M
mariainman
Guest
Why does it say in the Bible that Jesus had brothers and sisters if we believe he did not?
- Status
M
mosher
Guest
Adaquate answers to this question are given here:
catholic.com/library/Burial_Box_of_St_James_Found.asp
catholic.com/library/Bad_Aramaic_Made_Easy.asp
catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
T
thistle
Guest
There have been lots of threads on this one. You can do a search.
A
awalt
Guest
In short, the reading will explain:
- Brother is a loose translation, as there was no word for “cousin” in the original language translated from.
- If Jesus had brothers, He would not have asked John to take care of His mother at the crucifixion.
- There are many examples in the Bible of people called brothers that were shown in other places not to be brothers - the reason is #1.
- There is confusion at times as to what “Mary” a verse is talking about - there were plenty of them in the NT.
O
Ortho
Guest
Who cares if he had brothers? Is that important? Why?
L
levi86
Guest
He most definitely had brothers on Joseph’s side (half brothers), we all know Mary remained a virgin but I doubt Joseph would have done the same.
M
MonicaC
Guest
I would be careful in saying that He most definitely had brothers on Joseph’s side. There is no proof of this. And if St Joseph married Mary as a virgin than he would of stayed a virgin.
L
levi86
Guest
It is well known that Joseph was considerably older than Mary, it would have been unusual for a man of that period not to have children. Why wouldn’t he?
Even if he did it in no way takes away from Catholic doctrine, Mary was still a virgin, that’s the main thing
T
thistle
Guest
levi86 said:
It is well known that Joseph was considerably older than Mary, it would have been unusual for a man of that period not to have children. Why wouldn’t he?
Even if he did it in no way takes away from Catholic doctrine, Mary was still a virgin, that’s the main thing
What you claim has been taken from the Protoevangelium of James (written around 150 AD) and this has not been accepted by the Church.
It is also wouldn’t make sense. If Jesus had brothers or sisters (even step brothers or sisters) why would Jesus (from the Cross) entrust his mother Mary to a disciple instead of his brothers and sisters.
M
MonicaC
Guest
levi86 said:
It is well known that Joseph was considerably older than Mary, it would have been unusual for a man of that period not to have children. Why wouldn’t he?
Even if he did it in no way takes away from Catholic doctrine, Mary was still a virgin, that’s the main thing
Yes I agree that if St Joseph had been married it would in no way take away from Our Lady. But still that doesn’t prove anything. There are many traditions that say St Joseph was not an elderly man. In any case we cannot say for sure that he was older or younger. So we should not be so fast to jump on either boat.
Just my two cents.
Monica
L
levi86
Guest
Thats a very good point, i stand corrected
U
urban-hermit
Guest
Apologetics 101
Above is a link to a series of short 2-minute apologetic audios made for EWTN by John Martignoni. Scroll down to episode 12, which is entitled “Did Jesus have brothers and sisters?”
Since it is so short it is very quick to listen to or download, and all these short audios are excellent.
Above is a link to a series of short 2-minute apologetic audios made for EWTN by John Martignoni. Scroll down to episode 12, which is entitled “Did Jesus have brothers and sisters?”
Since it is so short it is very quick to listen to or download, and all these short audios are excellent.
O
Ortho
Guest
Insurance. Backup. Shared economic burden. Higher probability she would be safe and comfortable.
T
thistle
Guest
What rubbish!!
O
Ortho
Guest
Interesting thought. Why?
T
thistle
Guest
If Jesus had brothers and sisters (that would imply at least four blood siblings or four step siblings) how would one disciple be backup, insurance, etc. I’m sure 4 adults who would likely have families would have been more than sufficient to look after their mother!!
The bottom line anyway is that Jesus had no siblings and that is why he asked his beloved disciple (probably John) to look after his mother.
L
levi86
Guest
I would tend to agree with you here, however if Jesus had siblings and yet he still “gave” his Mother to John wouldn’t this support the view that Christ gave Mary to the church, rather than simply entrusting her to John because of financial and security concerns? thus bolstering the Catholic position on Mary’s role in the Church?
M
Mickey
Guest
The articles posted by mosher in post # 2 give adequate answers to this issue.
catholic.com/library/Bur…James_Found.asp
catholic.com/library/Bad…c_Made_Easy.asp
catholic.com/library/Bre…of_the_Lord.asp
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
catholic.com/library/Bur…James_Found.asp
catholic.com/library/Bad…c_Made_Easy.asp
catholic.com/library/Bre…of_the_Lord.asp
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
B
BrianH
Guest
Follow this:
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. "
Why did Mary not go into the care of James, Joses, Juda, or Simon?
Mary traveled with these people
"Mar 3:31* There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.**
**
Mar 3:32** And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. "
So if Mary traveled with these people, why would she not go into their care?
No one is even considering the other possibilities.
They were not around.
or
They were not believers and he was making a point by giving his Mom’s care to John.
This cannot be used as an argument for him not having brothers.
If you do not think he did, so be it. But he undoubtedly had close relatives…step-brothers, cousins…FAMILY…that would have made much more sense for her care to go to… Are you guys essentially saying that Mary had NO family that could care for her??
On a side note, I have been at plenty of hospital rooms where the dying has said to a lot of people, take care of my (dad, mom, kids, wife, etc). She went into his home from that very hour…John became her son…does not mean that siblings or cousins did not exist.
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. "
Why did Mary not go into the care of James, Joses, Juda, or Simon?
Mary traveled with these people
"Mar 3:31* There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.**
**
Mar 3:32** And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. "
So if Mary traveled with these people, why would she not go into their care?
No one is even considering the other possibilities.
They were not around.
or
They were not believers and he was making a point by giving his Mom’s care to John.
This cannot be used as an argument for him not having brothers.
If you do not think he did, so be it. But he undoubtedly had close relatives…step-brothers, cousins…FAMILY…that would have made much more sense for her care to go to… Are you guys essentially saying that Mary had NO family that could care for her??
On a side note, I have been at plenty of hospital rooms where the dying has said to a lot of people, take care of my (dad, mom, kids, wife, etc). She went into his home from that very hour…John became her son…does not mean that siblings or cousins did not exist.
T
thistle
Guest
He had no siblings and I believe he entrusted Mary to John for this reason and the one you offer that this was his way of telling the world that Mary was to be our Mother too.
- Status