Jesus’ Siblings in scripture

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lost4words
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dochawk said:
And if it’s to something that the poster can count the hits on, well . . .
Click to expand...
That’s what I was wondering, too! But, I decided to go with ‘charity’, thinking that he meant “no one addressed what I cited”, and not “I’ve been clocking the hits”… 🤷‍♂️
 
Hodos said:
Or your could take scripture at its word. So strange that we can accept that the Eucharist is Jesus body and blood because he says so, yet create elaborate theories to explain away the obvious in regard to Jesus siblings.
Click to expand...
I think the “elaborate theories” you posit here, actually came into existence for a very good reason: the community of Christians knew that Mary had no other children. It was part of the shared memory of the community. Therefore, it became necessary to understand what the inspired evangelist meant when he wrote heos. After all, the wrong interpretation would stand at odds with what the community already knew. So, the task at hand was to understand how both the inspired Scripture and the knowledge of the community could be true, and be harmonized with one another.

Not so strange, after all… 😉
 
dochawk said:
40.png
steve-b:
It’s interesting, not one single person opened the link defining “offspring” in Greek that I posted in [this response]
Click to expand...
Generally, expecting people to go read something else as part of reading your post is a breach of netiquette . . . it is not surprising at all that noone cooperated.
Click to expand...
links are meant to show it is NOT coming from my opinion… Jesus’ Siblings in scripture - #111 by steve-b iow the Greek shows it “can” mean siblings and can also mean descendants also, as in cousins, as in relatives, etc, and NOT necessarily children from Mary’s womb.

Point being, Can is a possibility from Marys womb, it is NOT an absolute.
40.png
dochawk:
And if it’s to something that the poster can count the hits on, well . . .

hawk
Click to expand...
I’m not looking to count hits. If people keep trying to sell other children from Mary’s womb, as if it is an absolute, and don’t open links that don’t support that view, then that’s not on me.

As it turns out, after making my comment, others have looked at the Greek. Jesus’ Siblings in scripture - #82 by steve-b

If it relates to her offspring, does that mean then that Jesus had children of His own (as in seed from Mary)?
 
Last edited:
Why would Jesus entrust His mother to John at the foot of the cross if He had other brothers and sisters?
 
Last edited:
Lost4words said:
Why would Jesus entrust His mother to John at the foot of the cross if He had other brothers and sisters?
Click to expand...
He felt it best. He was certainly prepared to break from tradition as is often pointed out when the topic of female Priests comes up.

Note I do not believe that Mary had other children I just consider that the weakest supporting argument.
 
You may be right. I know there were several close relatives of one another (Peter and his brother Andrew, James and John, James and possibly Matthew). Probably getting all the relations mixed up.
 
Brother and Sister meant a lot more in those days. They werent automatically siblings or children of the same parents. St Paul called people ‘son’ but we know he was single and didnt have children.
 
The three of them may have been brothers. I think Papias wrote about it.
 
Lost4words,
re: “Why would Jesus entrust His mother to John at the foot of the cross if He had other brothers and sisters?”

What scripture says it was John?
 
rstrats said:
What scripture says it was John?
Click to expand...
The “beloved disciple” may have been John the evangelist or it may have been somebody else. There are different theories. But I don’t see that it makes any material difference to the argument, unless you are claiming that the beloved disciple was one of the “brethren of the Lord” named in Matt 13:55 and Mark 6:3. Is that what you believe?
 
BartholomewB,
re: "The ‘beloved disciple’ may have been John the evangelist or it may have been somebody else. There are different theories. But I don’t see that it makes any material difference to the argument, unless you are claiming that the beloved disciple was one of the ‘brethren of the Lord’ named in Matt 13:55 and Mark 6:3. Is that what you believe?

Well, the Messiah did call the disciple her son and He did call her the disciple’s mother, so I see no scriptural reason to believe otherwise.
 
That’s an interesting idea, but it prompts an obvious question: Why the circumlocution? Why conceal his identity? Why doesn’t the Fourth Gospel just call him James or Jude or Joses or whichever one of the “brethren” he was?
 
Last edited:
BartholomewB,
re: “'The ‘beloved disciple’ may have been John the evangelist or it may have been somebody else…But I don’t see that it makes any material difference to the argument…”

The topic is with regard to the Messiah having siblings. I assume Lost4words was implying that John wasn’t one. But since the passage to which Lost4words was referring didn’t mention any names, it can’t legitimately be used to defend the no sibling theory.
 
BartholomewB,
re: “Why the circumlocution?”

I guess you’d have to ask the Messiah. He seems to be rather fond of doing that with His speech.
 
rstrats said:
But since the passage to which Lost4words was referring didn’t mention any names, it can’t legitimately be used to defend the no sibling theory.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I follow you here. Are you saying that in John 19:26-27 “the disciple whom He loved” and the man addressed as “you” in “your mother” may be two different people?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top