About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

Jessica. · 27-02-2010, 01:25 AM

Why wouldn't he. Mary married Joseph after GOD gave her JESUS. Women usually had quite a few children back then. Gabriel didn't say she would only have one child. More than likely JESUS did have brothers and sisters.

InOne · 27-02-2010, 01:28 AM

I guess him having siblings takes away his divinity, which makes sense cos he had none anyway!!

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InOne

I guess him having siblings takes away his divinity, which makes sense cos he had none anyway!!

Your constant need to remind yourself of what you have faith in personally belies the confidence in your verity.

InOne · 27-02-2010, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Your constant need to remind yourself of what you have faith in personally belies the confidence in your verity.

It's just a point, you asked the question I answered it.

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InOne

It's just a point, you asked the question I answered it.

tiresome

Dr.Gonzo · 27-02-2010, 08:19 AM

Well if he did they'd only be his half brothers/sisters, seeing as Mary cheated on Joseph with God to make lil baby Jesus. After seeing that train wreck of a marriage, it's no wonder the bearded one turned gay.

supernoodles! · 27-02-2010, 10:43 AM

Dunno.The whole Jesus/God/Christianity thing has just been blown way out of proportion anyway.Its just some old wives tale.

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by supernoodles!

Dunno.The whole Jesus/God/Christianity thing has just been blown way out of proportion anyway.Its just some old wives tale.

Yes. 2000 odd years or hyperbole..

Dr.Gonzo · 27-02-2010, 02:03 PM

Shasown · 27-02-2010, 03:28 PM

I dont think he did, well not by Mary that is, maybe step brothers from Joseph, in the sparse narratives from his early life it doesnt mention them.

All the people named as his brothers and sisters are at other times in the New Testament named as having some other person as their mother.

It is possible Joseph died while Jesus was still relatively young, in his early teens. He and Mary could have lived with relatives of either her or Joseph as part of an extended family, the other children in this extended family would then have been seen as being his brothers and sisters. A fairly common practice in that particular culture.

InOne · 27-02-2010, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasown

I dont think he did, well not by Mary that is, maybe step brothers from Joseph, in the sparse narratives from his early life it doesnt mention them.

All the people named as his brothers and sisters are at other times in the New Testament named as having some other person as their mother.

It is possible Joseph died while Jesus was still relatively young, in his early teens. He and Mary could have lived with relatives of either her or Joseph as part of an extended family, the other children in this extended family would then have been seen as being his brothers and sisters. A fairly common practice in that particular culture.

Ahhh yeah, there is a gap of like 15 years or something where it says nothing about his life, right?

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 03:39 PM

Matthew 12:46-47
Mark 3:31-32; 6:3
Luke 8:19-20
John 2:12; 7:3-5
Acts 1:14
1 Corinthians 9:5
Galatians 1:19

Shasown · 27-02-2010, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Matthew 12:46-47
Mark 3:31-32; 6:3
Luke 8:19-20
John 2:12; 7:3-5
Acts 1:14
1 Corinthians 9:5
Galatians 1:19

I am not disputing the fact they were called brothers, however look through the new testament and see how many times Jesus when addressing the apostles calls them brother. Does the word brother mean just that or does it mean relative in part of an extended family, like half brother or even cousin. (If Joseph had died before Jesus was able to look after his mother under Mosaic Law relatives were duty bound to take in Jesus and Mary and look after them as their own). Or even advocates of the same belief/social group.

Also take a peep at Matt 27:56 or Mark 6:3 and 15:40 for James and Joses.

There is no proof they were sons of Joseph and Mary. It is a belief contrary to the RC, Eastern Orthodox, Muslim and lots of Protestant Faiths. (Luther, Calvin even Wesley wrote in the defence of the perpetual virginity of Mary).

The arguement you are following is thus, it calls them brother so they must have been his brothers. Given you are using the new testament as evidence. The New Testament was gathered and put together, then guarded by the early christian church, what was to become the Catholic Church, which disputes the fact of a bloodline from Joseph and Mary. Are you saying they got these writings and established a belief that argues counter to the books on which it is based.

Did they change the Gospels during transcription (either by redaction or deliberately) to remove any history of his blood family? If so doesnt that undermine belief in the Gospels as a whole?

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 04:10 PM

Proper interpretation precludes this pretext. There is no biblical precedent for rendering the Greek word adelphos (brother) as cousin. If the NT writers had wanted us to read cousin they would have used the word anepsios.

Shasown · 27-02-2010, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Proper interpretation precludes this pretext. There is no biblical precedent for rendering the Greek word adelphos (brother) as cousin. If the NT writers had wanted us to read cousin they would have used the word anepsios.

You are missing the point, on that. If Joseph had died before Jesus was able to take care of Mary they would have been adopted into a relatives family and would have been treated as part of that family to all intents and purposes, even under the eyes of the law(Mosaic), cousins would have been treated as brothers. (This included inheritance from the adoptive uncle's estate).

Given that the Catholic Church both Roman and Eastern Orthodox in the early days wrote the bloody Gospels etc, I leave explanations to them and interpretations to those faiths that disagree with their teachings.

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasown

You are missing the point, on that. If Joseph had died before Jesus was able to take care of Mary they would have been adopted into a relatives family and would have been treated as part of that family to all intents and purposes, even under the eyes of the law(Mosaic), cousins would have been treated as brothers. (This included inheritance from the adoptive uncle's estate).

Given that the Catholic Church both Roman and Eastern Orthodox in the early days wrote the bloody Gospels etc, I leave explanations to them and interpretations to those faiths that disagree with their teachings.

do you know that Joseph died before Jesus was able to take care of Mary?

Shasown · 27-02-2010, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

do you know that Joseph died before Jesus was able to take care of Mary?

Well Joseph was definately dead or severely incapacitated by the time of the marriage of Cana. (John 2:1-10) as JC appears in the role of eldest male in the family, being called to represent the family at the wedding, then his mum asking him to sort something out for the guests. Would indicate the responsibility of hospitality fell to himself and Mary. (Paterfamilias)

Interestingly enough seeing as you are big on interpretations, it could be interpreted that verse 9 is spoken to Jesus although its said to be the bridegroom - and also responsibility for hospitality normally fell to the bridegroom in those days. Was Jesus the bridegroom? Does this prove that Jesus did in fact get married? Of course it doesnt however its the same sort of inference you use when claiming that those named in Matt 12:46 and Mark 6:3 are children of Joseph and Mary (given that elsewhere in the New Testament stronger indications of their geneology is provided)

Crimson Dynamo · 27-02-2010, 05:06 PM

Did Mary Have Other Children?

One of the more controversial teachings of the Catholic church deals with the perpetual virginity of Mary. This doctrine maintains that Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus and that biblical references suggesting Jesus had siblings are really references to cousins (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 510).

As the veneration of Mary increased throughout the centuries, the vehicle of Sacred Tradition became the means of promoting new doctrines not explicitly taught in the Bible. The virginity of Mary is clearly taught in scripture when describing the birth of Jesus. But is the doctrine of her continued virginity supported by the Bible? Did Mary lose her virginity after Jesus was born? Does the Bible reveal that Mary had other children, that Jesus had brothers and sisters?

The Bible does not come out and declare that Mary remained a virgin and that she had no children. In fact, the Bible seems to state otherwise: (All quotes are from the NASB.)

Matthew 1:24-25 - "And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took as his wife, and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Matthew 12:46-47 - "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."

Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"

Mark 6:2-3 - "And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, "Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands? "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?"

John 2:12 - "After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days."

Acts 1:14 - "These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers."

1 Cor. 9:4-5 - "Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?"

Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."

An initial reading of these biblical texts seems to clear up the issue: Jesus had brothers and sisters. But such obvious scriptures are not without their response from Catholic Theologians. The primary argument against these biblical texts is as follows:

In Greek, the word for brother is adelphos and sister is adelphe. This word is used in different contexts: of children of the same parents (Matt. 1:2; 14:3), descendants of parents (Acts 7:23, 26; Heb. 7:5), the Jews as a whole (Acts 3:17, 22), etc. Therefore, the term brother (and sister) can and does refer to the cousins of Jesus.

There is certainly merit in this argument, However, different contexts give different meanings to words. It is not legitimate to say that because a word has a wide scope of meaning, that you may then transfer any part of that range of meaning to any other text that uses the word. In other words, just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in context to see what it means.

Lets briefly analyze a couple of verses dealing with the brothers of Jesus.

Matthew 12:46-47, "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."

Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"

In both of these verses, if the brothers of Jesus are not brothers, but His cousins, then who is His mother and who is the carpenters father? In other words, mother here refers to Mary. The carpenter in Matt. 13:55, refers to Joseph. These are literal. Yet, the Catholic theologian will then stop there and say, "Though carpenters son refers to Joseph, and mother refers to Mary, brothers does not mean brothers, but "cousins." This does not seem to be a legitimate assertion. You cannot simply switch contextual meanings in the middle of a sentence unless it is obviously required. The context is clear. This verse is speaking of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus brothers. The whole context is of familial relationship: father, mother, and brothers.
Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm

There are many arguments pro and con concerning Jesus siblings. But the issue cannot be settled without examining Psalm 69, a Messianic Psalm. Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, "But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause."

He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise." His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Thy house will consume me."

Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.

To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9, "Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. 9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me."

This messianic Psalm clearly shows that Jesus has brothers. As Amos 3:7 says, "Surely the Lord God does nothing unless He reveals His secret counsel to His servants the prophets." Gods will has been revealed plainly in the New Testament and prophetically in the Old. Psalm 69 shows us that Jesus had brothers.

Did Mary have other children? The Bible seems to suggest yes. Catholic Tradition says no. Which will you trust?

Of course, the Catholic will simply state that even this phrase "my mother's sons" is in reference not to his siblings, but to cousins and other relatives. This is a necessary thing for the Catholic to say, otherwise, the perpetual virginity of Mary is threatened and since that contradicts Roman Catholic tradition, an interpretation that is consistent with that tradition must be adopted.

The question is, "Was Jesus estranged by His brothers?". Yes, He was. John 7:5 says "For not even His brothers were believing in Him." Furthermore, Psalm 69:8 says both "my brothers" and "my mother's sons." Are these both to be understood as not referring to His siblings? Hardly. The Catholics are fond of saying that "brothers" must mean "cousins." But, if that is the case, then when we read "an alien to my mother's sons" we can see that the writer is adding a further distinction and narrowing the scope of meaning. In other words, Jesus was alienated by his siblings, His very half-brothers begotten from Mary.

It is sad to see the Roman Catholic church go to such lengths to maintain Mary's virginity, something that is a violation of biblical law to be married and fill the earth.

http://www.carm.org/did-mary-have-other-children