are. My last post #284 gives it again, as to the martyrdom of the Apostles who were among the sons of Cleophas and Mary, his wife, which is why I posted it. That Jesus selected three of His four first cousins descended from His Uncle Cleophas, and Aunt Mary of Cleophas, to be his Apostles; that He selected two of His second cousins descended from Zebedee and His First Cousin, Mary Salome, a sister of the four brothers; and that one other brother of the four first cousins was later considered to be the replacement apostle for Judas Iscariot (but was not selected, as was Matthias, instead); well, that is the conclusion of the not-coincidental findings of the “names” or “characters” in the posts.

They were not Johnny-come-latelys; not only were some present from the beginning of His ministry, He actually grew up with them. The hour that Jesus selected his Apostles among the fishermen was simply the official commencement of His ministry with them. They were not random strangers. We know that Peter and Simon, brothers, were in partnership with His second cousins, the sons of Zebedee (in Zebedee’s fishing business), whom He would have known all of His life. You can imagine they probably hung out together, He knew them well. These were the characters of strength (“Sons of Thunder”, as He nicknamed James the Greater and John, their strong personalities were part of the legend of James the Greater’s name) with whom He would need to surround Himself, who could “go the distance”. (Entire families were involved in His ministry; remember, not only was Peter martyred, but so was his wife, at the same time.) And it answers the original question, as to whether Jesus had siblings, since the parents of all can be identified, and those that are Apostles, are identified as such, and related back to their parentage, in their martyrdom, as well. Did Jesus have siblings? The answer is “No”.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=320480&page=20

Really, if I have to, I’ll repost everything from the “Siblings” thread referencing Saint Cleophas (aka Alphaeus aka Clopas), Saint Mary of Cleophas (his wife), Saint Mary Salome (their daughter), and all four of their sons, the “brethren” James and Joseph/Joses, Simon and Judas (who are actually Jesus’s first cousins), and Saint Mary Salome and Zebedee’s sons James and John (Jesus’s second cousins). I mean, it’s LONG. Or, you can just go read it for yourself. At some point, you have to confront your ignorance, and educate yourself for the sake of your own soul, unless it is your agenda to hang onto your ignorance in order to make a flimsy point. You’ve simply got to read the writings of others and try to understand as historical and biblical fact who these characters are. And who they AREN’T. Then, you’ll quit trying to read meanings into passages that simply aren’t there.

Perhaps, as Scott Hahn did, once you do your research, you’ll also have to admit the Catholics got it right, and convert to the true faith? That’s what you’re afraid of, isn’t it? He didn’t want to convert, either, a lifelong protestant, in fact fought against it for a long time, but finally, he could not deny it any longer. But, the truth will set you free. We will welcome you, “brother”!

(Little play on words, there. I’m certain you are not my blood brother. An error of fundamentalists, this.) But, as Jesus is my Brother, we are all brothers and sisters, as followers of Christ referred to each other, then as now, in the family of Heaven. Hope to see you there, someday.

Love,

nevadagardener 😉
 
“When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.” Matthew 1:24-25 (emphasis mine). Words have meanings. The meaning of “until” necessarily includes the fact that he knew her sexually after the birth of the Bless Son. When Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek etc. say brothers and sisters it usually means literal brothers and sisters unless there is a good reason within the context to doubt it. That her virginity was necessary up until the birth and likely weaning is accepted universally. But, why is it necessary for you to think of her as an eternal virgin? It is special pleading to deny the plain meaning of these scriptures. Special pleading is understandable when faith necessitates it. Why is this reading necessitated by your faith?..
No you totally misunderstand the meaning of the word “UNTIL” and the focus of the Gospel writers … they were addressing the paternity of Jesus and proclaiming His Divien paternity … the word until addressing only past events and places contraints upon the past. the past only… the word "until as used here leaves silent any future contraints …

You cannot read the passage and say that the word “until” means that Joseph absolutely did not engage in sexual contact with Mary before the conception and birth of Jesus but absolutely had sexual contact wuth her after the birth … that is just not the purpose, function or meaning of the word … or from other scriptural uses we have dead women giving birth to children and a person somewhere who knows with a certainty where Moses was buried …
 
You are determined to make Saint James the Less a direct sibling to Jesus, citing Paul’s “the brother of the Lord”, which is meant to be a respectful reference to his Apostleship or kinship (first cousin), or fellowship in the Faith, despite other references by other inspired writers of Scripture who clearly identify him as otherwise, from citations taken from the “Jesus had Siblings?” thread we keep referencing (see below). I’m sorry your guy got it wrong, or that people sometimes look alike. So do many people of Jewish descent, Italians, Spaniards, Chinese, Irish, (insert any lineage here), look closely related at times. Likewise, in my large family of direct siblings, some of us look nothing alike, yet we have the same genes. I guess that means we are clearly not related, following your logic. Your point again?

I would also point out references in the “Siblings” thread that give the tradition that James the Less was 94 or 96 when he was martyred, which would make him 62 at the time of Jesus’s crucifixion at age 33. Older, not younger, as you allege. There is quite a discussion and backup posts to that on the thread as well. And be sure to follow it to the very end of the thread, because the posts and links are numerous about Jesus and His family.

Your few references are competently debated already on many posts. It would probably be helpful if you’d read the entire “Siblings” thread before you persist, so we don’t have to repost the whole thing to convince you further. The next posts are another source, since you chose not to debate Randy Carson’s post, which clearly covers it, or the references to post debates by Pons and PO18guy, all very good. For much more of the “Siblings” thread, we delve into descriptions and relationships of all of the so-called “brethren” to Jesus, so there can be no misunderstanding.

Re: Jesus had siblings? More about Mary of Cleophas

Thanks for your interest. Over the week I had a chance to address your concerns to the folks at the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. I received a response from Brother Andre Marie, whose full address is given below, who referenced back to the following Scriptural references (taken from an earlier response of a letter he had written):

… Mary never had other children. My response: There is no place in the Bible that says, “Mary never had other children.” Neither are there places that say that “Mary had other children.” Again, it is the Protestant (human) tradition that says she did (although not all Protestants believe this). There are passages in the Bible that you may interpret to mean that Mary had other children, but there are more sensible explanations of these passages that are consistent with all of Scripture, especially Luke 1:34 ff., where it is made obvious that Mary never intended to have normal marital relations. Also, interpreted by the authentic tradition of the Church — the “pillar and ground of the truth” — these passages clearly do not mean the Blessed Virgin had other children. St. Jerome, who, in the late fourth century, at the pope’s behest, translated the Bible into the Latin language, which was the commonly spoken western language at that time, wrote a treatise in defense of the Blessed Mother’s perpetual virginity against the novel teachings of a heretic named Helvidius.

As an example of such misappropriation, let us take the case of St. James the Less whom, no doubt, you allege was our Lord’s blood brother, since St. Paul calls him the “brother of the Lord” in Gal. 1:19. Three times the Holy Spirit inspired the evangelists to identify this Apostle as the son of Alpheus, not Joseph. (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; and Luke. 6:15) The mother of this James was also named Mary, and she is identified as one of the other women, besides the Blessed Virgin, standing beneath the cross of Christ. Here she is called the “sister” of the Blessed Virgin (John. 19:25). Unless we are to assume that two girls in the same family were given the same first name, the word “sister” here used must mean “relative,” “cousin,” or, perhaps, if she were married to the brother of St. Joseph, even “sister-in-law.” Therefore, James the Less, son of Alpheus (also called, in holy scripture, by his Greek name of Cleophas), was our Lord’s cousin. This is still a common practice among the Semitic people to call one’s cousin a brother or sister. Furthermore, if Jesus had other brothers from Mary, His mother, then why did the Savior, as He was dying on the cross, give her to the care of John? For James, Simon, Jude, and Joseph are all called the Lord’s “brethren” in the Gospel. I did a more detailed study on this that I could send you, if you are interested.

In the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
Brother Andre Marie, M.I.C.M.
Saint Benedict Center
Post Office Box 627
Richmond, New Hampshire 03470

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Homepage, www.catholicism.org

This next is taken from the website www.smcenter.org, the Saint Michael Center for the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Church remembers the feastday of Saint Mary of Cleophas on April 9, and the following is her description from the website:
  1. Saint Mary of Cleophas (First Century).
She was one of the “three Marys” who followed Our Lord and stood at the foot of the Cross on Calvary when He died. She was the wife of Saint Cleophas, the brother of Saint Joseph. She was the mother of Saint Simon, Saint James the Less and Saint Jude, Apostles, and of Saint Mary Salome, the mother of the Apostles Saint James the Greater and Saint John. Saint Mary of Cleophas was put on a boat with others by the Jews in the year 47, and pushed out to sea without sails or oars. She died in France. The island in France where she landed, after her miraculous journey from Jerusalem, is called les Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer (“the Holy Marys of the Sea”), named for Saint Mary of Cleophas, Saint Mary Magdalen and Saint Mary Salome.

Please see my next post …
 
Continued from previous post …

Notice, the above fails to mention Saint Joseph Barsabas, their fourth son, not an apostle, commonly referred to as “Joseph or Joses, the brother of James”, in many passages. While not appointed one of the original Twelve by Jesus, we do know that he was considered opposite Matthias as the replacement apostle for Judas Iscariot by the 11 Apostles (see Acts of the Apostles). Apparently there was a prayerful casting of lots, and Matthias won the majority. Saint Joseph Barsabas and Matthias were both considered because they had been present from the beginning of Jesus’s ministry.

Additional websites and posts on the “Siblings” thread do mention him, giving scriptural references, as one of the four brothers, and Mary as the wife of Cleophas, with Cleophas being the brother of Saint Joseph (foster father of Jesus, husband of the Virgin). Check out the following, from the Catholic Encyclopedia, www.newadvent.org.

Mary of Cleophas

This title occurs only in John 19:25. A comparison of the lists of those who stood at the foot of the cross would seem to identify her with Mary, the mother of James the Less and Joseph (Mark 15:40; cf. Matthew 27:56). … In the narratives of the Resurrection she is named “Mary of James”; (Mark 16:1; Luke 24:10) and “the other Mary” (Matthew 27:61; 28:1). The title of “Mary of James” is obscure. If it stood alone, we should feel inclined to render it “wife of (or sister of) James”, but the recurrence of the expression “Mary the mother of James and Joseph” compels us to render it in the same way when we only read “Mary of James”. … James is termed “of Alpheus”, i.e. presumably “son of Alpheus”. St. Jerome would identify this Alpheus with Cleophas who, according to Hegesippus, was brother to St. Joseph (Hist. eccl., III, xi). In this case Mary of Cleophas, or Alpheus, would be the sister-in-law of the Blessed Virgin, and the term “sister”, adelphe, in John 19:25, would cover this.

😉
 
I assumed you had read a lot of the early church fathers. Here is a quote from a letter from Ignatius to the apostle John regarding what I wrote. I am sure you know Ignatius was a disciple of John and present while Mary was living with John:

IF thou wilt give me leave, IF thou wilt give me leave, I desire to go up to Jerusalem, and see the faithful saints who are there, especially Mary the mother, whom they report to be an object of admiration and of affection to all. For who would not rejoice to behold and to address her who bore the true God from her own womb, provided he is a friend of our faith and religion?** And in like manner * the venerable James, who is surnamed Just, whom they relate to be very like Christ Jesus in appearance, in life, and in method of conduct, as if he were a twin-brother of the same womb. They say that, if I see him, I see also Jesus Himself, as to all the features and aspect of His body.***

You see James must have been born from the same womb as Jesus. He looked exactly like him. If we can’t believe Ignatius, then who can we believe? He lived during that time.

Yes, I read the Early Church Fathers and St Ignatius’s writings … But this passage does not declare that Jesus and James were born of the same womb … in fact it makes no such claim. Brothers looking alike in apearance is not really remarkable and if one usually remarks o oit they include the relationship as in He looked exactly like hi older brother … Ignatius fails to write what you have read into the piece …

For an example: I have two sons and two grandsons … they all look very similar to my brothersc at the same ages … that does not make them my brothers brothers … what that are is nephews and great nephews - in reality …

… and I have a picture of my daughter at one year of age that looks exactly like a picture of her paternal grandfather [complete with long dress - common for the era] … they are noit borhters and not even the same sex … looks can be decieving …
If we are going to believe the scriptures then we must also believe them when they say that we can understand them and don’t have to rely on someone else to tell us what they say.
 
40.png
YADA:
Yes, I read the Early Church Fathers and St Ignatius’s writings … But this passage does not declare that Jesus and James were born of the same womb … in fact it makes no such claim. Brothers looking alike in apearance is not really remarkable and if one usually remarks o oit they include the relationship as in He looked exactly like hi older brother … Ignatius fails to write what you have read into the piece …

For an example: I have two sons and two grandsons … they all look very similar to my brothersc at the same ages … that does not make them my brothers brothers … what that are is nephews and great nephews - in reality …

… and I have a picture of my daughter at one year of age that looks exactly like a picture of her paternal grandfather [complete with long dress - common for the era] … they are noit borhters and not even the same sex … looks can be decieving …

The scriptures say Jesus is the son of Joseph the carpenter … do you take that passage literally too?

MArtin Luter did not translate the first scritures into the German language … there already existed 18 different translation [in both high German and low German] before Luterh ever translated his version … those ealier translations did not have to add words to change meaning and support new theologies … nor did they remove books [and attempt to remove books] from the scriptures as Luther did. There were alos already English, French and Smanish translations … sorry this is just another piece of false information - the church was not attempting to keep people ignorant of the Scriptures … …A great reply that the OP will never read… 😦
 
A great reply that the OP will never read… 😦
You are very kind … Thanks…:o

You also seem to be correct regarding the OP andreading the post … unless they read it but decided not to acknowledge that they did .🤷
 
Eternity is a long time to be wrong…

Read the Bible… scripture tells us the truth…
 
Next up, Hannah’s other children after Samuel! I mean, he was just her firstborn, right? No reason why Samuel’s so special that she’d only have one son, right?
 
Eternity is a long time to be wrong…

Read the Bible… scripture tells us the truth…
I do read the bible * … I have studied Theology and had a variety of instructors: Catholic, Lutheran, Episcopalian and Presbyterian … one professor [a Lutheran was a Dead Sea Scholar - who spent the year just prior his teaching my master’s cohort translating scroll fragments. He reads, studies and teaches biblical hebrew and greek as well 👍 wish I could ;)] …

Why are you so angry with the church Christ founded? - you must have been very hurt by someone …

You are very correct about Truth but your inteprettion of scripture does not equal Truth …

Why does modern protestantism feel the need to change its understanding regarding Mary?

Can you tell me what Calvin wrote regarding the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and why that was important in Salvation history?

What about Luther and Zwingli … What did they beleive?

Why the change and how does this change increase your faith?*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top