Did Jesus have brothers and sisters?

[Kathryn_Ann]

They were cousins.
That’s the traditional belief, due to
The Blessed Mother’s perpetual virginity.
May your day be very blessed.
Kathryn Ann

 

[Erich]

SO, To answear the question, Did Jesus have brothers and sisters.
The answear is YES.

Any interpretation of Scripture must be done in harmony with all the other Scripture that speaks to that subject. In others words, it is ALL true. We have four Gospels, and one of the manifest blessings of that is that we can compare them, as small things in one or two can and do clarify for us what is in another. That is, of times, called Scripture interpreting Scripture.

In all of Scripture there are only 4 named brothers of Jesus: **Matthew 13:55 ** “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?”
**Mark 6:2-3 ** - “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?”
Gal. 1:19 - “But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord’s brother”
We know from Gal 1:18-19 that James the “brother of the Lord” is an apostle. There are two apostles named James. We know from Mark 3:13-19 that one of them is the son of Zebedee, and the other is the son of Alphaeus. So, if James the “brother of the Lord” is an apostle, as St. Paul says, he can’t be the son of either Alphaeus or Zebedee. There is no James the apostle who could also be James the sibling brother of Jesus. We know from Mark 15:40 that James is indeed the son of a woman named Mary. Not only that, but Joseph is his brother. That’s two of the four, right?

Now go to John speaking of those witnessing the Crucifixion: John 19:25: “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother (Mary) and His mothers sister, *** Mary the wife of Cleophas***, and * Mary Magdalene*.” (emphasis added)
Look up John 19:25 at blueletterbible.org/ and click the ‘C’ icon (for the Strong’s Concordance), then click the Strong’s number for the name Cleophas. It comes up “father of James the less, the husband of Mary the sister of the mother of Jesus.”

Did you get that? That Mary, who was the mother of James the less, and of Joseph, from Mark 15:40, is the wife of Cleophas, the father of James the less, and she is called the ‘sister’ of Our Lord’s mother - Mary!

So, two of the four ‘brothers’ have been identified as the children of parents other than Joseph and the Virgin Mary. Of the brothers named, that still leaves Jude and Simon. Next, Jude: Acts 1:13 ** "…James, the son of Alphaeus , and Simon Zelo’tes, and ** Jude the brother of James…" (emphasis added)
There goes Jude out of the mix! *** Matter of fact, Jude says the same in his own epistle: Jude 1:1 "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ *** and brother of James…" (emphasis added)
Lastly, Simon. Simon, called the Zealot, is identified as coming from Cana, not Nazareth as were Joseph, Mary and the Christ! Luke 6:15 "and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and ** Simon who was called the Zealot," (emphasis added)

Mark 3:18 “Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and ** Simon the Cananaean**…” (emphasis added)

Matt 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. (emphasis added)
Simon is a Cananean, while Jesus is a Nazarene!

We see that Simon the Zealot being from Cana, and a ‘brethren’ or ‘brother’ of the Christ. Let’s go to John’s Gospel, chapter 2. Mary and Our Lord are invited to a wedding there! So, close business associates, maybe, of Joseph from the carpentry trade, or more likely - family, or brethren, relatives, are having this wedding! Like, maybe the Holy Family had actual kinfolk in Cana, be they cousins, in-laws, nephews, aunts, uncles, all of which are routinely called ‘brethren’!

Remember what Mary said to the servants? She told them to ‘Do as He says.’

Think about that a second? What would give this humble woman from Nazareth any position to so speak to the servants of someone else in an entirely different town, at their wedding? The simplest and most easily understood answer would be – she is a family relation to those giving the wedding feast…

So Simon is from Cana, and a ‘brother’ of the Lord! He’s not a sibling though, but very likely related. And James, Joseph and Jude all have the same father and mother, and it is not Joseph and the Virgin Mary, but their mother is named Mary and called the sister of Jesus’ mother Mary. Even here ‘sister’ may not mean blood sibling, or we have two sisters with the same name in the same family.

 

[Erich]

And what about Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40, and John l9:25? From This Rock,

In these James and Joses (Joseph), who are mentioned in Matthew l3:55 with Simon and Judas (Jude) as Jesus’ adelphoi, are called sons of Mary, wife of Clopas, a different Mary from our Blessed Mother. This “other” Mary (Matt. 27:61, 28:1) is called our Lady’s* adelphe* in John 19:25. It is wholly unlikely that two daughters of the same parents were given the same name, “Mary.” Our Lady and the “other Mary” were related only in the wider sense of adelphe. They were relatives, but not sisters. Since Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 mention Simon, Judas, and the sisters of Jesus along with James and Joses, calling them all adelphoi (masculine) and adelphai (feminine), these words in the texts at issue must be translated “relatives.”

Indeed, when trying to understand these verses, the first thing to note is that the term “brother” (Greek: adelphos) has a very wide meaning in the Bible. It is not restricted to the literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother. The same goes for “sister” (adelphe) and the plural form “brothers” (adelphoi). Indeed, according to onechurch.org/Brothers_in_the_NT.htm the vast majority of the time that the Greek word “adelphos” and its feminine form “adelphe” appear in the New Testament – in the King James Version they are usually translated “brother”, “brethren”, “sister”, or “sisters” – it can not or almost certainly does **not **refer to a family sibling.

The Old Testament shows that the term “brother” had a very wide semantic range of meaning and could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended (male relatives from whom you are descended are known as “fathers”), as well as kinsman such as cousins, those who are members of the family by marriage or law though not related to you by blood, and even friends or mere political allies (1 Sam. 9:13; 20:32; 2 Sam. 1:26; Amos 1:9).

Lot, for example, is called Abraham’s “brother” (Gen. 14:14), even though, being the son of Aran, Abraham’s brother (Gen. 11:26-28), he was actually Abraham’s nephew. Similarly, Jacob is called the “brother” of his uncle Laban (Gen. 29:15). Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar had no sons, only daughters, who married their “brethren,” the sons of Kish. These “brethren” were really their cousins (1Chron. 23:21-22).

The terms “brothers,” “brother,” and “sister” did not refer only to close relatives, as in the above examples. Sometimes they meant kinsman (Deut. 23:7, Neh. 5:7, Jer. 34:9), as in the reference to the forty-two “brethren” of King Azariah (2 Kings 10:13-14).

In other words, Scripture confirms what we already know, namely, “brothers of Jesus” =/= “children of Mary and Joseph.”

Joseph recognized Mary’s special consecration as God’s living vessel, the Ark of the New Covenant. Note that because God’s presence overshadowed the tabernacle, Moses was not able to enter: “Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation, because the cloud abode therein, and the glory of the the Lord filled the tabernacle.” (Ex 40:34-35)Just as Moses was not able to enter the tabernacle due to God’s presence, Joseph was not able to have marital relations with Mary because God’s presence, in the same way as in Exodus 40:34-35, had overshadowed her. Another example is seen in Uz’zah, who aroused the anger of God simply for touching the Ark: “And when they came to Na’chon’s threshing floor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the Ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uz’zah, and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the Ark of God.” (2 Sam 6:6-7)Don’t think that Joseph wasn’t aware of this story - the fact that Uz’zah was killed immediately simply for reaching out to steady the Ark being shaken by the oxen. He knew that Mary, as the New Ark of the Covenant, was not to be touched, either. This is why Joseph refrained from intercourse with Mary during her miraculous pregancy and afterwards as well, because if God’s Presence had indeed “overshadowed” Mary’s womb, Catholics believe that Mary’s womb had become the dwelling place of the Lord, something like the Eastern Gate mentioned in Ezekiel 44: “This gate shall remain shut: it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter it; for the Lord, the God of Israel has entered it; THEREFORE, it shall remain shut. Only the prince may sit down in it to eat his meal in the presence of the Lord.” (Ez 44:1-3)

 

[Erich]

Since we are focusing on the Greek word for “until”, lets figure out how this should be interpreted using your same reasoning from scripture

“Michal the daughter of Saul had no children till the day of her death” (2 Sam. 6:23). Are we to assume she had children after her death?

The book of Deuteronomy says that no one knew the location of Moses’ grave “until this present day” (Deut. 34:6). But we know that no one has known since that day either.

 

[onemangang]

Great Post Erich

I would like to use it on my Facebook page if you don’t mind!

 

[grandfather]

Any interpretation of Scripture must be done in harmony with all the other Scripture that speaks to that subject. In others words, it is ALL true. We have four Gospels, and one of the manifest blessings of that is that we can compare them, as small things in one or two can and do clarify for us what is in another. That is, of times, called Scripture interpreting Scripture.

So Simon is from Cana, and a ‘brother’ of the Lord! He’s not a sibling though, but very likely related. And James, Joseph and Jude all have the same father and mother, and it is not Joseph and the Virgin Mary, but their mother is named Mary and called the sister of Jesus’ mother Mary. Even here ‘sister’ may not mean blood sibling, or we have two sisters with the same name in the same family.

This is excellent, but you are talking to someone with his ears plugged.

 

[LittleSoldier]

This where people need to understand the Greek and the context.
For instance, The word save, [The Greek word is, Sozo] has many meanings and you have to knw what meaning goes with what scripture context.

In Matt 1: 21. It means saved from sins.
In Matt 8: 25, It means saved from the storm & sea.
In Lk 18: 42. it means healed.

As you say, The Greek for,Jesus’s brothers & sisters can mean siblings or Cousins
NOW As for Jesus’s brothers and sisters in Matt 13: 55-56.

I didn’t say that. Please provide the post number where I said that. I didn’t use a Greek word nor did I even refer to the Greek or Hebrew language. I’m also a bit confused by your sentence. It appears to be missing some punctuation and has some added punctuation or something and I can’t make sense out of it (“The Greek for,Jesus’s brothers & sisters can mean siblings or Cousins NOW As for Jesus’ brothers and sisters in Matt 13: 55-56.”)

The Greek meaning there is,
“Brothers and sisters from the same mother”.

Meaning Mary had other children, And Jesus had brothers and sister as the Bible says.

Whoa! How do you determine context? Why does it mean what *you *say it means in Matthew 13:55-56? Who is your authority?

AS for Matt 1: 25.
The Greek word for, " Till", As is, "“Not til”, Is, “Heos”.
And the meaning is,
“Until”.
Meaning, Mary had no sexual relations UNTILL after Jesus was born.

So the English word “until” is “heos” in Greek. That is all very good but what is important is the definition of that word - how it was used in NT times - NOT how it is used today.

Forget what St Jerome said,
You can’t use the Old testament Hebrew and translate it to the New Testament Greek.
I noticed you did that in order to twist the Bible.

That is a logical fallacy called an ad hominem. You can’t possibly know why I did what I did unless you can see into my mind. Are you claiming that you can do this? Is this a process similar to the way you seem to think you can decide what a certain word in the Bible means, according to context? You have also introduced a straw man. You have misrepresented my position (you could easily have requested clarification but didn’t) and then attacked both it and me. I did NOT say that “the Greek for,Jesus’s brothers & sisters can mean siblings or Cousins.” So why did you claim that I did? I didn’t mention one Greek word (and I also did not mention one Hebrew word). Please don’t do that to me or to anyone else.

You cannot get away from the scriptures or the Greek unles you twist the Bible and the original Biblical texts.

Have you ever considered the possibility that you are twisting the Bible and the original Bible texts? I don’t mean purposely, but just because it happens. I’m wondering because I haven’t seen any authority mentioned by you (please correct me if you have mentioned an authority). I have provided an authority - St. Jerome. Here is another one: the Bible was authored by the Holy Spirit and penned by those in the Church. The Catholic Church.

SO, To answear the question, Did Jesus have brothers and sisters.
The answear is YES.

I am well aware that the OT was written in Hebrew and the NT in Greek - that is common knowledge, even to me. However, the people referred to in the appropriate part of the NT were Hebrews, whether what they said was written down in Hebrew or Greek or Latin or Aramaic or Hungarian or French or 21st century American English. They acted as Hebrews - they spoke as Hebrews. And to the Hebrews there was very little, if any, difference between referring to siblings and to cousins (and other near-relations) as “brothers” and/or “sisters.” They referred to close relations as “brothers” and “sisters.” This is simply what they did.

And they most likely spoke Aramaic - not Hebrew or Greek.

I refuse to ignore St. Jerome as I refuse to ignore any other saint and I have to admit I question why you tell me to ignore a saint. Is this your advice for someone who is learning the Bible - to ignore what authorities have stated about its meaning? As a Catholic I am encouraged to question, to seek answers, to read what people have written. Yet I should just “forget” what Jerome said? WHY? Oy vey!

BTW, who is your authority for the interpretation of Bible Scripture?

Please know that I am trying to be charitable and I mean absolutely no offense to you. I’m having trouble writing today because of medication I take that sometimes causes problems with language processing. If I have written anything uncharitable I apologize and want you (and everyone) to know that I am really trying to be charitable in all my words and actions.

 

[LittleSoldier]

…

So Simon is from Cana, and a ‘brother’ of the Lord! He’s not a sibling though, but very likely related. And James, Joseph and Jude all have the same father and mother, and it is not Joseph and the Virgin Mary, but their mother is named Mary and called the sister of Jesus’ mother Mary. Even here ‘sister’ may not mean blood sibling, or we have two sisters with the same name in the same family.

Yes - I believe I have brought this up. Two sisters, both named Mary? Unless this was common practice (and I haven’t seen anyone ever say that it was) why would Mary’s parents name her sister “Mary?” It would make it a bit difficult to distinguish between the two and there are some very nice names they could have picked.

Mary and her sister Mary? Strange.

 

[LittleSoldier]

“Michal the daughter of Saul had no children till the day of her death” (2 Sam. 6:23). Are we to assume she had children after her death?

The book of Deuteronomy says that no one knew the location of Moses’ grave “until this present day” (Deut. 34:6). But we know that no one has known since that day either.

I’d forgotten those!

It’s not the words so much as the difference in definitions as time progresses on. In the NT Jesus probably spoke Aramaic - the common language of the people who lived in His area of the world. But the NT was penned in Greek and then translated into Latin and then translated into many other languages, one of which is English - both archaic and modern and with different meanings depending on where one lives.

I’m reading a book about Paul Erdos, the brilliant and very eccentric mathematician. He would ask someone “When did you arrive?” And whoever he asked would, of course, assume that he meant “When did you get here?” And he did mean that but what he meant specifically was “What is your birth date?”

 

[Anna_Scott]

Gospel Man,
The issue of “til” or “until” has been explained a long time ago.

This is one of the explanations from a link I posted earlier:

". . . . .1. There is the inference, that the mother of our Lord had other children than Jesus, derived from the word “till” and the word “first-born,’” in Matt. i. 25. This is shorn of all force by the fact, that learned critics are unanimously of opinion-an opinion sustained by abundant citations from writers, sacred and profane-that the words in question are not conclusive on the subject. The meaning of a word is determined by its use: “quem penes arbitrium est, et jus et norma loquendi.” But the use of “till” and “first-born,” according to the force of the Greek idiom, is not such as to imply, in the passage in question, a second or third born child. . . . .

. . . . .The second presumption drawn from Gal. i. 19, that James was the Lord’s brother, in the sense of his mother’s son, is weakened by the liberal way in which the word “brother” was used by the Jews**. It may mean “half-brother;” it may mean “adopted” or “foster brother;” it may simply mean “cousin” or “near relation.”** If in any particular case there is no reason to doubt the exact relationship, we of course interpret the word in the proper and strict sense. But if there is reason for doubt, we are perfectly free to look for another interpretation. Thus, when we read in Gen. xxix. 12, "Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s brother," the fact that the Greek for “brother” means etymologically “mother’s son,” or other arguments based upon the word brother, we readily set aside as of no weight in the case whatever. To ascertain Jacob’s precise relationship to Rachel’s father, we go back to Gen. xxv. 20, and find that he was only his nephew. . . . ."
Link: anglicanhistory.org/usa/mahan/james.html

For the truth, See my post, #128.

If Joseph and Mary didn’t have sexual relations, Why would Matthew mention it, Why would God inspire Matthew to say it??.

The Greek reads like this,
“Joseph Didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”.

And Matt 13: 55–56 were Mary’s children.

You can’t get away from facts.

Gospel Man,

Did you read my post, before quoting it?

Where does Matthew say “Joseph and Mary had sexual relations”?

What Bible translation says, “Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”?

 

[Gospel_Man]

Gospel Man,

Did you read my post, before quoting it?

Where does Matthew say “Joseph and Mary had sexual relations”?

What Bible translation says, “Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”?

Matt 1: 25,
“Joseph knew not Mary until she brought forth her fistborn”, Jesus.
Meaning She had sexual relations after,

The Greek says,
“Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”.
Proving she did have sexual relations.

I can only tell you what the Bible and the Greek says, After all people wan’t the truth, DON’T THEY??

 

[Farsight001]

Matt 1: 25,
“Joseph knew not Mary until she brought forth her fistborn”, Jesus.
Meaning She had sexual relations after,

The Greek says,
“Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”.
Proving she did have sexual relations.

I can only tell you what the Bible and the Greek says, After all people wan’t the truth, DON’T THEY??

This is based on a common misunderstanding of the word “until” in English. Most people assume that if “such and such did not happen until…”, that it therefor DID happen afterward. This is not what the word until is meant to imply. “Until” simply clarifies that “such and such” did not happen up to a point, and does not offer a suggestion as to whether “such and such” did or did not later happen after that point.

Look to Jesus’ words “behold, I will be with you until the end of the age…” Does that mean that after the age is over, he’s no longer with us? Of course not! He is always there for us.

 

[Erich]

This is based on a common misunderstanding of the word “until” in English. Most people assume that if “such and such did not happen until…”, that it therefor DID happen afterward. This is not what the word until is meant to imply. “Until” simply clarifies that “such and such” did not happen up to a point, and does not offer a suggestion as to whether “such and such” did or did not later happen after that point.

Correct. The implication that “such and such” did happen later is the modern sense of the term ‘until.’

You might as well try to claim that Jesus could not be Mary’s “first-born” unless there were other children that followed him. But this shows ignorance of the way the ancient Jews used the term. For them it meant the child that opened the womb (Ex. 13:2; Num. 3:12). Under the Mosaic Law, it was the “first-born” son that was to be sanctified (Ex. 34:20). Did this mean the parents had to wait until a second son was born before they could call their first the “first-born”? Hardly. The first male child of a marriage was termed the “first-born” even if he turned out to be the only child of the marriage.

Look to Jesus’ words “behold, I will be with you until the end of the age…” Does that mean that after the age is over, he’s no longer with us? Of course not! He is always there for us.

We’ve already seen other instances where, if the modern sense of ‘until’ is forced on the Bible, some ridiculous meanings result. The examples could be multiplied, but you get the idea—nothing can be proved from the use of the word “until” in Matthew 1:25.

Recent translations give a better sense of the verse: “He had no relations with her at any time before she bore a son” (New American Bible); “He had not known her when she bore a son” (Knox).

 

[Erich]

Great Post Erich

I would like to use it on my Facebook page if you don’t mind!

I don’t mind… but the credit is not due me. The original sources for (most of) what I wrote are:

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary
Mary, the Ark

(i.e. the sites I referenced in posts 19 and 33 on this very thread, but which no one seems to have read *until *now. Or, should I say, no one seems to have read before now )

 

[Anna_Scott]

Gospel Man,
The issue of “til” or “until” has been explained a long time ago.

This is one of the explanations from a link I posted earlier:

". . . . .1. There is the inference, that the mother of our Lord had other children than Jesus, derived from the word “till” and the word “first-born,’” in Matt. i. 25. This is shorn of all force by the fact, that learned critics are unanimously of opinion-an opinion sustained by abundant citations from writers, sacred and profane-that the words in question are not conclusive on the subject. The meaning of a word is determined by its use: “quem penes arbitrium est, et jus et norma loquendi.” But the use of “till” and “first-born,” according to the force of the Greek idiom, is not such as to imply, in the passage in question, a second or third born child. . . . .

. . . . .The second presumption drawn from Gal. i. 19, that James was the Lord’s brother, in the sense of his mother’s son, is weakened by the liberal way in which the word “brother” was used by the Jews**. It may mean “half-brother;” it may mean “adopted” or “foster brother;” it may simply mean “cousin” or “near relation.”** If in any particular case there is no reason to doubt the exact relationship, we of course interpret the word in the proper and strict sense. But if there is reason for doubt, we are perfectly free to look for another interpretation. Thus, when we read in Gen. xxix. 12, "Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s brother," the fact that the Greek for “brother” means etymologically “mother’s son,” or other arguments based upon the word brother, we readily set aside as of no weight in the case whatever. To ascertain Jacob’s precise relationship to Rachel’s father, we go back to Gen. xxv. 20, and find that he was only his nephew. . . . ."
Link: anglicanhistory.org/usa/mahan/james.html

For the truth, See my post, #128.

If Joseph and Mary didn’t have sexual relations, Why would Matthew mention it, Why would God inspire Matthew to say it??.

The Greek reads like this,
“Joseph Didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”.

And Matt 13: 55–56 were Mary’s children.

You can’t get away from facts.

Gospel Man,

Did you read my post, before quoting it?

Where does Matthew say “Joseph and Mary had sexual relations”?

What Bible translation says, “Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”?

Matt 1: 25,
“Joseph knew not Mary until she brought forth her fistborn”, Jesus.
Meaning She had sexual relations after,

The Greek says,
“Joseph didn’t have sexual relations with Mary until after Jesus was born”.
Proving she did have sexual relations.

I can only tell you what the Bible and the Greek says, After all people wan’t the truth, DON’T THEY??

Gospel Man,

If you are serious about discussion, please respond to the issues directly. Repeating the same thing over and over again does not help your point of view, especially when you don’t answer questions or acknowledge information that contradicts your claims.

This is a place for discussion, debate, and the free and charitable exchange of ideas. It is not a place to proselytize.

 

[Erich]

I can only tell you what the Bible and the Greek says

Evidently, you can’t even do that.

The identification of the “brethren of the Lord” as Jesus’ first cousins is open to legitimate question—they might even be relatives more distantly removed—but our inability to determine for certain their exact status strictly on the basis of the biblical evidence (or lack of it, in this case) says nothing at all about the main point, which is that the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed Virgin Mary’s children.

 

[Anna_Scott]

(name removed by moderator),

Well, JC,
After nearly 3 years here, I would agree that this is a “tough gig”; but in a good way. I was a Southern Baptist when I first came here. I am constantly pushed forward in study and reconsideration of long held beliefs.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Correct. The implication that “such and such” did happen later is the modern sense of the term ‘until.’

You might as well try to claim that Jesus could not be Mary’s “first-born” unless there were other children that followed him. But this shows ignorance of the way the ancient Jews used the term. For them it meant the child that opened the womb (Ex. 13:2; Num. 3:12). Under the Mosaic Law, it was the “first-born” son that was to be sanctified (Ex. 34:20). Did this mean the parents had to wait until a second son was born before they could call their first the “first-born”? Hardly. The first male child of a marriage was termed the “first-born” even if he turned out to be the only child of the marriage.

We’ve already seen other instances where, if the modern sense of ‘until’ is forced on the Bible, some ridiculous meanings result. The examples could be multiplied, but you get the idea—nothing can be proved from the use of the word “until” in Matthew 1:25.

Recent translations give a better sense of the verse: “He had no relations with her at any time before she bore a son” (New American Bible); “He had not known her when she bore a son” (Knox).

Erich,

I’m really impressed with your posts. Great contributions to the discussion.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Well, I appreciate that JC, but I really didn’t have a clue about what I was getting myself into. lol. The knowledge of Bible and Tradition here would challenge even the most avid reader. I’ve had some heated debates in the past–even had to apologize a few times. And—I must confess, I had a bit of an attitude in the beginning. Just ask PRmerger. She was a CAF friend who I de-friended after a heated discussion; and then I re-friended her later after cooling down. Let’s just say, I’ve mellowed over time.

Anna

 

[PRmerger]

As you say, The Greek for,Jesus’s brothers & sisters can mean siblings or Cousins
NOW As for Jesus’s brothers and sisters in Matt 13: 55-56.
The Greek meaning there is,
“Brothers and sisters from the same mother”.

Meaning Mary had other children, And Jesus had brothers and sister as the Bible says.

Actually, the Bible NEVER states that Mary had other children.

Incidentally, if you are referring to the Greek word adelphi to mean womb brother, then how do you explain that this word is also applied to James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude-- but we are told in John’s gospel who the mother of James is. (Note: it’s NOT the Blessed Mother).