"If" Jesus had blood brothers & sisters, then...

[Nicea325]

“If” Jesus had blood brothers & sisters, then…I am curious why Jesus would not have made one them an Apostle? Why no slight detail of little bro’s and sisters by Jesus? No other NT folks (followers of Jesus) discuss them in detail or refer to them as followers? If Mary His Mother followed Jesus,how strange the NT writers make no mention of who took care of Jesus’ siblings?

No mention by the NT writers if they were jealous of Jesus or proud of big bro Jesus? Zilch…nada about them.No word by the ECF’s about their exact names, backgrounds or whereabouts? More important,if Jesus did indeed have blood brothers,strange he would leave the care of His mother to John?

So many unanswered questions about the so-called brothers and sisters of Jesus.

 

[rev_kevin]

“If” Jesus had blood brothers & sisters, then…I am curious why Jesus would not have made one them an Apostle? Why no slight detail of little bro’s and sisters by Jesus? No other NT folks (followers of Jesus) discuss them in detail or refer to them as followers? If Mary His Mother followed Jesus,how strange the NT writers make no mention of who took care of Jesus’ siblings?

No mention by the NT writers if they were jealous of Jesus or proud of big bro Jesus? Zilch…nada about them.No word by the ECF’s about their exact names, backgrounds or whereabouts? More important,if Jesus did indeed have blood brothers,strange he would leave the care of His mother to John?

So many unanswered questions about the so-called brothers and sisters of Jesus.

The Bible tells us that Jesus‘ mother would be a virgin at the time of her birth, so there would be no question of his true parentage-the child of a mortal mother and a divine Father. However, it does not specify that this was to be her status the remainder of her life. She was already engaged when she learned she had been chosen to be the mother of the Savior and Joseph learned he was to be that child’s guardian.

Although some Christians argue that Jesus’ siblings were really the children of a much older Joseph from a previous marriage, the scriptures appear to suggest otherwise, because Jesus was referred to as God’s only begotten Son, but Mary’s first-born son. This distinction suggests Mary had other children after Jesus was born, but God did not beget any further children.

In Matthew 13, we learn a little about Jesus’ siblings.

55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Of course, we know Joseph was only Jesus’ guardian, not His physical father, but the verses give name to four brothers and mention that he had sisters, using the plural form. Verse 57 also gives us a clue that all was not smooth in the home. Jesus mentioned that a prophet was without honor in his own home, suggesting Jesus’ brothers, at least, did not recognize His divinity. John 7:5 states this more plainly:

For neither did his brethren believe in him.

This is further suggested by the fact that when Jesus was dying, he placed his mother in the care of an apostle. Had his brothers been present, and supportive of His mission, they would have been the ones to care for her.

Happily, we also see that after the Savior’s resurrection, his brothers repented and became what we now call Christians. James, in fact, rose to an important place in the church, after seeing his resurrected brother and penned one of the books of the Bible.

After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. (1 Corinthians 15:7)

It is likely this James replaced the other apostle, also named James, who was the brother of John and killed by Herod Agrippa. We know Jesus’ brother became an apostle through Paul’s epistle to the Galatians:

“But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.” (Galatians 1:19)

His brother Jude also wrote an epistle that is preserved in the Bible, and he identifies himself as Jesus’ brother: Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: (Jude 1:1)

Scholar Gerald N. Lund adds, “Nothing more is recorded of Simon and Joses in the New Testament, but an ancient tradition, preserved for us by the early church historian, Eusebius, states that Simon later became bishop of the church in Jerusalem and was finally crucified in the Roman persecutions under the emperor Trajan.”

Sources:

Carlfred B. Broderick, “The Brothers of Jesus: Loving the Unbelieving Relative,” Ensign, Mar 1987, 50

Robert J. Matthews, “Mary and Joseph,” Ensign, Dec 1974, 13

Richard Lloyd Anderson, “The First Presidency of the Early Church: Their Lives and Epistles,” Ensign, Aug 1988, 16

Gerald N. Lund, “I Have a Question,” Ensign, Sept. 1975, 36-37

 

[Nelka]

Brethren.

 

[Nicea325]

The Bible tells us that Jesus‘ mother would be a virgin at the time of her birth, so there would be no question of his true parentage-the child of a mortal mother and a divine Father. However, it does not specify that this was to be her status the remainder of her life. She was already engaged when she learned she had been chosen to be the mother of the Savior and Joseph learned he was to be that child’s guardian.

Although some Christians argue that Jesus’ siblings were really the children of a much older Joseph from a previous marriage, the scriptures appear to suggest otherwise, because Jesus was referred to as God’s only begotten Son, but Mary’s first-born son. This distinction suggests Mary had other children after Jesus was born, but God did not beget any further children.

In Matthew 13, we learn a little about Jesus’ siblings.

55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Of course, we know Joseph was only Jesus’ guardian, not His physical father, but the verses give name to four brothers and mention that he had sisters, using the plural form. Verse 57 also gives us a clue that all was not smooth in the home. Jesus mentioned that a prophet was without honor in his own home, suggesting Jesus’ brothers, at least, did not recognize His divinity. John 7:5 states this more plainly:

For neither did his brethren believe in him.

This is further suggested by the fact that when Jesus was dying, he placed his mother in the care of an apostle. Had his brothers been present, and supportive of His mission, they would have been the ones to care for her.

Happily, we also see that after the Savior’s resurrection, his brothers repented and became what we now call Christians. James, in fact, rose to an important place in the church, after seeing his resurrected brother and penned one of the books of the Bible.

After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. (1 Corinthians 15:7)

It is likely this James replaced the other apostle, also named James, who was the brother of John and killed by Herod Agrippa. We know Jesus’ brother became an apostle through Paul’s epistle to the Galatians:

“But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.” (Galatians 1:19)

His brother Jude also wrote an epistle that is preserved in the Bible, and he identifies himself as Jesus’ brother: Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: (Jude 1:1)

Scholar Gerald N. Lund adds, “Nothing more is recorded of Simon and Joses in the New Testament, but an ancient tradition, preserved for us by the early church historian, Eusebius, states that Simon later became bishop of the church in Jerusalem and was finally crucified in the Roman persecutions under the emperor Trajan.”

Sources:

Carlfred B. Broderick, “The Brothers of Jesus: Loving the Unbelieving Relative,” Ensign, Mar 1987, 50

Robert J. Matthews, “Mary and Joseph,” Ensign, Dec 1974, 13

Richard Lloyd Anderson, “The First Presidency of the Early Church: Their Lives and Epistles,” Ensign, Aug 1988, 16

Gerald N. Lund, “I Have a Question,” Ensign, Sept. 1975, 36-37

Rev Kev:

I respect your position and beliefs,however, I do not accept the relatively modern Protestant position of Mary having other children. Unfortunatley much you provided still does not answer a lot of what is missing about the so-called brothers and sisters of Jesus.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Rev Kev:

I respect your position and beliefs,however, I do not accept the relatively modern Protestant position of Mary having other children. Unfortunatley much you provided still does not answer a lot of what is missing about the so-called brothers and sisters of Jesus.

The ‘firstborn’ argument is relatively new (as is indeed the man-made protestant teaching that Mary was not a perpetual virgin. Of course, not all protestants believe this).

Some protestants appear to have forgotten the verses

Exodus 13:1 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: [2] Sanctify unto me every firstborn that openeth the womb among the children of Israel, as well of men as of beasts: for they are all mine.

“Firstborn that openeth the womb”.

Suppose a woman (call her Joan) gives birth to one child. A son. By Jewish law this is the FIRSTBORN who has ‘opened the womb’.

Joan never has another child.

Does that mean her son is no longer a ‘firstborn’ because he never has brothers or sisters? Please answer me that.

 

[rev_kevin]

The ‘firstborn’ argument is relatively new (as is indeed the man-made protestant teaching that Mary was not a perpetual virgin. Of course, not all protestants believe this).

Some protestants appear to have forgotten the verses

Exodus 13:1 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: [2] Sanctify unto me every firstborn that openeth the womb among the children of Israel, as well of men as of beasts: for they are all mine.

“Firstborn that openeth the womb”.

Suppose a woman (call her Joan) gives birth to one child. A son. By Jewish law this is the FIRSTBORN who has ‘opened the womb’.

Joan never has another child.

Does that mean her son is no longer a ‘firstborn’ because he never has brothers or sisters? Please answer me that.

If someone has only one child how can that child be called the firstborn? That child would be the only child born. Saying firstborn implies she has other children.

Common sence would tell you that the firstborn would open the womb but it does not suggest a only child.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

If someone has only one child how can that child be called the firstborn? That child would be the only child born. Saying firstborn implies she has other children.

Common sence would tell you that the firstborn would open the womb but it does not suggest a only child.

Really? So (we are talking of Jewish people then, Rev. Kev), you’re telling me that if two Jewish people from the time of Moses on had a son, and then had no other children, that child would NOT be considered “Firstborn”? Wouldn’t have the ‘rights’ or 'responsibilities" of a firstborn?

But Jewish law says that the firstborn who opens the womb should be redeemed. When is that redemption? AFTER the ‘second’ child is born? No, it is 40 days after the child --the FIRST–is born. If there are NO children born after, that child still has the STATUS (if male) of a FIRST BORN.

IOW: The status of 'Firstborn" in NO WAY, SHAPE, or FORM implies that there is a second or third born after. First born is First born even if ONLY BORN.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The Bible tells us that Jesus‘ mother would be a virgin at the time of her birth, so there would be no question of his true parentage-the child of a mortal mother and a divine Father. However, it does not specify that this was to be her status the remainder of her life. She was already engaged when she learned she had been chosen to be the mother of the Savior and Joseph learned he was to be that child’s guardian.

Although some Christians argue that Jesus’ siblings were really the children of a much older Joseph from a previous marriage, the scriptures appear to suggest otherwise, because Jesus was referred to as God’s only begotten Son, but Mary’s first-born son. This distinction suggests Mary had other children after Jesus was born, but God did not beget any further children.

In Matthew 13, we learn a little about Jesus’ siblings.

55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Of course, we know Joseph was only Jesus’ guardian, not His physical father, but the verses give name to four brothers and mention that he had sisters, using the plural form. Verse 57 also gives us a clue that all was not smooth in the home. Jesus mentioned that a prophet was without honor in his own home, suggesting Jesus’ brothers, at least, did not recognize His divinity. John 7:5 states this more plainly:

For neither did his brethren believe in him.

This is further suggested by the fact that when Jesus was dying, he placed his mother in the care of an apostle. Had his brothers been present, and supportive of His mission, they would have been the ones to care for her.

Happily, we also see that after the Savior’s resurrection, his brothers repented and became what we now call Christians. James, in fact, rose to an important place in the church, after seeing his resurrected brother and penned one of the books of the Bible.

After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. (1 Corinthians 15:7)

It is likely this James replaced the other apostle, also named James, who was the brother of John and killed by Herod Agrippa. We know Jesus’ brother became an apostle through Paul’s epistle to the Galatians:

“But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.” (Galatians 1:19)

His brother Jude also wrote an epistle that is preserved in the Bible, and he identifies himself as Jesus’ brother: Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: (Jude 1:1)

Scholar Gerald N. Lund adds, “Nothing more is recorded of Simon and Joses in the New Testament, but an ancient tradition, preserved for us by the early church historian, Eusebius, states that Simon later became bishop of the church in Jerusalem and was finally crucified in the Roman persecutions under the emperor Trajan.”

Sources:

Carlfred B. Broderick, “The Brothers of Jesus: Loving the Unbelieving Relative,” Ensign, Mar 1987, 50

Robert J. Matthews, “Mary and Joseph,” Ensign, Dec 1974, 13

Richard Lloyd Anderson, “The First Presidency of the Early Church: Their Lives and Epistles,” Ensign, Aug 1988, 16

Gerald N. Lund, “I Have a Question,” Ensign, Sept. 1975, 36-37

CONTENT RULES

1. Do not paste entire articles from web sites into a post. If you wish to reference an article on the web, link to its web address, instead.

Guidelines on posting articles to Catholic Answer Forums:

Avoid quoting from copyrighted works. Instead, paraphrase what is said and provide a link. If you do quote, limit your quotes to one to three paragraphs.

The ENTIRE article you copied and pasted is also copyrighted material.

How is this applying yourself honestly in a discussion? To me it seems to be maintaining an agenda against anything Catholic, and being lazy on top of it.

 

[T_More]

Was not David referred to by God as “firstborn”? David certainly was not firstborn of Jesse, but the youngest, correct?

 

[Joe_Kelley]

If someone has only one child how can that child be called the firstborn? That child would be the only child born. Saying firstborn implies she has other children.

Common sence would tell you that the firstborn would open the womb but it does not suggest a only child.

The offering for the firstborn had to be made 38 days after birth. How were they to know then whether there would be more? If she has no more children would they undo the sacrifice since he is not the first born?

I hope that the fact that I am married to my first wife does not imply that I will have more.

 

[puzzleannie]

well I have brothers and sisters and if I were starting my own religion I would think twice about having them for followers, much less successors. Of course if I did that, it would be a non-Catholic religion, so I guess the question belongs on this forum.

 

[Rightlydivide]

“If” Jesus had blood brothers & sisters, then…I am curious why Jesus would not have made one them an Apostle? Why no slight detail of little bro’s and sisters by Jesus? No other NT folks (followers of Jesus) discuss them in detail or refer to them as followers? If Mary His Mother followed Jesus,how strange the NT writers make no mention of who took care of Jesus’ siblings?

No mention by the NT writers if they were jealous of Jesus or proud of big bro Jesus? Zilch…nada about them.No word by the ECF’s about their exact names, backgrounds or whereabouts? More important,if Jesus did indeed have blood brothers,strange he would leave the care of His mother to John?

So many unanswered questions about the so-called brothers and sisters of Jesus.

James, the brother of the Lord, was an Apostle. They are mentioned in the NT but they are not the focus of the NT. As far as the ECF, here is Hegesippus, the earliest Christian historian from around the year 130-150 AD.

James, the Lord’s brother, succeeds to the government of the Church, in conjunction with the apostles. He has been universally called the Just, from the days of the Lord down to the present time. For many bore the name of James; but this one was holy from his mother’s womb

There still survived of the kindred of the Lord the grandsons of Judas, who according to the flesh was called his brother. These were informed against, as belonging to the family of David, and Evocatus brought them before Domitian Caesar: for that emperor dreaded the advent of Christ, as Herod had done

 

[rev_kevin]

The offering for the firstborn had to be made 38 days after birth. How were they to know then whether there would be more? If she has no more children would they undo the sacrifice since he is not the first born?

I hope that the fact that I am married to my first wife does not imply that I will have more.

Why would you call her your first wife? To say that does imply you intend to have a second or you would just say she is my wife or the only wife I will have, not my first wife.

 

[guanophore]

The Bible tells us that Jesus‘ mother would be a virgin at the time of her birth, so there would be no question of his true parentage-the child of a mortal mother and a divine Father. However, it does not specify that this was to be her status the remainder of her life. She was already engaged when she learned she had been chosen to be the mother of the Savior and Joseph learned he was to be that child’s guardian.

This being the case, don’t you think her elder female relatives would not have tutored her in how a newlywed was to behave, and what was to be expected? Do you think she really did not know where babies originate?

If she was already engaged, soon to be taken to her husband’s bed, why would she not expect to have a child in the natural way?

Instead, when the angel told her she would bear the messiah she asked “how can this be, since I know not a man?” No person who is about to have marital relations needs to ask such a question. Only one who has taken a vow of perpetual virginity would wonder such a thing.

 

[guanophore]

Although some Christians argue that Jesus’ siblings were really the children of a much older Joseph from a previous marriage, the scriptures appear to suggest otherwise, because Jesus was referred to as God’s only begotten Son, but Mary’s first-born son. This distinction suggests Mary had other children after Jesus was born, but God did not beget any further children.

This is a good point, because no younger sibling would try to take their older brother, a rabbi, into “custody” for being crazy.

This is further suggested by the fact that when Jesus was dying, he placed his mother in the care of an apostle. Had his brothers been present, and supportive of His mission, they would have been the ones to care for her.

Even if not, it would be a gross breech of Jewish custom for the children not to care for their mother after the death of the father and the eldest son, believers or not.

Besides, Jesus would know that his “brothers” would be converted, and become disciples after the resurrection, so why not leave His mother in their care?

Happily, we also see that after the Savior’s resurrection, his brothers repented and became what we now call Christians.

Exactly. So, why give His mother to another disciple?

James, in fact, rose to an important place in the church, after seeing his resurrected brother and penned one of the books of the Bible.

This statement reflects some very poor scholarship, rev kev, since it is easily shown that the none of the Apostles, or the author of the book of James are children of Jesus’ mother.

It is likely this James replaced the other apostle, also named James, who was the brother of John and killed by Herod Agrippa. We know Jesus’ brother became an apostle through Paul’s epistle to the Galatians:

“But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.” (Galatians 1:19)

Baseless and erroneous conjecture.

His brother Jude also wrote an epistle that is preserved in the Bible, and he identifies himself as Jesus’ brother: Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: (Jude 1:1)

Some of the best evidence that neither James or Jude are sons of Jesus’ mother!

Sources:

Thank you for citing these this time. It shows your integrity is in growth.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Thank you for citing these this time. It shows your integrity is in growth.

The sources were cited in the article he copied and pasted. He just copied and pasted the entire page, including the sources.

 

[GaryTaylor]

If someone has only one child how can that child be called the firstborn? That child would be the only child born. Saying firstborn implies she has other children.

Common sence would tell you that the firstborn would open the womb but it does not suggest a only child.

When anyone has a firstborn chirld, thats just a fact. has nothing to do with if they had other children.

 

[guanophore]

If someone has only one child how can that child be called the firstborn? That child would be the only child born. Saying firstborn implies she has other children.

Common sence would tell you that the firstborn would open the womb but it does not suggest a only child.

rev kev, please go back and read the scripture posted that you are replying to here. It has the answer to your question.

A firstborn is the one that opens the womb. It does not imply that there are any other offspring, man or beast.

God does not think as man thinks, rev. kev.

What would have to change for you if you were to accept that what the Cathlic Church teaches is true?

 

[PRmerger]

James, the brother of the Lord, was an Apostle.

James, the brother of the Lord, is no where in Scripture described as “the son of Mary” the Mother of Jesus.

 

[rev_kevin]

guanophore;7823504]

What would have to change for you if you were to accept that what the Cathlic Church teaches is true?

A lot.