Mary's other children - Mark 6:1-3

  • Thread starter Thread starter jspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
By the way, I’m really not sure what it is about “secular scholars” that makes them more able to attest to issues such as this. It is my experience, particularly these days, most secular scholars are looking for ways to disprove faith in general more than anything else. Sounds like a bad source of information regarding matters of God to me.
 
I had a protestant brother tell me that this verse shows that Jesus had brothers and sisters. I didn’t know how to respond. I need help with this one. I looked it up in the Greek, and i’m more confused than ever.
And ask the Protestant brother were scripture is EXPLICIT Mary had other children? Why does scripture not provide all their names,if it so important? Protestants always expect everything to be taught explicitly from scripture,then ask the Protestant for the scriptural evidence.

Second, if Jesus had other brothers as they claim,then why didn’t Jesus tell His mother from the cross that one of His other sibilings should take of her? Why ask John the Apostle,if Jesus had blood brothers? Jewish custom required a sibiling to take care of her,not a non-relative and Jesus was an orthodox Jew.

Finally,ask them it is not possible for a woman to remain a virgin her whole life? Who are we to place limits on God? It is no different than their denial Mary was born without original sin. Who are they say what God can do and not do?
 
By the way, I’m really not sure what it is about “secular scholars” that makes them more able to attest to issues such as this. It is my experience, particularly these days, most secular scholars are looking for ways to disprove faith in general more than anything else. Sounds like a bad source of information regarding matters of God to me.
I agree with you.Some scripture scholars seem more like scientists always looking for material proof or some tangible evidence to prove Jesus had brothers. No faith in God.
 
hellopeople
If something is true, then secular scholars as well as Protestant scholars and scholars of other faiths should agree with the church
Paul even calls James the brother of Christ.
That reasoning is obviously unreasonable. Many scholars have tried to misinterpret the Sacred Scriptures even some Catholics.

As you should know by now neither Hebrew nor Aramaic, the language spoken by Christ and His disciples, had a special word meaning cousin, so the word for brother was used. The Gospels speak of four “brethren”, James, Joseph, Simon and Jude.

As Christ gave us His Church with His authority to teach infallibly, with the primacy to Peter, why would you want to trust anyone else?
Jesus founded His Church on Peter:
All four promises to Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19)

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).
 
He then went on to say that Jesus’ brother James was not a believer until after Jesus’ death.
… did you ask your friend where he came up with this? Where did James talk of coming to be a believer after Jesus’ death?
 
Are there any modern scholars you can quote that are outside of the church that believe Mary was a perpetual virgin.
I would, in return, ask you are there any scholars, other than modern scholars, that taught that Mary was NOT a perpetual virgin?

It would seem that this interpretation of YOURS is the invention of man, not the Catholic position, for its less than 200 - 300 years old.

lol
 
sounds like you should give them the bible alone process of not using one liners to prove scripture…

SO WHO WERE THESE “BROTHERS OF JESUS?”
A. While James and Joses are mentioned as Jesus’s brothers in Matthew 13:55, it is made clear in Mathew 27:56 and Mark 15:40 that their mother was another Mary.
Matthew 27:56 Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.
This “other Mary” at the Cross, is revealed in John 19:25 to be the wife of Cleophas. Mary of Cleophas is therefore revealed as the mother of two of Jesus’s so-called “brothers”, James and Joses.
B. In John 19:25, the original Greek states. “But by he cross of Jesus were the Mother of Him AND the sister of the Mother of Him, Mary the wife of Cleopas AND Mary the Magdalene.” The precise positioning of the ANDs in the original Greek makes it clear that Mary the Wife of Cleopas, is also referred to as the Virgin Mary’s sister. Since we know no-one has two daughters and calls them BOTH Mary, we know that sister here does not mean sister. The same would apply to “brother” with reference to Jesus.
C. In the introduction to the Book of Jude, Jude introduces himself as: Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ, and a brother of James. If Jude/Judas were truly the brother of Jesus, why wouldn’t he say so? He identifies himself in his letter as brother of James, but significantly not as a brother of Jesus, only as a servant. To have identified himself as Jesus’s blood brother would have added enormous weight to his epistle, but Jude doesn’t so identify himself here. We know the reason, because James and Joseph have already been revealed to be sons of the other Mary in Matthew 27 and Mark 15. Judas then must also be a son of this other Mary. Mary wife of Cleophas. So another of Jesus’s so-called “brothers” is eliminated.
D. James “Brother of Jesus” is referred to as one of the APOSTLES by Paul in Galatians 1:19. . We know from Matthew 10:2-4 that neither of the Apostles named James was actually a Son of Mary. So James, “brother of Jesus” cannot be a Son of Mary. He is actually James, Son of Alphaeus (thought to be another form of Cleophas)! James is a kinsman of Jesus, but not a sibling.
A few more points:
In Luke 2:41-51, the twelve-year-old Jesus goes missing on a trip to Jerusalem, and is only found three days later in the temple. Yet in all this time no mention at all is made of any other children, even though the entire family made the journey together. If all the people mentioned in Matthew were actually surviving children of Mary, she would have had at least seven children younger than Jesus to look after! In fact both Mary and Joseph race back to Jerusalem to find him, through country filled with bandits, something they could not have done if there had been babies and other young children in need of care!
The people of Nazareth refer to Jesus as “the son of Mary” (Mark 6:3), not as “a son of Mary”
Finally, if James and Joseph, Simon and Jude, were children of Mary, and if Jesus had even more brothers and sisters, why did Jesus commit His Mother to the care of St. John at His death?

Mk 6:3 says, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses, and Judas and Simon, and are not His sisters here with us?” We need to realize a few things here about these “brothers and sisters”: #1, there was no word for cousin, or for nephew or niece, or for aunt or uncle in ancient Hebrew or Aramaic - the words that the Jews used in all those instances were “brother” or “sister”. An example of this can be seen in Gen 14:14, where Lot, who was Abraham’s nephew, is called his brother.
Another point to consider. If Jesus had had any brothers, if Mary had had any other sons, would the last thing that Jesus did on earth be to grievously offend his surviving brothers? In Jn 19:26-27, right before Jesus dies, it says that Jesus entrusted the care of His mother to the beloved disciple, John. If Mary had had any other sons, it would have been an incredible slap in the face to them that the Apostle John was entrusted with the care of their mother!
Also, we see from Mt. 27:55-56, that the James and Joses mentioned in Mark 6 as the “brothers” of Jesus, are actually the sons of another Mary. And, one other passage to consider is Acts 1:14-15, “[The Apostles] with one accord devoted themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus and with His brothers…the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty.” A company of 120 persons composed of the Apostles, Mary, the women, and the “brothers” of Jesus. Let’s see there were 11 Apostles at the time. Jesus’ mother makes 12. The women, probably the same three women mentioned in Matthew 27, but let’s say it was maybe a dozen or two, just for argument’s sake. So that puts us up to 30 or 40 or so. So that leaves the number of Jesus’ brothers at about 80 or 90! Do you think Mary had 80 or 90 children? She would have been in perpetual labor! No, Scripture does not contradict the teaching of the Catholic Church about the “brothers” of Jesus, when Scripture is properly interpreted in context.
 
i’m still waiting for an answer on where in the Bible did it say that anyone was Mary’s child other than Jesus
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top