James, Brother of Jesus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oneheartway
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Council of Trent re-affirmed earlier council decisions. Councils are usually called upon due to problematic issues that arise within Christianity. A perfect example is the first ever Christian council, the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) which dealt on the issue of Christian circumcision. In similar ways, councils have been orchestrated by the Catholic Church for the last 2000 years. Most councils, as did the council of Jerusalem, deal with problems of the Church and decide on them authoritatively as happened in Acts 15. During the time of the reformation, the Council of Trent addressed the heresies brought about by the reformation of, among others, an excommunicated Priest, one Martin Luther. Because Luther considered removing a total of eleven Books from the Bible, and later settled on seven, the Council addressed this issue and reaffirmed earlier council canons proclaiming the Canonicity of the Bible. Remember, the first ever Bible was put together at the end of the 4th century, and it included all the same Books that the Catholic Bible includes today. Included below is a link to the Council of Carthage in 419 AD. Look for Canon 24 (about ¼ down the page) and you’ll see a list of 71 Books. The reason it’s 71 and not 73 is because the Book of Baruch as well as the Book of Lamentations was at that time combined into the Book of Jeremiah. It wasn’t until sometime later that these Books were separated into their own individual works.

newadvent.org/fathers/3816.htm

The Jews also rejected Christ. Remember a division arose between the Jews and Gentiles during the time of Christ’s earthly ministry. A separation had to be made between the Jews that rejected Christ and the Gentiles that accepted and glorified Him. This form of division led to the Council of Jamnia which concluded to accept the Tanakh instead of the Septuagint. The Septuagint was the Bible that the Apostled used, which would have made it the Bible that Christ used. The Septuagint had every Book of the current Catholic Old Testament as well as others which are not considered Canonical by the Church.

The King James Version of the Bible has five old Testament books that do not have direct quotations to the New Testament. These books are: Esther, Ecclesiastes, Canticle of Canticles (a.k.a. Song of Solomon, a.k.a. Song of Songs), 1 Esdras (a.k.a. Ezra), and 2 Esdras (a.k.a. Nehemiah). If you added the Deuterocanonical 7 Books, that’s 12 Books without direct quotations. That would reduce the Bible to just 61 books. The fact that Jesus did not quote from these Books does not take away from their Canonicity.

Can you clarify this question for me? I’m not sure what you mean.

By the way, did you find my analysis of Psalm 69 interesting?
Actually, Erik, there are tons of quotes and references to the Deuterocanonical books in the rest of scripture. scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

In fact, there was a thread on this subject: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=4624
 
Bob Stantley :

A comparison of Mt 27:56, and Mk 15:40, clearly shows that Zebedee had a wife whose name was Salome. She is called the ‘mother of Zebedee’s children’ in Mt 27:56, and ‘Salome’ in Mk 15:40. They had two children, JOHN and JAMES, Mk 3:17. JOHN at the foot of the cross to whom Jesus gave His mother, was not a child of Mary, the mother of Jesus, but of Zebedee and Salome. If Jesus had blood brothers, why then did He not give His mother to them? Jewish law would have demanded it…

GENEALOGY:

—Zebedee------Mt 4:21,Mk 1:19, Mk 3:17----------------
—Salome------------Mt 27:56, Mk 15:40--------------------

—Cleophas-(Alphaeus)–Mt 10:2-3, Jn 19:25, Acts 1:13------
—Mary----the other Mary, Mt 27:56,61, 28:1, Jn 19:25------

—THE HOLY SPIRIT------Lk 1:35-38----------------------
—Mary---------------------Lk 1:30-38-----------------------

This ‘Genealogy’ shows who the real parents of the ‘brothers’ in Mark 6:3, and Matthew 13:55, are,
and makes the word ‘brother’ a non-argument.
 
I don’t doubt that there were copies in Hebrew as my understanding is that they were read by the Jews, however even the Jews of Palestine, including the Jewish Council of Jamnia which met in 90 AD rejected the Apocrypha as scripture.
The Greek Septuagint, which contained the deuterocanonical books were read by Greek speaking Jews throughout the dispersion, before and during the time of Christ, as Greek was their first language. And would be the language of the Church, that’s why the NT was written in Greek. The Septuagint was translated into Greek about two hundred to three hundred years before Christ. There was no fixed canon in Christ’s time. The Pharasees had more books than the Sadducees who only accepted the five books of Moses, those in the dispersion used the Septuagint.

Why would you accept the Jewish Council of Jamnia which met in 90AD? That would be tantamount to accepting, as authoritative, pronouncements on scriptural matters by a Jewish Council today. Would you do that?
One example, Philo, a Jewish teacher who lived in the 1st century quoted from nearly every OT canonical book, but never from the apocrypha.
JL: Catholic Encyclepdia says Philo use the Septuagint, newadvent.org/cathen/12023a.htm move down to DOCTRINE. Well if he quoted from NEARLY every OT canonical book, that means he did not quote all of those in your OT canon. How many times do people who debate scripture today, quote even all the NT books not to mention the OT. The reason would be they find what they need form certain books.
 
If the apocryphal books are inspired, why weren’t the writers of these books confirmed by miracles or include prophecy like OT and NT writers?
JL: Are all the NT writters confirmed by miracles?
 
JL: Are all the NT writters confirmed by miracles?
Well, they are all saints, so I would say they have to be… A better question would be are all the Old Testament authors confirmed by miracles? It would be very hard to demonstrate that they were, since most of them are lost to antiquity, unknown except to God. And by the way, it is tradition that Moses wrote the Pentanuech. There is no scriptural support of this, that I know of…
 
Imjustme,

It occurred to me that there is one more bit of scriptural evidence that strongly suggests that James, Joseph, Judas and Simon are not literally brothers of Jesus Christ.

St. Jude starts off his epistle this way:

Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ and brother of James, to those who are called, beloved in God the Father and kept safe for Jesus Christ:

Now if Jude (Judas) was truly a literal brother of Jesus, why would he only claim to be a brother of James? There’s a lot of evidence now against your literal, english reading of the word brother in scripture. It certainly is not obviously true, as you previously claimed.
What say you now?
As Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:16-17 (King James Version) “Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. (17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”

He is saying that we knew Him as a man, born as a Jew in the tribe of Judah, the son of Mary, but now after His crucifixion, death and resurrection, we no longer regard Him according to the natural man, but the spiritual man. He is no longer Jewish, born of the tribe of Judah, nor is He the son of Mary. We know Him now as the risen Lord, the King of Kings, the firstborn of many brethren, the Son of the living God.

This is why Jude did not expressly introduce himself as brother of Jesus but more appropriately “bondservant of Jesus”.

(By the way…I found this information by asking my mailman, who is also a Christian pastor…as his name is James, I asked how many James’ were in the NT and the conversation developed into me having an answer to your question…as you see…one does not need Vatican credentials to understand the Word of God, only a willing heart and mind and fellowship with other believers that look for their answers within the Bible, as canonized by the earliest followers of Jesus.)

God Bless!
 
Well, they are all saints, so I would say they have to be… A better question would be are all the Old Testament authors confirmed by miracles? It would be very hard to demonstrate that they were, since most of them are lost to antiquity, unknown except to God. And by the way, it is tradition that Moses wrote the Pentanuech. There is no scriptural support of this, that I know of…
The Bible refers to saints when talking of those who believe in Christ…see this link for more details…it has nothing to do with works but with faith.

gracepoints.com/articles/gpsaint.php

As the NT writers were confirmed by miracles, the OT writers were confirmed as being prophets. There were other requirements, but this is one of them.

This is why the books in question, apocrypha (aka the deuterocanonical by Catholics) , are not accepted as cannon by certain Christians…because they did not meet the requirement (of pre-Jesus manuscripts) of being written by a prophet.
 
The Bible refers to saints when talking of those who believe in Christ…see this link for more details…it has nothing to do with works but with faith.

gracepoints.com/articles/gpsaint.php

As the NT writers were confirmed by miracles, the OT writers were confirmed as being prophets. There were other requirements, but this is one of them.

This is why the books in question, apocrypha (aka the deuterocanonical by Catholics) , are not accepted as cannon by certain Christians…because they did not meet the requirement (of pre-Jesus manuscripts) of being written by a prophet.
JL: If I am understanding you correctly you are saying anyone who wrote a book of the NT personally performed miracles as evidence of inspiration. Could you give a scriptural example of Matthew personally performing a miracle, or am I totally misunderstanding.
 
As Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:16-17 (King James Version) “Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. (17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”

He is saying that we knew Him as a man, born as a Jew in the tribe of Judah, the son of Mary, but now after His crucifixion, death and resurrection, we no longer regard Him according to the natural man, but the spiritual man. He is no longer Jewish, born of the tribe of Judah, nor is He the son of Mary. We know Him now as the risen Lord, the King of Kings, the firstborn of many brethren, the Son of the living God.

This is why Jude did not expressly introduce himself as brother of Jesus but more appropriately “bondservant of Jesus”.

(By the way…I found this information by asking my mailman, who is also a Christian pastor…as his name is James, I asked how many James’ were in the NT and the conversation developed into me having an answer to your question…as you see…one does not need Vatican credentials to understand the Word of God, only a willing heart and mind and fellowship with other believers that look for their answers within the Bible, as canonized by the earliest followers of Jesus.)

God Bless!
You can ask your mailman/pastor for scriptural advice if you want, it doesn’t mean he has any particular insight. That’s the point. Why do you believe him? I think its because he agrees with you. If he didn’t, you would dismiss him. You said in an earlier post that if you didn’t like what a pastor was saying (i.e., you didn’t agree with his interpretation of the bible), you would walk away because you have better things to do with your Sunday mornings.

Frankly, you are going to great lengths to prove that Mary had children in addition to Jesus. This quote from Corinthians isn’t particularly compelling. Like a lot of Protestant answers, it is a giant twist to try to justify something that isn’t true. James and Joseph and Jude and Simon are the sons of Alpheus.and the other Mary, per Mark 15: 40 and Matthew 27: 55, they are cousins of Jesus.

Did you even read the Catholic Encyclopedia article I gave you on the subject? Are you interest in the truth or just what you would like the truth to be.
 
As Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:16-17 (King James Version) “Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. (17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”

He is saying that we knew Him as a man, born as a Jew in the tribe of Judah, the son of Mary, but now after His crucifixion, death and resurrection, we no longer regard Him according to the natural man, but the spiritual man. He is no longer Jewish, born of the tribe of Judah, nor is He the son of Mary. We know Him now as the risen Lord, the King of Kings, the firstborn of many brethren, the Son of the living God.

This is why Jude did not expressly introduce himself as brother of Jesus but more appropriately “bondservant of Jesus”.

(By the way…I found this information by asking my mailman, who is also a Christian pastor…as his name is James, I asked how many James’ were in the NT and the conversation developed into me having an answer to your question…as you see…one does not need Vatican credentials to understand the Word of God, only a willing heart and mind and fellowship with other believers that look for their answers within the Bible, as canonized by the earliest followers of Jesus.)
God Bless!
JL: Wow! What a streach on 2Cor5:16-17, next time ask you paper boy. Tell me do you henceforth we know NO MAN AFTER THE FLESH, or is it just Jesus? Whom Paul calls man in, 1Tm2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS; **
 
You can ask your mailman/pastor for scriptural advice if you want, it doesn’t mean he has any particular insight. That’s the point. Why do you believe him? I think its because he agrees with you. If he didn’t, you would dismiss him. You said in an earlier post that if you didn’t like what a pastor was saying (i.e., you didn’t agree with his interpretation of the bible), you would walk away because you have better things to do with your Sunday mornings.

The only reason that my mailman 🙂 was given my ear is that he said “check out what Paul had to say about it in the bible”…he didn’t say…“read my notes” or “this is what I have to say about it”…he referred back to the inerrent and God inspired books.

Don’t you think it could have been God sending the mailman to teach me something I didn’t already learn about in His Word? Why is that so weird to you? I actually feel blessed by it and he said that I blessed his day by telling him of my story and bible studies. That is what fellowship is all about.

**I’m sorry but you misquoted me…here is what I said:
“If my preacher confirms what Jesus says and refers to the same scriptures as Jesus did, that is enough credentials for me. As soon as what I hear or see from the pews is different, I’m outta there – better things to do with my Sunday morning!”

Believe me, there is PLENTY I don’t like to hear in church…for I am not sinless…but I must humble myself to listen for it is the Word of God.

**

Frankly, you are going to great lengths to prove that Mary had children in addition to Jesus. This quote from Corinthians isn’t particularly compelling. Like a lot of Protestant answers, it is a giant twist to try to justify something that isn’t true. James and Joseph and Jude and Simon are the sons of Alpheus.and the other Mary, per Mark 15: 40 and Matthew 27: 55, they are cousins of Jesus.

I’m really not going to great lengths, and if you wish for me to drop the issue, I will. No problem. I thought you wanted to hear the other (non Catholic) viewpoints. See, I find the opposite true regarding Catholic doctrine…they have to go to great lengths, even referring to non canonical books and making up some of their own, to justify their teachings.

Did you even read the Catholic Encyclopedia article I gave you on the subject?
No, I hadn’t had a change and quite frankly don’t respect it as much as anything you would quote me from scripture.
Are you interest in the truth or just what you would like the truth to be.

The truth as it is written in scripture. That is what moved me to the Protestant Church. I no longer wanted man made stuff.
 
JL: Wow! What a streach on 2Cor5:16-17, next time ask you paper boy. Tell me do you henceforth we know NO MAN AFTER THE FLESH, or is it just Jesus? Whom Paul calls man in, 1Tm2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS; **

I agree…no man after the flesh…that’s also why we’re not supposed to talk to the dead. Read your bible…it’s in there…really!!

I don’t have a paper boy but if I did and he was a Bible reading Christian, I bet he’d be a better resource than most Catholics.
 
How about Matt 12:46-50
46 While He was still talking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak with Him. 47 Then one said to Him, “Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak with You.”
48 But He answered and said to the one who told Him, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49 And He stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, “Here are My mother and My brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother.”
Dear Imjustme,

In some way by just restating the Bible verses you validate that the terminology for mother, brother, and sister is used loosely as it is in some ethnic communities today. It’s been stated a mulititude of times that neither aramaic or hebrew had a word for cousin or near relative. So they would be called by brother /sister, which did not refer to being blood brothers/sisters.

Just as the terminology for ‘hand’ is not the same today as it was back then. As far as I have read, from the fingertips to the elbow was considered the hand. That’s where the confusion lies about Jesus being nailed to the Cross through his hands. People say his hands would have torn so He must have been nailed through His wrists. Well, as I’ve read, the hand back then included the wrist.

Just as the terminology for ‘until’ is not the same today. Back then it didn’t mean that something happened after the word 'until is used. It only described the window of the event. For instance, I can’t remember where but in the old testament it says (paraphrasing) that the woman did not bear any children until her death. Does this mean she had children after she died… Of course not. So in Matthew when it says Joseph did not know Mary until Jesus was born, it does not mean that he knew Mary after Jesus was born. It was only said to make sure everyone knew that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.

May God guide us always.

jpaul1953
 
I agree…no man after the flesh…that’s also why we’re not supposed to talk to the dead. Read your bible…it’s in there…really!!
Did you know that John 3:16 says that 'whoever believes in Me shall have eternal **life", **i’mjustme? That means those who are in heaven are ALIVE. Not dead. 👍
 
Well, they are all saints, so I would say they have to be…
If you are referring to the process of canonization, in which the Church requires miracles, I think I read that not every single saint has been officially “canonized”, and that would include the NT writers, I believe.

Can any Catholics out here correct me?
 
You can ask your mailman/pastor for scriptural advice if you want, it doesn’t mean he has any particular insight. That’s the point. Why do you believe him? I think its because he agrees with you. If he didn’t, you would dismiss him. You said in an earlier post that if you didn’t like what a pastor was saying (i.e., you didn’t agree with his interpretation of the bible), you would walk away because you have better things to do with your Sunday mornings.

Frankly, you are going to great lengths to prove that Mary had children in addition to Jesus. This quote from Corinthians isn’t particularly compelling. Like a lot of Protestant answers, it is a giant twist to try to justify something that isn’t true. James and Joseph and Jude and Simon are the sons of Alpheus.and the other Mary, per Mark 15: 40 and Matthew 27: 55, they are cousins of Jesus.

Did you even read the Catholic Encyclopedia article I gave you on the subject? Are you interest in the truth or just what you would like the truth to be.
I was going to post a answer but I must run my trash man is here and I have a question for him about the Bible, be right back see you later
 
This link explains the miracles requirement, if you want to read about it.

tektonics.org/guest/truthmiracle.html#threea
Thanks for the link, imjustme.

However, why isn’t there a verse in Scripture that says there is a “miracles requirement” for a book to be part of the canon of Scripture?
🤷

That would seem to be a man-made, arbitrary requirement.

And, from the references show in the above link, it seems that the inspired writers only mentioned the words “sign” or “miracle” in their writings, not* performed* them. Who cares if they mention the word?

Why does that indicate that the writer is inspired?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top