To those that believe that Jesus had brothers why do you think they would betray him?

[heart4home]

If James, Joses, Simon and Judas . were really his own brothers why wouldn’t they have understood that there was something special about him?

Do you feel Mary wouldn’t have been able to reveal to her own sons how he was immaculately conceived, at least when the time came for him to be known? Do you think she did and they just didn’t believe her?

 

[kaid100]

I’m wondering if some early church figures thought they could get some extra prestige by claiming to be the brother of Jesus. After all, he wasn’t on Earth to contradict them, and they aren’t mentioned in the Gospels.

 

[po18guy]

After being trusted by God to conceive His Son and raise Him for 30 years, and to remain with Him from Annunciation to Ascension, why on earth would a humble servant (handmaiden/bond slave) of the Lord conceivably want any other child? How could you possibly turn your eyes away from Jesus, to divert your attention from Him after promising your life and service to God? Since Mary consecrated herself to God before Gabriel, who stands in God’s presence, the Church both believes and teaches that there were no other children of her own. For a thinking person, the thought of other children is silly, if not insulting and vulgar.

Saint Paul also gave himself completely to the Lord. He did not marry or have children, either. Such is the life of someone who gives themselves entirely to God.

 

[Nine_Two]

I’m wondering if some early church figures thought they could get some extra prestige by claiming to be the brother of Jesus. After all, he wasn’t on Earth to contradict them, and they aren’t mentioned in the Gospels.

Err the argument that he had brothers is based on the fact that the Gospels do use the term in reference to certain individuals.

Additionally it was held by the Early Church that he didn’t. It is modern Protestants who say he did. Not a very good way to claim extra prestige if people don’t believe you for anothe 2,000 years.

 

[heart4home]

Err the argument that he had brothers is based on the fact that the Gospels do use the term in reference to certain individuals.

Additionally it was held by the Early Church that he didn’t. It is modern Protestants who say he did. Not a very good way to claim extra prestige if people don’t believe you for anothe 2,000 years.

There are several Bible verses where it mentions brothers and one where it mentions him having the 4 brothers and sisters (plural, which would therefore have to mean at least 2)

Here is just one, but there are others…

**Mark 6:3

“Is not this the carpenter, the Son of Mary, the Brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.”**

but the Catholic Church teaches that the original word being used before being translated could have also meant cousins etc. and I understand the Church’s explanation however this is why it is a common argument from Protestants that Mary could not have remained a virgin.

But it just got me thinking. At least two of these so called “brothers” betrayed him and so with my “human reasoning” I started wondering if they really were his brothers why wouldn’t Mary have at least shared with them what she obviously knew.

 

[kaid100]

Err the argument that he had brothers is based on the fact that the Gospels do use the term in reference to certain individuals.

Yikes my mistake, thought it didn’t get mentioned until later in the NT.

Additionally it was held by the Early Church that he didn’t. It is modern Protestants who say he did. Not a very good way to claim extra prestige if people don’t believe you for anothe 2,000 years.