Hey, is there anybody here at CAF, who believes that Jesus Christ had biological brothers and can you prove it?

[Good_Fella]

The last part of J.W. Robinson’s article:

“My MOTHER’S Children”

As a final proof that Jesus Christ was not the ONLY CHILD of His mother, let us turn to Psalm 69:8, which all Bible scholars recognize as a prophecy concerning Christ. In this scripture we read, “I am become a stranger unto MY BRETHREN, and an alien unto MY MOTHER’S CHILDREN.” Christ certainly was speaking of His PHYSICAL mother and brethren – blood relatives – in this prophecy. Christ’s spiritual mother is the Church (Rev. 12:1-5) and His spiritual brethren are His followers – those who compose the true Church today (Matt. 12:49-50, Rom. 8:16-17, 29). Christ’s spiritual brethren certainly recognized Him from the beginning of His ministry (John 1:35-49). He WAS a stranger (an alien) to His physical brethren, however. They did not believe in Him during His ministry (John 7:2-5), although some of them were converted after His resurrection.

Anyone who earnestly believes that the Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God, CANNOT fail to see these facts. These scriptures definitely PROVE – absolutely – that Jesus Christ did have brothers and sisters who were the children of His mother. Their father was Joseph. Joseph was the legal, not actual, father of Jesus. This means that Jesus and His brothers and sisters had the same mother, but not the same father.

Obviously you haven’t been following this thread. I refuted this lame Fundamentalist argument in reply #125(?) above.

PAX

 

[SIA]

Obviously you haven’t been following this thread. I refuted this lame Fundamentalist argument in reply #125(?) above.

PAX

I don’t believe that you refuted anything. you merely offered an alternative perspective.

 

[Good_Fella]

I don’t believe that you refuted anything. you merely offered an alternative perspective.

The only reasonable perspective. I’m not sure whether the ingenuous Fundamentalist misperception should make one want to or :crying: .

But in any case you deserve a round of :clapping: for your expertise in :juggle: .

PAX :tiphat:

 

[sola_scriptura]

Mailman’s first round of arguments were sound – but I agree relying on Psalm 69:8 (which of course applies to David) is not in itself an effective argument to refute RCC Mariology (but it’s certainly less of a stretch than some of the Catholic typologies concerning Mary).

No worries – I’ve already done it though

Yes, me sola protestantola … single handedly tore down a millennium of wacky exegesis … ahhh juuust kidding!!!

 

[guanophore]

What is truth"? That question was asked of Jesus Christ by Pontius Pilate in John 18:38.
Truth is a person, and that person is Jesus Christ. John 14:6, Ephesians 1:13,4:21
Since there is only one Jesus Christ, it stands to reason that there can be only one truth. John 17:17-19.
Since He IS truth, then His Word is truth. John 17:17
In fact, He IS “The Word”. John 1:1
Therefore, we know that something is true if, and because He said it.

It is very Catholic of you to say these things!

We also know something is true if Holy Scripture had said it elsewhere, since the books within it were inspired by the Holy Spirit.Simple, isn’t ?

No, in fact, I cannot figure out what this means at all.

Nowhere in the bible does it say that the Mother of Jesus had other children why do so many insist she did.

Because it is a challenge used to “prove” that the Catholic Church is not infallible.

Like any good son Jesus will defend His Mother from detractors.

May He have mercy on their souls. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against the wickedness of men who resist the Truth.

Luke 1:
48 for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all ]generations will call me blessed;
49 for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.
50 And his mercy is on those who fear him from generation to generation

 

[guanophore]

Are you aware there is no evidence for any Gospel written in Aramaic?

I am aware that you are not aware of the evidence, and that ignorance of something, in your mind -= “it does not exist”.

Can you imagine how arrogant it sounds for you to make statements like this? It is the same as saying “I am not aware of it, therefore, there is no evidence, an it does not exist”. I mean, it is embarrassing to read.

Not sure what you mean here. Can you clarify?

At Pentecost, the Apostles are together with His Mother, the women, and his “brethren”. The total of them came to about 120. That is a lot of near relatives. Even Mary could not produce that many brethren for Jesus, had she had one ever year after He was born! I guess you think she was prone to triplets and quintuplets?

Mary’s other children were not “hidden”. We know that James and Jude were both authors of NT books and were brothers of Jesus.

It seems that you have quite a bit to learn about your family history there ja4. Those books were written by Apostles of Jesus, neither one of which can be a son of Mary, the mother of Jesus. You would be able to see this too, if you were to explore that post # 778 on the other thread that you keep avoiding.

 

[guanophore]

excellent job!!

Perhaps you can offer your thoughts on the job I did with the Catholic idea that Mary is a “type” for the Ark (link here).

you have it backwards. The ark is a type for Mary! The Truth is in the OT concealed and in the NT revealed.

 

[GeorgiaPeach]

Mary’s other children were not “hidden”. We know that James and Jude were both authors of NT books and were brothers of Jesus.

Which of her sons named James to you propose Mary “knew” in order to give birth to Jude?

“When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James.” (Acts 1:13)

 

[rinnie]

Oh my we have been busy. Ok let me start again, and try to get to the point fast so SS doesnt yell at me (just kidding SS). I said Jesus spoke Aramaic and hebr. So rather its translated Greek, Polish etc it does not matter if I say brother in Slavic and the poles know that brothers in Slavic means cousins, relatives, etc. they know what I mean. Now if you read brother in English because i translated it to you, you only know brother as brother. LIngo, thats what im saying and i believe i said before. Thats why we cant always understand the bible. LIke i can translate Fox in Slavic to a Polish person and say my sons thinks she a fox. They would probally think she sneaky or sly, not pretty.

And as far as the Blessed Mother having cousins, and relatives, I said I can not see how this can be proof that she still had other children. My Aunt never had children and had cousins and relatives. (it was said that was proof she had other children)

And if every word is to be taken at such face value and I read the bible out of context then I can say that Ok the protestants are right. Jesus did have brothers and sisters, Because didnt Jesus say that the Blessed Mother gave birth to everyone. Who are my brothers and sister anyone who folllows God right.

Again Why did Jesus talk to us in parables Matt:13-17
My words to make it quick, but go back and read it for yourself.

The Disciples have the HS to understand the mysteries of heaven, we don’t, Anyone who says they understand scripture must have the Gift of the HS. Thats why we can’t do it. That is why there is so much disagreement. But Jesus left us the Pope, Bishops, they have the gift. That is why I go by what the Pope tells us, he explains it to us. Or Priests, etc they help us. We dont argue with them, then we understand. That is why they are here to teach us. If not why not leave us a book and say you figure it out. Jesus did not do this.

I can show time after time, ORAL TEACHINGS, MANY Many things are not in the bible, Protestants miss this part, then they say they believe in Oral teachings, but then they say the Blessed Mother isnt a virgin, we say we are taught, Oral Teachings, from the CHurch, Oh well we dont believe in your Church, Well I DO, I cant help they will not believe what they can not see written in the Bible. There is so so much missing. But the Church has it all. Thats how we know. (now you tell me do protestants believe in the bible and oral teachings or not) NO

John21:25 There is much else that JEsus did, if it were written down in detail I do not suppose the world itself would hold all the books that would be written.

ORAL TEACHINGS are passed down to the Church. Thats where the Blessed Mother comes in.

How can anyone believe that the Catholic Church would tell the truth about Scripture in the bible, and then turn around and lie about the Oral Teachings. Would that not make the Church a liar, and if so what lie do you believe, and why do you choose to believe written teachings and not Oral whats the difference.

St Augustine, MARTIN LUTHERS guide and Mentor ought to have the last word about Sola Scriptura he said BUT NOT FOR THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH I WOULD NOT BELIEVE THE GOSPEL.

Bottom Line the Church Said through Oral Teachings Mary never had other Children she was a Virgin, I believe them. The Church thats my proof.

The Church said that Mary’s Body never hit the dirt. She was never buried she was TAKEN UP TO HEAVEN BY GOD. Not on her own the Way Jesus left she was taken up by God, Again I believe the Church.

Without the Church we have nothing!
:

 

[onenow1]

Hi
Originally Posted by onenow1
We also know something is true if Holy Scripture had said it elsewhere, since the books within it were inspired by the Holy Spirit.Simple, isn’t it ?

QUOTE=guanophore;4139719]
No, in fact, I cannot figure out what this means at all.

Quote= OneNow1, Mary echoes God’s word in the Magnificat.
Since the word of God is true then the words in the Magnificat,are also true. Detractors of Mary steer away from these words of God.

Peace OneNow1

 

[onenow1]

Hi! I found another text that uses the word “blessed” (Greek, makarizo- pronounce fortunate, call happy). It’s in James 5:11.

“Take, my brethren, for example of suffering evil, of labour and patience, the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord. Behold, we account them blessed who have endured. You have heard of the patience of Job and you have seen the end of the Lord, that the Lord is merciful and compassionate” (James 5:10-11- Douay-Rheims).

God bless.

Quote= OneNow1: A big difference in the use of the word blessed.

Examples : The Holy Spirit inspired Mary to say> HE God ].

James 5: 10-11 Holy Spirit inspired them to use the word WE not even an infrince that God said they were blessed. Contex, Contex Context.

Peace,OneNow1

 

[justasking4]

I am aware that you are not aware of the evidence, and that ignorance of something, in your mind -= “it does not exist”.

Can you imagine how arrogant it sounds for you to make statements like this? It is the same as saying “I am not aware of it, therefore, there is no evidence, an it does not exist”. I mean, it is embarrassing to read.

At Pentecost, the Apostles are together with His Mother, the women, and his “brethren”. The total of them came to about 120. That is a lot of near relatives. Even Mary could not produce that many brethren for Jesus, had she had one ever year after He was born! I guess you think she was prone to triplets and quintuplets?

It seems that you have quite a bit to learn about your family history there ja4. Those books were written by Apostles of Jesus, neither one of which can be a son of Mary, the mother of Jesus. You would be able to see this too, if you were to explore that post # 778 on the other thread that you keep avoiding.

If you think that post #778 can win the day then bring it over here. It certainly didn’t the job there you were hoping it would. Maybe it might do a better job here…You can be its champion–View attachment 3960

 

[justasking4]

Which of her sons named James to you propose Mary “knew” in order to give birth to Jude?

“When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James.” (Acts 1:13)

Not sure what you mean by your question. Can you clarify?

 

[GeorgiaPeach]

Not sure what you mean by your question. Can you clarify?

Sure. You claim that the Apostles James and Judas are blood brothers of Jesus in an attempt to prove Mary wasn’t ever virgin. Scripture clearly states that the Apostle Judas is the son of James. Hence, Mary would have had to have relations with James (whom you say is her son) in order to have Judas (whom you also say is her son).

Before you bring up that there are more than one James think about it. Draw a chart if needed. It will only make your argument more convoluted.

 

[GeorgiaPeach]

I can’t remember if anyone brought this up yet, but Hebrews 2 has some great scripture regarding brothers in Christ.

*Hebrews 2:5-18

5 For it was not to angels that he subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. 6 Instead, someone has testified somewhere: “What is man that you are mindful of him, or the son of man that you care for him? 7 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and honor, 8 subjecting all things under his feet.” In “subjecting” all things (to him), he left nothing not “subject to him.” Yet at present we do not see “all things subject to him,” 9 but we do see Jesus “crowned with glory and honor” because he suffered death, he who “for a little while” was made “lower than the angels,” that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. 10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the leader to their salvation perfect through suffering. 11 He who consecrates and those who are being consecrated all have one origin. Therefore, he is not ashamed to call them “brothers,” 12 saying: “I will proclaim your name to my brothers, in the midst of the assembly I will praise you”; 13 and again: “I will put my trust in him”; and again: “Behold, I and the children God has given me.” 14 Now since the children share in blood and flesh, he likewise shared in them, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and free those who through fear of death had been subject to slavery all their life. 16 Surely he did not help angels but rather the descendants of Abraham; 17 therefore, he had to become like his brothers in every way, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest before God to expiate the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself was tested through what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested. *

 

[justasking4]

Sure. You claim that the Apostles James and Judas are blood brothers of Jesus in an attempt to prove Mary wasn’t ever virgin. Scripture clearly states that the Apostle Judas is the son of James. Hence, Mary would have had to have relations with James (whom you say is her son) in order to have Judas (whom you also say is her son).

Before you bring up that there are more than one James think about it. Draw a chart if needed. It will only make your argument more convoluted.

There are a number of “James’” mentioned in the Scriptures. If you are referring to Luke 6:16 there is no reason to think this James is related to Jesus the brother of Lord since even His own brothers did not believe in Him during His earthly ministry. See John 7:5.

The James who is related to Jesus via Mary and thereby His blood brother is mentioned in Matthew 13:55. This brother of Jesus is the one in whom our Lord appeared to after the resurrection in I Corinthinians 15:7 who later wrote the book of James.

 

[Good_Fella]

There are a number of “James’” mentioned in the Scriptures. If you are referring to Luke 6:16 there is no reason to think this James is related to Jesus the brother of Lord since even His own brothers did not believe in Him during His earthly ministry. See John 7:5.

The James who is related to Jesus via Mary and thereby His blood brother is mentioned in Matthew 13:55. This brother of Jesus is the one in whom our Lord appeared to after the resurrection in I Corinthinians 15:7 who later wrote the book of James.

You’ve created an imaginary playmate. By keeping with the lists of the apostles, we know that this James you mention is James the less, also known as “the Just”, son of Alphaeus (Cleopas), cousin of our Lord, and Bishop of Jerusalem. His younger brother was the author of the Epistle of Jude who goes by that name. The other James is the son of Zebedee and brother of John the evangelist. There are only two by the name of James, and neither one was a uterine brother of Jesus.

 

[guanophore]

If you think that post #778 can win the day then bring it over here. It certainly didn’t the job there you were hoping it would. Maybe it might do a better job here…You can be its champion–

No, it did not do the job, ja4, except that trying to get you to look at the information proved to all of us that you are not willing to do so. No post will “wind the day” for a person who is unwilling to open his mind to look at what exists.

Judas, the Apostle of Jesus, is the son of a man named James. If he is a son of Jesus mother Mary, then she got him from another man besides Jesus. Jude, referenced in Matthew as “brethren of the Lord” is the son of someone other than Joseph with Mary.

There are a number of “James’” mentioned in the Scriptures. If you are referring to Luke 6:16 there is no reason to think this James is related to Jesus the brother of Lord since even His own brothers did not believe in Him during His earthly ministry. See John 7:5.

I agree that there are many James mentioned in Scripture. I also agree that there is no reason to beleive that an of them are children of Mary. I agree that many of his own kindred did not believe in Him during His earthly ministry.

The James who is related to Jesus via Mary and thereby His blood brother is mentioned in Matthew 13:55. This brother of Jesus is the one in whom our Lord appeared to after the resurrection in I Corinthinians 15:7 who later wrote the book of James.

In order to cling to this view, you must disregard an extrordinary amount of historical and scriptural evidence.

Your proposal would work better if you would choose a James that is not mentioned elsewhere in scripture!

 

[KenEOTE]

OK. I am jumping in late, and its late in the evening and I feel like being controversial. I say even if you believe he had biological brothers you can not prove. You can also not prove that he didn’t.

Before you start throwing stones. Think about it. There are enough verses that can be read that say that Mary and Joseph did in fact have union as husband and wife and there are verses that say your brothers and sisters. So technically you can not prove he did not have biological brothers and sisters. It is a matter of faith.

You are placing your faith in Church tradition that says he did not. But as we are not able to travel back in time we have to go by someones word. When you do that it is a matter of faith.

Is your faith strong enough to allow someone to question it? Is your faith strong enough that you don’t need concrete evidence? That is all carry on. Good reading so far.

 

[sola_scriptura]

Faith in the veracity of an earthly institution is not the same thing as faith in God.