Jesus and his actual brothers? And Mary not being a perpetual virgin. How to refute this Protestant attack?

[snowflake12345]

Help me out on this please. I’m losing sleep over this one.

I know all about the cousin argument, and the half brother argument (not by blood - Joseph’s children from an earlier marriage, and how there is no word for cousin in the language the NT writers spoke, and when it was translated “relative” was simply translated as brother.

But how do I reconcile Paul using the word cousin for Barnabas AND brother with reference to James the brother of Jesus? How do I reconcile this?

See the non-Catholic argument here:

Problem with the Aramaic/Hebrew/cousins argument is that the NT books were written in Greek; and there is a specific word for “cousin” in Greek, used in Colossians 4:10

Μᾶρκος ὁ ἀνεψιὸς Βαρναβᾶ

Mark the cousin of Barnabas

cousin = anepsios (English phonetics)

If they were cousins, the NT writers would have used them.

Also, there are other words for close relative, cousin, as in Luke 1:36 “your relative Elizabeth”

Ἐλισάβετ ἡ συγγενίς

How do we understand Paul specifically using both “cousin” AND “brother”?

Why wouldn’t St. Paul, a native Greek speaker use the term “James, the Cousin of our Lord”? He had the word for cousin on his tongue right?

Please help! I’m confused…

 

[adawgj]

From what I understood is that the modern usage of brother (especially in the English language) is very different from the usage of brother in the Greek and Aramaic.

Brother normally means cousin in the Greek and Aramaic.

I could be wrong since I’m not a student of Greek or Aramaic.

However words are tricky.

For example I can read and somewhat speak Spanish.

In Spanish for example the word cousin is primo.
While for second cousins you can use primo segundo.
However culturally second cousins are also known as your uncles or aunts.

While I’m no expert. What I’m trying to say is you can’t take every word for face value right away. It takes linguistic and philological study.

 

[snowflake12345]

From what I understood is that the modern usage of brother (especially in the English language) is very different from the usage of brother in the Greek and Aramaic.

Brother normally means cousin in the Greek and Aramaic.

I could be wrong since I’m not a student of Greek or Aramaic.

However words are tricky.

For example I can read and somewhat speak Spanish.

In Spanish for example the word cousin is primo.
While for second cousins you can use primo segundo.
However culturally second cousins are also known as your uncles or aunts.

While I’m no expert. What I’m trying to say is you can’t take every word for face value right away. It takes linguistic and philological study.

I agree, but St. Paul was a Greek speaker, and there was a word for Cousin in Greek. Why wouldn’t St. Paul clear up the confusion and call James, “our Lords cousin”? I don’t get the Paul thing specifically?

Anyone know?

 

[snowflake12345]

Are there any Greek experts here who can provide some insight?

The St. Paul argument is something I can’t find a refute to, and I’ve combed the web…

 

[JohnR77]

I agree, but St. Paul was a Greek speaker, and there was a word for Cousin in Greek. Why wouldn’t St. Paul clear up the confusion and call James, “our Lords cousin”? I don’t get the Paul thing specifically?

Anyone know?

Good Question.
It is NOT the Catholic position that the “brothers” of Jesus were his cousins. Catholics believe that they were close relatives, but not sons of Mary. And personally, I lean toward the position that they were not the sons of Joseph either.

Paul could use the word “cousin” for Mark and Barnabas, because they were that. It fit.
However, the “brothers” of Jesus might have had a more complicated relationship, that is, not exactly “cousins” so that word did not fit, but maybe a cousin once removed or second cousins etc. So, by default the New Testament writers used the concept of “close family relative” as denoted by the Hebrew word for brother, but writing in Greek, used the Greek word that was closest to that Hebrew word for brother - or close relative- which does not have an exact equivalent in the Greek.

Consider:

James, The Brother of the Lord

**Galatians 1:19
**“But I did not see any other of the apostles, only James the brother of the Lord.”

There are two Apostles named James. However, it is clear that neither one of the Apostles named James is the son of Joseph and Mary. They are stated to be the “son of Zebedee” and the “son of Alphaeus” in the lists of the Apostles.
See Mark 3:14-19, and Matthew 10:2-4. **
**
Mark 3:14-19
“He appointed twelve (whom he also named apostles) … Simon, … James, son of Zebedee, and … James the son of Alphaeus …”**
**
When we compare these texts with John 19:25 we can deduce that Clopas and Alphaeus must be the same person. This can be easily explained, as Karl Keating points out, because the Aramaic name Alphaeus can be rendered in the Greek as either Alphaeus or as Clopas. Or Alphaeus could have taken a Greek name similar to his Jewish name the same way as Saul took the Greek name Paul.

In the second century church historian Hegesippus explained that Clopas was the brother of Joseph, Mary’s husband. Therefore, by marriage, Clopas’s sons and Jesus were close relatives, and hence they were called brothers in close knit familial society of the Hebrews.

Since Joseph is not a blood relative of Jesus, the word “cousin” does not exactly fit for Jesus’ relationship with these “brothers.”

Even in the New Testament we can see how the Greek word for brother ** “adelphos” **the original derivation of which meant “from the same womb” did NOT actually mean that by the time of the first century AD. Apparently, its definition had developed with time as most words in a living language do.

see
defendingthebride.com/ma2/brothers.html
.

 

[snowflake12345]

Good Question.
It is NOT the Catholic position that the “brothers” of Jesus were his cousins. Catholics believe that they were close relatives, but not sons of Mary. And personally, I lean toward the position that they were not the sons of Joseph either.

Paul could use the word “cousin” for Mark and Barnabas, because they were that. It fit.
However, the “brothers” of Jesus might have had a more complicated relationship, that is, not exactly “cousins” so that word did not fit, but maybe a cousin once removed or second cousins etc. So, by default the New Testament writers used the concept of “close family relative” as denoted by the Hebrew word for brother, but writing in Greek, used the Greek word that was closest to that Hebrew word for brother - or close relative- which does not have an exact equivalent in the Greek.

Consider:

James, The Brother of the Lord

Galatians 1:19
“But I did not see any other of the apostles, only James the brother of the Lord.”

There are two Apostles named James. However, it is clear that neither one of the Apostles named James is the son of Joseph and Mary. They are stated to be the “son of Zebedee” and the “son of Alphaeus” in the lists of the Apostles.
See Mark 3:14-19, and Matthew 10:2-4. **
**
Mark 3:14-19
“He appointed twelve (whom he also named apostles) … Simon, …** James, son of Zebedee, and … James the son of Alphaeus …”****
**
When we compare these texts with John 19:25 we can deduce that Clopas and Alphaeus must be the same person. This can be easily explained, as Karl Keating points out, because the Aramaic name Alphaeus can be rendered in the Greek as either Alphaeus or as Clopas. Or Alphaeus could have taken a Greek name similar to his Jewish name the same way as Saul took the Greek name Paul.

In the second century church historian Hegesippus explained that Clopas was the brother of Joseph, Mary’s husband. Therefore, by marriage, Clopas’s sons and Jesus were close relatives, and hence they were called brothers in close knit familial society of the Hebrews.

Since Joseph is not a blood relative of Jesus, the word “cousin” does not exactly fit for Jesus’ relationship with these “brothers.”

Even in the New Testament we can see how the Greek word for brother ** “adelphos” **the original derivation of which meant “from the same womb” did NOT actually mean that by the time of the first century AD. Apparently, its definition had developed with time as most words in a living language do.

see
defendingthebride.com/ma2/brothers.html
.

So St. Paul didn’t use “cousin” because James wasn’t Jesus’ first cousin??

 

[Randy_Carson]

Help me out on this please. I’m losing sleep over this one.

"Brethren of the Lord"
catholic.com/tracts/brethren-of-the-lord

When Catholics call Mary the “Blessed Virgin,” they mean she remained a virgin throughout her life. When Protestants refer to Mary as “virgin,” they mean she was a virgin only until Jesus’ birth. They believe that she and Joseph later had children whom Scripture refers to as “the brethren of the Lord.” The disagreement arises over biblical verses that use the terms “brethren,” “brother,” and “sister.”

There are about ten instances in the New Testament where “brothers” and “sisters” of the Lord are mentioned (Matt. 12:46; Matt. 13:55; Mark 3:31–34; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:19–20; John 2:12, 7:3, 5, 10; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:5).

When trying to understand these verses, note that the term “brother” (Greek: adelphos) has a wide meaning in the Bible. It is not restricted to the literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother. The same goes for “sister” (adelphe) and the plural form “brothers” (adelphoi). The Old Testament shows that “brother” had a wide semantic range of meaning and could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended (male relatives from whom you are descended are known as “fathers”) and who are not descended from you (your male descendants, regardless of the number of generations removed, are your “sons”), as well as kinsmen such as cousins, those who are members of the family by marriage or by law rather than by blood, and even friends or mere political allies (2 Sam. 1:26; Amos 1:9).

Lot, for example, is called Abraham’s “brother” (Gen. 14:14), even though, being the son of Haran, Abraham’s brother (Gen. 11:26–28), he was actually Abraham’s nephew. Similarly, Jacob is called the “brother” of his uncle Laban (Gen. 29:15). Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar had no sons, only daughters, who married their “brethren,” the sons of Kish. These “brethren” were really their cousins (1 Chr. 23:21–22).

The terms “brothers,” “brother,” and “sister” did not refer only to close relatives. Sometimes they meant kinsmen (Deut. 23:7; Neh. 5:7; Jer. 34:9), as in the reference to the forty-two “brethren” of King Azariah (2 Kgs. 10:13–14).

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

No Word for Cousin

Because neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and his disciples) had a special word meaning “cousin,” speakers of those languages could use either the word for “brother” or a circumlocution, such as “the son of my uncle.” But circumlocutions are clumsy, so the Jews often used “brother.”

The writers of the New Testament were brought up using the Aramaic equivalent of “brothers” to mean both cousins and sons of the same father—plus other relatives and even non-relatives.** When they wrote in Greek, they did the same thing the translators of the Septuagint did. (The Septuagint was the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible; it was translated by Hellenistic Jews a century or two before Christ’s birth and was the version of the Bible from which most of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are taken.)

In the Septuagint the Hebrew word that includes both brothers and cousins was translated as adelphos, which in Greek usually has the narrow meaning that the English “brother” has. Unlike Hebrew or Aramaic, Greek has a separate word for cousin, anepsios, but the translators of the Septuagint used adelphos, even for true cousins.

You might say they transliterated instead of translated, importing the Jewish idiom into the Greek Bible. They took an exact equivalent of the Hebrew word for “brother” and did not use adelphos in one place (for sons of the same parents), and anepsios in another (for cousins). **This same usage was employed by the writers of the New Testament and passed into English translations of the Bible. To determine what “brethren” or “brother” or “sister” means in any one verse, we have to look at the context. When we do that, we see that insuperable problems arise if we assume that Mary had children other than Jesus.

When the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary and told her that she would conceive a son, she asked, “How can this be since I have no relations with a man?” (Luke 1:34). From the Church’s earliest days, as the Fathers interpreted this Bible passage, Mary’s question was taken to mean that she had made a vow of lifelong virginity, even in marriage. (This was not common, but neither was it unheard of.) If she had not taken such a vow, the question would make no sense.

Mary knew how babies are made (otherwise she wouldn’t have asked the question she did). If she had anticipated having children in the normal way and did not intend to maintain a vow of virginity, she would hardly have to ask “how” she was to have a child, since conceiving a child in the “normal” way would be expected by a newlywed wife. Her question makes sense only if there was an apparent (but not a real) conflict between keeping a vow of virginity and acceding to the angel’s request. A careful look at the New Testament shows that Mary kept her vow of virginity and never had any children other than Jesus.

When Jesus was found in the Temple at age twelve, the context suggests that he was the only son of Mary and Joseph. There is no hint in this episode of any other children in the family (Luke 2:41–51). Jesus grew up in Nazareth, and the people of Nazareth referred to him as “the son of Mary” (Mark 6:3), not as “a son of Mary.” In fact, others in the Gospels are never referred to as Mary’s sons, not even when they are called Jesus’ “brethren.” If they were in fact her sons, this would be strange usage.

Also, the attitude taken by the “brethren of the Lord” implies they are his elders. In ancient and, particularly, in Eastern societies (remember, Palestine is in Asia), older sons gave advice to younger, but younger seldom gave advice to older—it was considered disrespectful to do so. But we find Jesus’ “brethren” saying to him that Galilee was no place for him and that he should go to Judea so he could make a name for himself (John 7:3–4).

Another time, they sought to restrain him for his own benefit: “And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, ‘He is beside himself’” (Mark 3:21). This kind of behavior could make sense for ancient Jews only if the “brethren” were older than Jesus, but that alone eliminates them as his biological brothers, since Jesus was Mary’s “first-born” son (Luke 2:7).

Consider what happened at the foot of the cross. When he was dying, Jesus entrusted his mother to the apostle John (John 19:26–27). The Gospels mention four of his “brethren”: James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude. It is hard to imagine why Jesus would have disregarded family ties and made this provision for his mother if these four were also her sons.

Sleep well!

 

[JohnR77]

So St. Paul didn’t use “cousin” because James wasn’t Jesus’ first cousin??

Most likely, that is the case.
But notice that the dogmas of Church do not define their relationship except to say that Mary only had one child by the flesh.
We are all her children by the Spirit.

**Revelation 12:17
“Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus.”
NAB

**. That is what is important.
However, as an outside chance, could they have been first cousins? I suppose they could have been, even though I personally don’t think so. It is not impossible that St. Paul could have used two different words for the same relationship. God inspires the writers of the New Testament as He wills, not as I will it.

The more important question:
How does Mary’s Perpetual Virginity give glory to God ?

When Jesus came into your life did He change it?
Well, He changed Mary’s life as well. Her Virginity is His work that gives Him glory.
Many Scriptural verses support Mary’s perpetual virginity. Her specialness does not distract from God’s glory, but rather manifests it.

See
defendingthebride.com/ma2/neweve.html
.

 

[snowflake12345]

No Word for Cousin

Because neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and his disciples) had a special word meaning “cousin,” speakers of those languages could use either the word for “brother” or a circumlocution, such as “the son of my uncle.” But circumlocutions are clumsy, so the Jews often used “brother.”

The writers of the New Testament were brought up using the Aramaic equivalent of “brothers” to mean both cousins and sons of the same father—plus other relatives and even non-relatives.** When they wrote in Greek, they did the same thing the translators of the Septuagint did. (The Septuagint was the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible; it was translated by Hellenistic Jews a century or two before Christ’s birth and was the version of the Bible from which most of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are taken.)

In the Septuagint the Hebrew word that includes both brothers and cousins was translated as adelphos, which in Greek usually has the narrow meaning that the English “brother” has. Unlike Hebrew or Aramaic, Greek has a separate word for cousin, anepsios, but the translators of the Septuagint used adelphos, even for true cousins.

You might say they transliterated instead of translated, importing the Jewish idiom into the Greek Bible. They took an exact equivalent of the Hebrew word for “brother” and did not use adelphos in one place (for sons of the same parents), and anepsios in another (for cousins). **This same usage was employed by the writers of the New Testament and passed into English translations of the Bible. To determine what “brethren” or “brother” or “sister” means in any one verse, we have to look at the context. When we do that, we see that insuperable problems arise if we assume that Mary had children other than Jesus.

When the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary and told her that she would conceive a son, she asked, “How can this be since I have no relations with a man?” (Luke 1:34). From the Church’s earliest days, as the Fathers interpreted this Bible passage, Mary’s question was taken to mean that she had made a vow of lifelong virginity, even in marriage. (This was not common, but neither was it unheard of.) If she had not taken such a vow, the question would make no sense.

Mary knew how babies are made (otherwise she wouldn’t have asked the question she did). If she had anticipated having children in the normal way and did not intend to maintain a vow of virginity, she would hardly have to ask “how” she was to have a child, since conceiving a child in the “normal” way would be expected by a newlywed wife. Her question makes sense only if there was an apparent (but not a real) conflict between keeping a vow of virginity and acceding to the angel’s request. A careful look at the New Testament shows that Mary kept her vow of virginity and never had any children other than Jesus.

When Jesus was found in the Temple at age twelve, the context suggests that he was the only son of Mary and Joseph. There is no hint in this episode of any other children in the family (Luke 2:41–51). Jesus grew up in Nazareth, and the people of Nazareth referred to him as “the son of Mary” (Mark 6:3), not as “a son of Mary.” In fact, others in the Gospels are never referred to as Mary’s sons, not even when they are called Jesus’ “brethren.” If they were in fact her sons, this would be strange usage.

Also, the attitude taken by the “brethren of the Lord” implies they are his elders. In ancient and, particularly, in Eastern societies (remember, Palestine is in Asia), older sons gave advice to younger, but younger seldom gave advice to older—it was considered disrespectful to do so. But we find Jesus’ “brethren” saying to him that Galilee was no place for him and that he should go to Judea so he could make a name for himself (John 7:3–4).

Another time, they sought to restrain him for his own benefit: “And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, ‘He is beside himself’” (Mark 3:21). This kind of behavior could make sense for ancient Jews only if the “brethren” were older than Jesus, but that alone eliminates them as his biological brothers, since Jesus was Mary’s “first-born” son (Luke 2:7).

Consider what happened at the foot of the cross. When he was dying, Jesus entrusted his mother to the apostle John (John 19:26–27). The Gospels mention four of his “brethren”: James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude. It is hard to imagine why Jesus would have disregarded family ties and made this provision for his mother if these four were also her sons.

Sleep well!

Thank you and God bless you for the help, but may I ask then why St. Paul uses the actual word “cousin” in Colossians 4:10? And then calls James the brother of Jesus? Why wouldn’t he use the word “cousin” since he used it elsewhere? This is what I am stumbling over. can you help me here?

 

[McCartney]

At the crucifixion. Jesus “handed over” His mother to His disciple John. The bible says that from that day the disciple made a place for her in his home. If she had other children wouldn’t it be preferable for her to stay with them?

 

[ClearWater]

Help me out on this please. I’m losing sleep over this one.

I know all about the cousin argument, and the half brother argument (not by blood - Joseph’s children from an earlier marriage, and how there is no word for cousin in the language the NT writers spoke, and when it was translated “relative” was simply translated as brother.

But how do I reconcile Paul using the word cousin for Barnabas AND brother with reference to James the brother of Jesus? How do I reconcile this?

See the non-Catholic argument here:

Problem with the Aramaic/Hebrew/cousins argument is that the NT books were written in Greek; and there is a specific word for “cousin” in Greek, used in Colossians 4:10

Μᾶρκος ὁ ἀνεψιὸς Βαρναβᾶ

Mark the cousin of Barnabas

cousin = anepsios (English phonetics)

If they were cousins, the NT writers would have used them.

Also, there are other words for close relative, cousin, as in Luke 1:36 “your relative Elizabeth”

Ἐλισάβετ ἡ συγγενίς

How do we understand Paul specifically using both “cousin” AND “brother”?

Why wouldn’t St. Paul, a native Greek speaker use the term “James, the Cousin of our Lord”? He had the word for cousin on his tongue right?

Please help! I’m confused…

Here’s EWTN’s apologetic’s Bible verse cheat sheet.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/WALLET.HTM

Catholic Answers also has its own. See: shop.catholic.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=cheat+sheet&op.x=0&op.y=0&op=Search

Additionally, there are many books under the topic “apologetics” that can give more in depth answers should you need them.

These should help prepare you for those questions and many more. Good luck!

 

[jediliz]

At the crucifixion. Jesus “handed over” His mother to His disciple John. The bible says that from that day the disciple made a place for her in his home. If she had other children wouldn’t it be preferable for her to stay with them?

Jewish custom may have required other children to care for her. She had no other children.

 

[JohnR77]

Thank you and God bless you for the help, but may I ask then why St. Paul uses the actual word “cousin” in Colossians 4:10? And then calls James the brother of Jesus? Why wouldn’t he use the word “cousin” since he used it elsewhere? This is what I am stumbling over. can you help me here?

To say it again, Most likely it is because Jesus and the “brothers” were not first cousins, so the word Greek word for “cousins” does not fit.

“How can this be since I have no relations with a man?” (Luke 1:34)

I realize that the above is the NAB translation, but that is not really what the Greek says. Mary was not asking, “How CAN this happen?”
She was not doubting that it could or would happen. To build on Randy C’s point, She was asking how it was to happen.

defendingthebride.com/ma2/neweve.html#PERPETUAL

[See RSV which also correctly translates it as “How shall this be …” ]

Mary was not doubting whether or not it could happen, but rather she was asking how it was going to happen, by what method shall this happen. We can see from Elizabeth’s statement in verse 45 that Mary did not doubt God’s message from the angel like Zechariah did.

Luke 1:45
“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”

And Mary’s reply to the angel is literally “since I know not man.” This suggests that Mary had taken a vow of virginity, that is, “to know not man.” “To know” is a polite metaphor that biblical writers used to refer to two people having sexual relations. Cf. Genesis 4:1 ] And Mary was wondering if the angel was informing her that God wanted to her to rescind this vow.

Mary was questioning how this pregnancy was to happen. Every new bride , under normal circumstances, would be anticipating at least the possibility of children. Now either Mary had made a vow of virginity or she did not. If she had not then this question of hers to the angel of how she was to become pregnant does not make sense since there had, up until this moment, only one way to get pregnant. Therefore, this questioning by Mary only makes sense if she had made a vow of virginity. Therefore, the text suggests that Mary was asking if God had wanted her to forgo a vow of virginity that she had already made to God.

In considering Mary’s question about how she would become pregnant, it is important to note that the archangel said that Mary “will" - the future tense - conceive a child. Mary would have assumed that the child would be conceived the only way any child had ever been conceived until then.
.

 

[snowflake12345]

To say it again, Most likely it is because Jesus and the “brothers” were not first cousins, so the word Greek word for “cousins” does not fit.

“How can this be since I have no relations with a man?” (Luke 1:34)

I realize that the above is the NAB translation, but that is not really what the Greek says. Mary was not asking, “How CAN this happen?”
She was not doubting that it could or would happen. To build on Randy C’s point, She was asking how it was to happen.

defendingthebride.com/ma2/neweve.html#PERPETUAL

[See RSV which also correctly translates it as “How shall this be …” ]

Mary was not doubting whether or not it could happen, but rather she was asking how it was going to happen, by what method shall this happen. We can see from Elizabeth’s statement in verse 45 that Mary did not doubt God’s message from the angel like Zechariah did.

Luke 1:45
“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”

And Mary’s reply to the angel is literally “since I know not man.” This suggests that Mary had taken a vow of virginity, that is, “to know not man.” “To know” is a polite metaphor that biblical writers used to refer to two people having sexual relations. Cf. Genesis 4:1 ] And Mary was wondering if the angel was informing her that God wanted to her to rescind this vow.

Mary was questioning how this pregnancy was to happen. Every new bride , under normal circumstances, would be anticipating at least the possibility of children. Now either Mary had made a vow of virginity or she did not. If she had not then this question of hers to the angel of how she was to become pregnant does not make sense since there had, up until this moment, only one way to get pregnant. Therefore, this questioning by Mary only makes sense if she had made a vow of virginity. Therefore, the text suggests that Mary was asking if God had wanted her to forgo a vow of virginity that she had already made to God.

In considering Mary’s question about how she would become pregnant, it is important to note that the archangel said that Mary “will" - the future tense - conceive a child. Mary would have assumed that the child would be conceived the only way any child had ever been conceived until then.
.

Thanks, so then this:

“He appointed twelve (whom he also named apostles) … Simon, … James, son of Zebedee, and … James the son of Alphaeus …”

Can refer to second cousins or kin? I.e. James could have been a second cousin to our Lord by being the son of one of these men?

 

[snowflake12345]

What I mean is could the two James we read about be considered 2nd or third cousins to Jesus, or other such kin then by the way we read about their fathers? Therefore enabling St. Paul to use the term brother instead of cousin?

 

[snowflake12345]

Does anyone else have any thoughts on Paul’s word usage? I can’t find anything else on the Internet to refute this claim…?

 

[Cachonga]

What about Luke 14:12 ("And He also went on to say to the one who had invited Him, “When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, otherwise they may also invite you in return and that will be your repayment.” NASB). Note that Jesus Himself used “brothers” (ἀδελφούς) and “relatives” (συγγενεῖς) in the same sentence. Paul tells us that all Scripture is “God-breathed”, so I see no reason to doubt what the Scriptures say. In regard to Abraham and Lot (an argument I’ve heard many times), we know the exact relationship between them because God took the time to explain it to us in His word. Either God did the same thing when He described the “brothers and sisters” of Jesus, or He didn’t. Catholic scholar Ludwig Ott, in his book “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” (available in the CA bookstore), points out that there is NO Scriptural support for this dogma. It first appears in writings in the 3rd or 4th century in works condemned by Pope Gelasius as heretical (odd that an “Apostolic Tradition” first be found in a heretical writing centuries after the Apostles were gone). Any Scripture offered in defense of this dogma is an “indication”, not a “proof”.

Personally, I don’t believe she was a perpetual virgin (for many reasons). However, if it is ever proven to be the case, my faith in God and His Scriptures will remain strong. What if someone finds proof that Mary and Joseph had other children?

Just something else to think about!

 

[chero23]

I have worked on this booklet (is 192 pages long and it talks about the majority of Catholic teaching, in it I dedicated a section to, Did Mary have children? Ill post it here so you can see that Mary was a perpetual Virgin.

• First Protestant Argument; they will cite Matthew 1:25, but knew her not until she had borne a son. They will state that “until” means that after Jesus was born, Mary and Joseph had sexual relations and children.

Catholic Response
•Genesis 8:7 and sent forth a raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth. (this means that the raven stopped flying once the Earth dried up)
•2 Samuel 6:23 And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death. (So Mical had children after her death?)
•Matthew 28:20 Jesus says that he will be with us until the end of the world. So, using their logic, Jesus won’t be with us after the world ends.
•Luke 1:80 (John the Baptist) And the child grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness till the day of his manifestation to Israel. Once again using their logic, so once John manifested himself, he didn’t need any more strong spirit.
•1 Corinthians 15:25 Christ will reign until all his enemies are destroyed. So once all of Christ’s enemies are destroyed, he will stop reigning?

*Second Protestant Argument: They will cite, Luke 2:7, she gave birth to her firstborn. What they don’t understand the word “firstborn” is a Title.
*Catholic Response
•Genesis 27:1; Exodus 13:2; Numbers 3:12-13; Numbers 18:15-16; and Deuteronomy 21:15-17, here we can see that the older son is called the firstborn. It is a title used in the Jewish culture
•Isaiah 41:4; Isaiah 44:6; and Isaiah 48:12 in these verses we see how God is the first and last
•Sirac 44:23 God gives Isaac, the son of Abraham, the right of the firstborn, if we see in Genesis 22:2, Isaac is Abraham only son, but yet here he gets the title of firstborn
•Romans 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren.
•1 Corinthians 15:20 Jesus was the first one to resuscitate.
•Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation;
•Colossians 1:18 He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in everything he might be pre-eminent.
•Hebrews 1:8 God presented his firstborn Son to the world
•Revelation 1:8 and Revelation 21:6-7 Christ is the Alpha and Omega (beginning and end)
*Some might understand that the word “firstborn” is a title, and has nothing to do whether Mary had more children. But others might say, “Well it does say that is her firstborn, she did have more”. The next verse will show the contrary.
•1 Chronicles 23:17 The sons of Eleazar: Rehabias the chief; Eleazar had no other sons

 

[chero23]

page 2

*Third Protestant Argument; they will cite, Matthew 12:46; Matthew 13:55; Mark 3:31-34; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:19-21; John 2:12; John 7:3,5,10; Acts 1:14; 1 Corinthians 9:51; and Galatians 1:19 here they speak about Jesus brothers
*Catholic Response What Protestants don’t understand is that the Word “brother” in the Hebrew dictionary, does not only mean being from the same mother and father, but also being from the same region, and belief system. Another thing to add is that in the Hebrew tongue, the word for “cousin, aunt, and brother-in-law” does not exist. They were all brothers.
•Exodus 2:11 here the Word brother, means people from the same region
•2 Samuel 1:26 David tells Jonathan brother, although they have different parents. Here the word brother means friend
•1 Kings 9:13 here the King tells Solomon brother, although both are not blood brothers
•1 Kings 20:32 and Amos 1:9 here the Word brother means friendship
•1 Maccabees 5:13,16; 1 Maccabees 9:9-10; 1 Maccabees 6-7,21; 2 Maccabees 1:1; 2 Maccabees 12:6 here the word brother means people from the same region
•Matthew 5:22; Matthew 5:47; and Matthew 7:3 here the word brother means neighbor
•Matthew 12:50 Jesus says that whoever does his Father, is his brother, sister, and mother.
•Matthew 23:8 here Jesus tells the people, “brethren” this does not mean that they were all born from Mary
•Matthew 25:40 and Hebrews 2:17 brothers here means everyone
•Mark 3:35 Jesus that everyone who does the will of the Father, is his brother and mother
•Luke 22:32 Jesus prayed for Peter, said that his faith didn’t diminish and with that, he could teach his brothers, the apostles. The apostles came from different families
•Acts 1:13-15 here it is said that the apostles got together to pray with the brothers of Jesus, along with his mother Mary. Then it says that 120 people were there. If that’s the case Mary had 120 children, Here we can see that the word brother does not mean blood brothers, but more in terms as friends and family, like cousin.
•**Acts 2:29; Acts 2:37; Acts 3:17; Acts 6:3; Acts 7:1; Acts 7:23-26; Acts 9:3-; Acts 11:1,29; Acts 13:15,26; Acts 13:38-39; Acts 14:2: Acts 15:1,3,7,13; Acts 15:22-23; Acts 15:32; Acts 20:32; Acts 22:1; Acts 23:1,5-6; Acts 28:15,17; Acts 28:21; Romans 1:13; Romans 7:1,4; Romans 8:12; Romans 9:3; Romans 10:1; Romans 11:25; Romans 12:10,17,19; Romans 15:14,30; Romans 16:5,15,17; 1 Corinthians 1:2,10,16; 1 Corinthians 2:1; 1 Corinthians 3:1; 1 Corinthians 4:6; 1 Corinthians 7:29; 1 Corinthians 10:14; 1 Corinthians 11:33; 1 Corinthians 12:1,14,20,26; 1 Corinthians 15:1,31; 1 Corinthians 16:1,15,20: 2 Corinthians 1:8; 2 Corinthians 6:11; 2 Corinthians 7:1; 2 Corinthians 8:1,18,22; 2 Corinthians 9:1,35; 2 Corinthians 12:19; 2 Corinthians 13:11; Galatians 1:11; Galatians 3:15; Galatians 4:12; Galatians 5:11,13; Galatians 6:1,12; Ephesians 6:10,13; Philippians 1:12,14; Philippians 2:12; Philippians 3:1,13,17: Philippians 4:1,8,21; Colossians 1:1-2; Colossians 4:7; 1 Thessalonians 1:1,4; 1 Thessalonians 2:1,9,14,17: 1 Thessalonians 4:1,10,13; 1 Thessalonians 5:4,12,14,25; 1 Thessalonians 5:25-26; 2 Thessalonians 1:1.3; 2 Thessalonians 2:1,13,15; 2 Thessalonians 3:1,6,13,15;1 Timothy 1:18-19; 1 Timothy 4:6; 1 Timothy 4:13: 1 Timothy 6:2; 2 Timothy 4:4; Philemon 1:1,7,16-17, 19-20; Hebrews 2:11-12; Hebrews 3:1,12; Hebrews 6:9-10; Hebrews 13:1,22-23; James 1:2,9,16,19; James 2:1,5,14; James 3:1; James 4:1; James 5:7,9-10,12,19; 1 Peter 2:11,17: 1 Peter 3:8; 1 **Peter 4:12; 2 Peter 1:10; 2 Peter 3:1,8,14,17; 1 John 2:7; 1 John 3:2,13-16; 1 John 4:1,7,11; 2 John 1:15; 3 John 1:5; Jude 1:3,17,20 here the word brother means friendship, fellow Christian
•Revelation 1:9 John tells the people of the Church that he is their brother
•Revelation 22:9 that all the brethren adore God

*The following verses will prove that Mary did not have any more children.
•Matthew 10:2, Matthew 20:20, Mark 7:17; Luke 5:10; Acts 12:2 here we see that James is brother of John, in Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3 John is not mentioned to be a brother of Jesus. We can see that they are sons of Zebedee, see Matthew 4:21; Mark 1:20; & Mark 10:35. Now in Matthew 20:20; Matthew 27:56 we can see that their mother is the other Mary (see John 19:25)
•Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3 mention 4 men to be the brother of Jesus; James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas Thaddeus; James is mentioned as the son of Alphaeus, (see Matthew 10:3), in Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40 we see that the other Mary is the mother of James, Joseph, and Salome.

As we can see, James and Joseph are from the same mother, which is not Jesus mother. Protestants will argue, the Bible doesn’t contradict itself, and they are right. But here we see that 2 of those 4 men who were mentioned as Jesus brother are the sons of another Mary. This proves that the Catholic teaching that the word brother, here means cousin. But there’s more, now we get to talk about Judas Thaddeus.

*Jude is mentioned to be a brother of James, see Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13; and Jude 1:1, as we can see, 3 of the 4 men who were mentioned as Jesus brothers are not Jesus brother, because they come from the other Mary.