face2face
Well-Known Member
- Jun 22, 2015
- 8,243
- 1,202
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
And then there is...the foxes have holes but...
Peter and the coin...the list goes on and on!
F2F
Were Jesus's brothers born of another woman?
- Thread starter NotTheRock
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Peter and the coin...the list goes on and on!
F2F
face2face
Well-Known Member
- Jun 22, 2015
- 8,243
- 1,202
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
Who can blame them? Can you imagine your brother telling you that he's God in the flesh?
Taken
Well-Known Member
You said:
I Disagreed.
How does your response about Mary and King David have anything to do with Jesus having blood brothers?
Thanks.
Glory to God,
Taken
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Saying, anywhere, that they were sons and daughters of Mary. And it never does...anywhere. In the culture of the day, the word "brother" (or "sister") did not always mean blood brother or sister. They were frequently used to indicate someone who was a cousin or close friend. Even in our culture today, the word brother does not always mean "blood brother." For example, "What's happening, my brother?!" is a common greeting among some folks.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Do you know the difference between implying something compared to explicitly stating something?
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Absolutely, I do. Do you know the difference between personal interpretation and authoritative interpretation? And do you realize that the Martin Luther, who started the Protestant Reformation, believed that Jesus had no blood siblings?
Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. {Luther's Works, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan (vols. 1-30) & Helmut T. Lehmann (vols. 31-55), St. Louis: Concordia Pub. House (vols. 1-30); Philadelphia: Fortress Press (vols. 31-55), 1955, v.22:23 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539)}
Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers. {Pelikan, ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539)}
Similarly, John Calvin (1509-1564), the second most important Protestant “Reformer” after Martin Luther, and probably more historically influential than even Luther himself, believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Here are the usual proofs offered in favor of his beliefs:
- “Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ’s ‘brothers’ are sometimes mentioned.” (Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke, on Matthew 13:55)
- “Under the word ‘brethren’ the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.” (Commentary on John 7:3)
- “The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. ... No just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words … as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called ‘first-born’; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. ... What took place afterwards the historian does not inform us. ... No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.” (Harmony on Matthew 1:25)
Last edited:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
It takes discernment to differentiate between figurative and literal language. While the Bible is a highly figurative book, it also contains literal statements of truth. That Jesus had brothers and sisters is one of those literal truths.
There is another passage where Jesus rebukes his own family, figuratively saying who his real mother and sisters are.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Yup. Personal interpretation is what those who deny Mary had other children are doing.
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
If that's what it takes to stand on the truth of Scripture, so be it. I'm OK with that.
Jesus's brothers who didn't believe that He was the Messiah, though they later came to believe, were His cousins.
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
What you're missing is that it's not the truth of Scripture. It's your own personal interpretation of Scripture. There is no guarantee in that, whatsoever. See 2 Peter 1:20 that warns against personal interpretation of Scripture. "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation" If that's all you have, then you don't have a guarantee of the truth of Scripture, And any interpretation that disagrees with the authentic interpretation of the Church that wrote the New Testament and compiled the Bible is in error, as in this case.
Last edited:
“A crowd seated around him told him, ‘Your mother and your brothers [and your sisters] are outside asking for you.’ But he said to them in reply, ‘ Who are my mother and [my] brothers?’ And looking around at those seated in the circle he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers.’”
(Mark 3:32-34, NABRE)
www.biblegateway.com
NABRE is a Catholic translation (New American Bible Revised Edition)
Why does it not read “Your mother and your cousins are outside looking for you?
Assuming for a moment that it actually was his mother and his cousins (rather than his brothers [and sisters]) who were looking for him, what does that do to Jesus’ response? -> “Here are my mother and my cousins.”
Jesus considers his followers to be his spiritual cousins, not his spiritual brothers [and sisters]?
(Mark 3:32-34, NABRE)
Bible Gateway passage: Mark 3:32-34 - New American Bible (Revised Edition)
A crowd seated around him told him, “Your mother and your brothers [and your sisters] are outside asking for you.” But he said to them in reply, “Who are my mother and [my] brothers?” And looking around at those seated in the circle he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers.
NABRE is a Catholic translation (New American Bible Revised Edition)
Why does it not read “Your mother and your cousins are outside looking for you?
Assuming for a moment that it actually was his mother and his cousins (rather than his brothers [and sisters]) who were looking for him, what does that do to Jesus’ response? -> “Here are my mother and my cousins.”
Jesus considers his followers to be his spiritual cousins, not his spiritual brothers [and sisters]?
Last edited:
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Because the Greek word adelphos doesn't only mean sibling in the New Testament. In Matthew 13:55-56 four men are named as brothers (adelphoi) of the Lord: James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude. It would be an error, though, to conclude that these are at least some of Mary’s other children. The New Testament proves otherwise.“A crowd seated around him told him, ‘Your mother and your brothers [and your sisters] are outside asking for you.’ But he said to them in reply, ‘ Who are my mother and [my] brothers?’ And looking around at those seated in the circle he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers.’”
(Mark 3:32-34, NABRE)
Bible Gateway passage: Mark 3:32-34 - New American Bible (Revised Edition)
A crowd seated around him told him, “Your mother and your brothers [and your sisters] are outside asking for you.” But he said to them in reply, “Who are my mother and [my] brothers?” And looking around at those seated in the circle he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers.
NABRE is a Catholic translation (New American Bible Revised Edition)
Why does it not read “Your mother and your cousins are outside looking for you?
Assuming for a moment that it actually was his mother and his cousins (rather than his brothers [and sisters]) who were looking for him, what does that do to Jesus’ response? -> “Here are my mother and my cousins.”
Jesus considers his followers to be his spiritual cousins, not his spiritual brothers [and sisters]?
In John 19:25 we read, “Standing by the foot of the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary of Magdala.” Cross reference this with Matthew 27:56: “Among them at the cross were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.” We see that at least two of the men mentioned in Matthew 13 were definitely not siblings of Jesus (although they’re called adelphoi); they were Jesus’ cousins–sons of their mother’s sister.
Why do you think the Catholic translators chose to identify those outside as “brothers [and sisters]“ rather than “cousins”?
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
For the same reason our culture uses the word "brother" in cases where the person to whom they are referring is really not their blood brother. It is a cultural thing. How many times have you heard this or a similar saying, "Hey, brother, what's happenin'!?" That doesn't mean it's a blood brother.
Thanks.
The translators also inserted “[and sisters]”. That seems an odd choice if the cultural approach is what they had in mind. I have used the word “brother” when speaking to males who aren’t brothers by blood - and I have heard others do it too - but I‘ve never used the word “brother” when speaking to females, related to me by blood or not.
Similar threads
