Again, I don’t want to come on here and cause chaos. I just ask we look at this honestly leaving our pride at the door. Scooby, I agree with you. Brothers and sisters can be used as a general term and I don’t have a problem with that. Is that what the Bible talks about here? The evidence would say no in my opinion. If the Bible just says brothers and sisters as a broad statement, then i might buy the argument that Mary was a virgin. The Bible doesn’t do that however.
In Matthew 12, it reads: While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. - Matthew 12:46. Honestly, if someone uses mother and brother in the same sentence, you are thinking a true mother and brother. If they said brothers and sisters, then you might have an argument.
In Luke 1, we know that Jesus and John the Baptist are literal cousins. They are relatives. This shows that the term relative, brother can be used as literal, not just talking about a group of believers. The disciples are those “brothers” right?
In Matthew 13, it reads: When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked. “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”– Matthew 13:53-56. Here the Holy Spirit actually names the brothers, many of whom we have never heard of. If he was talking about the disciples, then why wouldn’t he name one of the twelve? The evidence demonstrates that this is a very specific naming of his literal brothers. Again, the Bible never says Mary was a virgin either, so keep that in mind when you look at my argument.
In Galatians, we read: Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. – Galatians 1:18. Now again James is mentioned here as the Lord’s brother. He is not named as a disciple or an apostle, but a “brother”. If this was just a general term for brother, it’s quite an odd coincidence that James is named both in Matthew’s gospel and here in Paul’s letter. We don’t know anything about this guy named James, except he is referenced as his brother. The evidence is starting to become overwhelming at this point.
In John, we read: What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him. After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples. There they stayed for a few days. – John 2:11:12. Here the Holy Spirit distinguishes Jesus’ brothers and his disciples. They cannot be one in the same because he says “his brothers AND his disciples”. They are not mutually exclusive. That’s like saying that the NFL suspended Terrell Owens and Ocho Cincho. They are two separate individuals. In John, the disciples which are thousands are not brothers according to what the sentence says. Looking at the evidence, there really isn’t an argument for Jesus not having literal brothers.
Back to John, we read: Jesus’ brothers said to him, “Leave Galilee and go to Judea, so that your disciples there may see the works you do. No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” For even his own brothers did not believe in him. – John 7:6-9 We again see the disciples distinct from the brothers. The disciples are for Jesus, and the brothers at this point in his life are mocking him. Jesus’ brothers were not believers at this point in their lives and are basically telling him to put your money where your mouth is. the point you made earlier is that brothers are within the body of believers and I said I had no problem with that. Here Jesus’ real brothers are not only not believers, but they are mocking him and basically telling him to go down to Judea since he says he is the son of Man. Only later on did his brothers believe, and two of them wrote epistles in the New Testament.
So, I don’t want to offend anyone, and nobody’s salvation is in danger here. My point is that the Bible needs to be taken literally and by looking at what the Bible says, not what a minister or pastor says is what’s really important. I think we all know there are a lot of false teachers out there. I want everyone to have a great understanding of the Bible and I hope to see all of you great Christian brothers with me in heaven!
WhoDatChristian,
Code:
Even in our culture, we refer to others as "brothers" and "sisters" even though they are not blood relatives. If I went to your church and spoke to your congregation, beginning with, "Brothers and sisters..." and it was recorded, what do you think someone 1000 years from now might think upon hearing that and reading that there were 500 people present? "Wow! I'd like to meet HIS daddy!"? LOL
Another consideration is that St. Joseph was a widower before meeting Mary. It's very possible he had children, too. These would be Jesus' "brothers" and "sisters" but not Mary's blood children.
Here's a good article on the topic:
[catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp](http://www.catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp)
