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

[onenow1]

HI, All
All the evidence ja4 is that Jesus had no biological brothers.

                                        Reasons]

1. Why would it be so obscure, Jesus never mentions any brothers.
2. Logic and reason preclude any blood brothers, His fame spread so rapidly, it would be inconceviable someone did not lay claim to this, sibling bond.

3.Based on such flimsy evidence as anyone has, what is the real reason for slighting the Mother of GOD? Aren’t some judging her? Aren’t they calumnizing her?

1. If indeed Catholic are correct, which we are! ] And others who say we are wrong, I would be cautious and not offer any personal opinions. And pay attention to reason # 3.

Peace, OneNow1,

I

 

[guanophore]

.
Actually you could make the case that children grow up best in families where there is more than one child. Many lessons can be learned in such an enviorment.

Indeed! Perhaps this is why Jesus was surrounded by so many close relatives, referred to in scripture as “brothers and sisters”?

First we must study the Scriptures in light of this question. If we have good reasons to believe she had other children of her own then we should accept that

I think that is what you have done, is it not? What is puzzling is that you have come to a Catholic Board, apparently in an effort to pursuade Catholics that we “should” accept your anti-Catholic views. I must remind you that CAF is not a venue for you to promote your Sola Scriptura doctrine.

and not try to make the Scriptures say things that it does not even though it may have been taught by the church for centuries. Remember the church can be mistaken the Scriptures can’t.

Since the NT was produced by Catholics, it is very clear to Catholics what is being written about in its pages. It seems different to you because you are separated from the Aposotlic Tradition that produced them, and when reading them in a vaccuum, it is easy to misunderstand.

The church is not “mistaken”, ja4. When Jesus stated that He would send His spirit to guide the Church into “all truth” He meant exactly what He said.

You go far beyond what the Scriptures tell us about Mary here.

Not far, but it does not concern us, since we are not confined to the Scriptures as the only source of Revelation from God.

Again you go beyond what is written into speculations.

I undersand how it would seem that way to you, since you are separated from the mindset of those who wrote the NT.

If there is a Tradition that says Mary had other children then you have a contradiction. Scripture and Tradition cannot both be right. One is in error.

There are no contradictions between Scripture and Tradition. They both came from the same source. However, I agree that there is one in error. The one who separates the two from each other is in error.

 

[GailMac]

Oh dear, I’m gonna throw another monkey wrench in this argument. The passage in question: 54 He came to his native place and taught the people in their synagogue. They were astonished and said, “Where did this man get such wisdom and mighty deeds? 55 Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? 56 Are not his sisters all with us? Where did this man get all this?” 57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his native place and in his own house.” 58 And he did not work many mighty deeds there because of their lack of faith.

Did anyone ever consider the fact that at that time, Jesus began calling those who followed Him brothers and sisters? That being said, is it being tossed in His face by those who don’t approve of His teaching in the synagogue and used this instead to imply nasty things about His Mother? The crowd pointing their fingers at Jesus were playing nasty! Ummmmmm…keep in mind they eventually Crucify Him! And in many ways the disciples were becoming increasingly scared for their very lives for hanging with the Man!

So if we go on to the previous Chapter, twelve, we see Jesus calling His disciples brothers and sisters and even His mother! This passage says this: 46 While he was still speaking to the crowds, his mother and his brothers appeared outside, wishing to speak with him. 47 (Someone told him, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, asking to speak with you.”) 48 But he said in reply to the one who told him, “Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?” 49 And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father is my brother, and sister, and mother.” Matthew 12.

Some point to this and claim more “proof” that Mary had other children. But what they leave out is once again, we DO have God Himself speaking, and stating very plainly that all His brothers and sisters and mothers are those who keep His will! So whose to say the brothers mentioned with Mary His Mother are not more disciples? Only those who want to detract from His Mother’s chastity and St. Joseph’s integrity. They interject the word “blood” brothers into the sentence, but God Himself corrects this erroneous addition Himself! 49 And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father is my brother, and sister, and mother.” So, what have we got? An addition to Scripture by protestants who have a problem with Mary of “blood” before the word brothers. Alas, if they’d only thought to remove the rest of the discourse, in particular Jesus’s words stating who is truely His family and why!

What the protestants actually do is give the credibility of God Himself to *others voices *in the passage, and take it away from God! Yikes! So, who do you think you should listen to?

Peace,

Gail

 

[GailMac]

I’m gonna add another thought or two.

Dear Justasking, you keep trying to take Guano to task by stating he’s adding to Scriptures! You do this thusly: “Originally Posted by justasking4
You go far beyond what the Scriptures tell us about Mary here.” And again: “Originally Posted by justasking4
Again you go beyond what is written into speculations.”
And once more: “Originally Posted by justasking4
and not try to make the Scriptures say things that it does not”

Now, my thoughts are this - why isn’t it taking things beyond what the Scriptures actually say by interjecting the word “blood” to the passages of St. Matthew’s Gospel, Chapter 12? YOU ADD TO THEM! And try to impy with them that Mary had other children, when once again we have GOD Himself speaking in the passages correcting the twist you try to give the Scriptures. So, who do you personally give God’s authority to? NOT GOD! You strip Him of His voice and put your voice in there instead and in so doing aline yourself with those who Crucified Him!

I’m kinda tired of this accusation being hurled at the Church and her faithful when you are actually doing this and corrupting those who hear you with the perversions of Gospel you claim contain the “truth” about Mary. Why you have no fear of God after knowing that this IS His word and should be kept is beyond me. If you hold His words as close to your heart as you claim, why do you twist them? I know, Justasking, you’d answer honestly if you could, but you can’t. A lifetime of error is a lot to give up. But hey, you can do it! Lots have.

Peace,

Gail

 

[guanophore]

Now, my thoughts are this - why isn’t it taking things beyond what the Scriptures actually say by interjecting the word “blood” to the passages of St. Matthew’s Gospel, Chapter 12? YOU ADD TO THEM! And try to impy with them that Mary had other children, when once again we have GOD Himself speaking in the passages correcting the twist you try to give the Scriptures. So, who do you personally give God’s authority to? NOT GOD! You strip Him of His voice and put your voice in there instead and in so doing aline yourself with those who Crucified Him!

And uses for his bolster the words of calumny spoken against Jesus, who are either ignorant or malevolent, saying that Jesus is the “carpenter’s son”, they either do not know, or refuse to accept His origins. These people are the company of ja4.

 

[Jeremiah333]

I’d like to say that I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind, I’m just providing a different angle to think about. Let’s reason this out.

They were astonished and said, “Where did this man get such wisdom and mighty deeds? 55 Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas? 56 Are not his sisters all with us? Where did this man get all this?” 57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his native place and in his own house.” 58 And he did not work many mighty deeds there because of their lack of faith.

“…*Is he not the carpenter’s son…” * - literally.
“…Is not his mother named Mary …” - literally.
“…and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas…” - Why wouldn’t this be literally also?

So if we go on to the previous Chapter, twelve, we see Jesus calling His disciples brothers and sisters and even His mother! This passage says this: 46 While he was still speaking to the crowds, his mother and his brothers appeared outside, wishing to speak with him.

Right. We see Jesus calling His disciples brothers and sisters and even his mother. It seems like it is maybe the first time the crowds had ever heard that Jesus called disciples and believers in the crowd “mothers & brothers”. Especially when we hear this part:

"48 But he said in reply to the one who told him, “Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?” 49 And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father is my brother, and sister, and mother.” Matthew 12.

It sounds like he is almost “reprimanding them” for not already knowing that his disciples were “his brothers and sisters”, doesn’t it?

So… if he is setting them straight- that his brothers and sisters and mother are the ones who obey God’s will, that means that at the time that “someone” told him that His mother and brothers were outside, they were NOT *already *calling all his disciples his brothers and mother. So the one who said that, meant it quite literally, his mother and brothers were outside waiting to talk to him.

Some point to this and claim more “proof” that Mary had other children. But what they leave out is once again, we DO have God Himself speaking, and stating very plainly that all His brothers and sisters and mothers are those who keep His will!

Yes, too bad they didn’t know that before someone said his mother and brothers were waiting for Him.

So whose to say the brothers mentioned with Mary His Mother are not more disciples?

Well, because they didn’t know yet that He calls His disciples brothers, etc, that person that said his brothers and mother were outside, meant it literally. If they *had *known, they would have said “There are more of your brothers and mothers outside wanting to speak with you.

“Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father is my brother, and sister, and mother.”

So, what have we got? An addition to Scripture by protestants who have a problem with Mary of “blood” before the word brothers. Alas, if they’d only thought to remove the rest of the discourse, in particular Jesus’s words stating who is truely His family and why!

Yep, Jesus set them straight about who His brothers and mothers are, because they were a bit confused, thinking that ONLY his real brothers and mothers were called that.
He sure did set them straight. He let them know that His own brothers and mother were not the only ones called His mother and brothers.

Yikes! So, who do you think you should listen to?

Most definitely we should listen to God. Absolutely no one else.

 

[Good_Fella]

I’d like to say that I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind, I’m just providing a different angle to think about. Let’s reason this out.

“…*Is he not the carpenter’s son…” * - literally.
“…Is not his mother named Mary …” - literally.
“…and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas…” - Why wouldn’t this be literally also?

Right. We see Jesus calling His disciples brothers and sisters and even his mother. It seems like it is maybe the first time the crowds had ever heard that Jesus called disciples and believers in the crowd “mothers & brothers”. Especially when we hear this part:

It sounds like he is almost “reprimanding them” for not already knowing that his disciples were “his brothers and sisters”, doesn’t it?

So… if he is setting them straight- that his brothers and sisters and mother are the ones who obey God’s will, that means that at the time that “someone” told him that His mother and brothers were outside, they were NOT *already *calling all his disciples his brothers and mother. So the one who said that, meant it quite literally, his mother and brothers were outside waiting to talk to him.

Yes, too bad they didn’t know that before someone said his mother and brothers were waiting for Him.

Well, because they didn’t know yet that He calls His disciples brothers, etc, that person that said his brothers and mother were outside, meant it literally. If they *had *known, they would have said “There are more of your brothers and mothers outside wanting to speak with you.

Yep, Jesus set them straight about who His brothers and mothers are, because they were a bit confused, thinking that ONLY his real brothers and mothers were called that.
He sure did set them straight. He let them know that His own brothers and mother were not the only ones called His mother and brothers.

Most definitely we should listen to God. Absolutely no one else.

The problem with your angle is that James, Joses, Judas, Simon, and the sisters are not only disciples of Jesus but also his kinfolk: cousins and maybe other extended relatives. Don’t expect to convince anyone.

 

[rinnie]

Justforasking, Okay here it is AGAIN. The Post above just hit me.

IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Okay now, If we like you take every single word and make it just what it says (SOLA SCRIPT) then why in the world can you believe that St Joseph is not the Father of Jesus,

How can you believe as the CC teaches us that Jesus is the SON OF GOD, Not the carpenter’s son. Because is that not what is WRITTEN? Does that bible not say I repeat IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Where does it say Joseph is a STEP-FATHER, or Foster etc. Guess you have to take the word of the CC dont you. But then again you don’t believe anything thats not written in the Bible. So now without the Church how are we to figure it out? Now who is right on this you or the Church once again. Now the Church says Jesus is not the SOn of St Joseph, it also says Mary never had any other kids, whats a person to do?

 

[Good_Fella]

Justforasking, Okay here it is AGAIN. The Post above just hit me.

IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Okay now, If we like you take every single word and make it just what it says (SOLA SCRIPT) then why in the world can you believe that St Joseph is not the Father of Jesus,

How can you believe as the CC teaches us that Jesus is the SON OF GOD, Not the carpenter’s son. Because is that not what is WRITTEN? Does that bible not say I repeat IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Where does it say Joseph is a STEP-FATHER, or Foster etc. Guess you have to take the word of the CC dont you. But then again you don’t believe anything thats not written in the Bible. So now without the Church how are we to figure it out? Now who is right on this you or the Church once again. Now the Church says Jesus is not the SOn of St Joseph, it also says Mary never had any other kids, whats a person to do?

Excellent point, Rinnie! You are not far from the kingdom of heaven. JA4, however, might argue that other pasages affirm our Lord’s divinity. We have Peter’s declaration of faith, as well as Thomas’: “My Lord and my God.” But in the doubter’s case it was flesh and blood which revealed the divine truth to him. In any event, you provide a good moral lesson for our misguided friend: Church doctrines do not originate from Scripture; nor are they determined by isolating single verses. Tradition comes first. The apostles’ declaration of faith reflect a traditional belief of the Church that existed before it was put down in writing.

“How shall this be, seeing I do not know a man?”
Luke 1, 34

PAX :harp:

 

[Jeremiah333]

The problem with your angle is that James, Joses, Judas, Simon, and the sisters are not only disciples of Jesus but also his kinfolk: cousins and maybe other extended relatives. Don’t expect to convince anyone.

Like I said, I don’t expect to convince anyone… just wanted to give you something to think about logically.

If it was his kinfolk, cousins, or otherwise, they would have used the word for** cousin**, or whatever kinfolk they were.

 

[Jeremiah333]

Justforasking, Okay here it is AGAIN. The Post above just hit me.

IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Okay now, If we like you take every single word and make it just what it says (SOLA SCRIPT) then why in the world can you believe that St Joseph is not the Father of Jesus,

How can you believe as the CC teaches us that Jesus is the SON OF GOD, Not the carpenter’s son. Because is that not what is WRITTEN? Does that bible not say I repeat IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Where does it say Joseph is a STEP-FATHER, or Foster etc. Guess you have to take the word of the CC dont you. But then again you don’t believe anything thats not written in the Bible. So now without the Church how are we to figure it out? Now who is right on this you or the Church once again. Now the Church says Jesus is not the SOn of St Joseph, it also says Mary never had any other kids, whats a person to do?

The people of that day didn’t know that Jesus was the Son of God. It is the people there saying “the carpenter’s son”. They didn’t know yet, that Jesus is the Son of God. …

so I don’t get whatever you are trying to say.

 

[Vanny]

I can understand why you might see it that way. But since Jesus was her only child, what Jesus was doing was giving His mother into the care of the Church, and the Church to her. All of us can be “the disciple that Jesus loved” standing at the foot of the cross,and can receive her as our mother, by virtue of our status as adopted sons of the Father.

If Jesus did have blood brothers, they would have been faithful Jews just like the rest of the family. Their lack of acceptance of Jesus as messiah would have no bearing on their familial duty to care for their mother.

Exactly. And this is why I- as a Lutheran- believe that Jesus had no biological siblings- They would have been obliged to care for Mary after Jesus’ death-but Jesus gave her to John, as he knew that as a widow ,and with no son, she would have had no means of support. He was seeing to his mothers care.

 

[justasking4]

rinnie;4252069]Justforasking, Okay here it is AGAIN. The Post

above just hit me.

IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Okay now, If we like you take every single word and make it just what it says (SOLA SCRIPT) then why in the world can you believe that St Joseph is not the Father of Jesus,

Beacause the HS “overshadowed” her which resulted in the conception of Jesus. See Luke 1:35

How can you believe as the CC teaches us that Jesus is the SON OF GOD, Not the carpenter’s son. Because is that not what is WRITTEN?

Jesus is both. He is the Son and also the carpenter’s son. Both are presented in Scripture as being true of Him.

Does that bible not say I repeat IS HE NOT THE CARPENTER’S SON. Where does it say Joseph is a STEP-FATHER, or Foster etc.

Scripture does not use these terms of Joseph but we do know that Joseph is the husband of Mary and Mary is the mother of Jesus which makes Joseph the father of Jesus. It is the relationship that Mary and Joseph have as husband and wife that makes Joseph the father.

Guess you have to take the word of the CC dont you.

Only if the CC can back it up with Scripture and we have Scripture to do so.

But then again you don’t believe anything thats not written in the Bible. So now without the Church how are we to figure it out?

I just did above without appealing to your church.

Now who is right on this you or the Church once again.

If your church supports the Scriptures on this i.e. Joseph is the father of Jesus then both are right.

Now the Church says Jesus is not the SOn of St Joseph,

Huh? I thought the Catholic church taught this i.e. Joseph is the earthly father of Jesus. Am i wrong?

it also says Mary never had any other kids, whats a person to do?

Sadly you are mistaken. The Scriptures certainly show us she did indeed have other children and Jesus did have blood brothers and sisters.

 

[Good_Fella]

Sadly you are mistaken. The Scriptures certainly show us she did indeed have other children and Jesus did have blood brothers and sisters.

Sadly your interpretation of the scriptures is mistaken. You simply see what you wish to believe. :whacky:

He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other scriptures, to their own destruction.
2 Peter 3, 16

“Now, the cause, in all the points previously enumerated, of the false opinions, and of the impious statements or ignorant assertions about God, appears to be nothing else than the not understanding Scripture according to its spiritual meaning, but the interpretation of it by the mere letter. And, therefore, to those who believe that the sacred books are not the compositions of men, but that they were composed by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, agreeably to the will of the Father of all things through Jesus Christ, and that they have come down to us, we must point out the ways of interpreting them which appear correct to us, who cling to the standard of the heavenly Church of Jesus Christ according to the succession of the apostles.”
Origen, First Principles, 4, 1:9 (A.D. 230)

*“For if Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son than Jesus, and yet Jesus says to His mother, ‘Woman behold thy son,’ and not, ‘Behold you have this son also,’ then He virtually said to her, ‘Lo, this is Jesus, whom thou didst bear.’ Is it not the case that everyone who is perfect lives himself no longer, but Christ lives in him; and if Christ lives in him, then it is said of him to Mary, ‘Behold thy son Christ.’ What a mind, then, must we have to enable us to interpret in a worthy manner this work, though it be committed to the earthly treasure-house of common speech, of writing any passer-by can read, and which can be heard when read aloud by anyone who lends to it his bodily ears?” *
Origen, Commentary on John, 1:6 (A.D. 232)

For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Romans 8, 29

PAX :tiphat:

 

[GailMac]

Oh dear Justasking. I’m very disappointed in you. You state:" Sadly you are mistaken. The Scriptures certainly show us she did indeed have other children and Jesus did have blood brothers and sisters." Yes, she did. And I’m one. Please, would you please become one too? Then you wouldn’t get so miffed when you wonder how to get around the blaspheming part in your mind and give God His peace with your poor soul.

Peace,

Gail

 

[Analyzer]

**As Per Catholic *New American Bible’s ***footnote, verse 47 of Matthew 12 “is omitted in some important textual witnesses, including Codex Sinaiticus (original reading) and Codex Vaticanus”. This verse is: (Someone told him, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, asking to speak with you.”).
It is re-inserted in New American Bible but in BRACKETS.

I don’t know why this game of omission and re-insertion of verse with BRACKETS is being played by the church. Same kind of game is played with the first name of notorious prisoner BARABBBAS which is also Jesus. And not to mention the dilemma of John 3:16 in RSV and some other Bibles.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PVL.HTM#$31M

​

 

[justasking4]

Oh dear Justasking. I’m very disappointed in you. You state:" Sadly you are mistaken. The Scriptures certainly show us she did indeed have other children and Jesus did have blood brothers and sisters." Yes, she did. And I’m one. Please, would you please become one too? Then you wouldn’t get so miffed when you wonder how to get around the blaspheming part in your mind and give God His peace with your poor soul.

Peace,

Gail

These Marian doctrines are absolutely amazing. Not only do they claim that Mary did not have other children as in Matthew 13:55-56 and John 7:5 clearly show but now she is the mother of Catholics. This is what happens when people reject the Scriptures i.e. Sola Scriptura and open themselves up to believe almost anything.

 

[Angelos]

**As Per Catholic *New American Bible’s ***footnote, verse 47 of Matthew 12 “is omitted in some important textual witnesses, including Codex Sinaiticus (original reading) and Codex Vaticanus”. This verse is: (Someone told him, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, asking to speak with you.”).
It is re-inserted in New American Bible but in BRACKETS.

I don’t know why this game of omission and re-insertion of verse with BRACKETS is being played by the church. Same kind of game is played with the first name of notorious prisoner BARABBBAS which is also Jesus. And not to mention the dilemma of John 3:16 in RSV and some other Bibles.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PVL.HTM#$31M

​

However, we know perfectly well that you have an incurable addiction to copying and pasting some info about the minor variations in some Greek manuscripts although those variations fail to support your theories, being essentially irrelevant to the topic discussed.

 

[rinnie]

The people of that day didn’t know that Jesus was the Son of God. It is the people there saying “the carpenter’s son”. They didn’t know yet, that Jesus is the Son of God. …

so I don’t get whatever you are trying to say.

What my point was is that you cannot take every single word in the bible to heart. Justforasking takes one sentence and runs with it. Dwells on one sentence, Like I could of with what was said about Joseph, Of course he was the Son of God, and of course alot of people didnt believe it at that time.

Just look how I was trying to prove a point and she blew everything I said out of context. Thats an plain example of what she does every single time. She how I was just trying to prove a point (and what my point WAS and IS, we need the Church to help us to understand. She turned everything I said. Did exactly with it as she does with the bible. Read the post right after mine, she knew exactly what i meant. That is what she does with the bible, she does not learn what the meaning is she tells us what it means. You cannot do that, The bible is not something you can understand just by reading it. Too much is involved in that. You must learn first what God is trying to tell you, then you can read the bible and understand it. She did exactly what I said, took one sentence I said and look what she did with it. One sentence. Read again what i wrote and then what she wrote. I REST MY CASE.

 

[GailMac]

Dear justasking! You state:“This is what happens when people reject the Scriptures i.e. Sola Scriptura and open themselves up to believe almost anything.” …To which I add yeppers! If you don’t believe something you’ll fall for anything.

Peace,

Gail