Were Jesus's brothers born of another woman?

[Biblepaige]

Disagree.

The children of Mary and Joseph were biological children, meaning from Joseph’s seed and Mary’s egg.

Jesus was neither of Joseph’s sperm or Mary’s egg, not of their copulation or blood.

Jesus was mans (Roman law) Legal son…
And Gods “declaration’….Son of Man…
And God “declaration……Son of God…
Mary and Joseph’s biological children were Jesus’ Legal siblings, same as Joseph and Mary were Jesus’ Legal parents.

Jesus was “blood” related to NO human.

Glory to God,
Taken

Mary was off the line of King David.

I'll accept the Christian Bible account. Thanks.

God Bless.

 

[LuxMundy]

John 7:5....Really means the same thing. that is why Jesus entrusted Mary to John when otherwise He would have chosen His brothers.

That's not true, because in Jn. 7:5 we read that Jesus's brothers didn't believe in Him. In other words, Jesus's brothers didn't believe that He was the Messiah, which has nothing to do with Jesus having general trust issues with them.

And your post #4 doesnt say squat....

The evidence in post #4 shows that those believed to be Jesus's half-siblings were actually His cousins.

 

[RedFan]

I'm aware that Paul referred to apostles other than the Twelve at times, but that in and of itself doesn't mean he was in Gal. 1:18-19. In another thread, you've also acknowledged the obvious that the apostle Peter in Gal. 1:18 refers to the same Peter of the twelve apostles (post #229).

Again, in Gal. 1:18-19, Paul mentioned that in Jerusalem he had seen Peter, one of the twelve apostles, but that he didn't see another one of the apostles, except James the Lord’s brother. The title "the Lord's brother" indicates that James was Jesus’s kinsman/relative, and the context of these verses indicates that he was also one of the Twelve. This means that he would have had to have either been apostle James of Zebedee or apostle James of Alphaeus, and neither of them were a son of Joseph and Mary, yet still a kinsman/relative of Jesus.

If that's not enough for you, refer back to post #4 where there's evidence that shows the apostle James of Alphaeus was Jesus's cousin, who later became the first bishop of Jerusalem, which is why Paul saw him there.

I'm sorry, but I'm certain you are wrong. If the James of Galatians 1:18 -19 is not one of the original Twelve, your entire house of cards collapses. As it should.

By the way, I am not saying that Mary had other children. I want to be clear on that. I don't know that she did. Nobody does. My sole point here is that your argument for saying she didn't limps badly.

 

[Augustin56]

No. Jesus' other brothers were born of Mary. Catholics have this nonsense idea that Mary never had other kids but that is a lie. And the idea that there was another woman around is also impossible to consider as, since Joseph is not mentioned at all during Jesus' ministry there is good reason to believe he had died before Jesus began His ministry and with Mary still alive that would have made Joseph and adulterer if he was still around

But nowhere in Scripture does it say that Jesus' "brothers" were Mary's (Jesus' mom) son's. Nowhere. Nor does it imply that. Anyone believing that is making an error when reading Scripture, and most probably using someone's personal interpretation of Scripture, which Scripture nixes in 2 Peter 1:20.

 

[face2face]

Out of interest asoul, if you were told of the Lord face to face ( ) that he had half brothers and sisters what would that do to your faith?

Would anything change for you, denomination? would you experience some form of spiritual trauma? And would it prompt you to relook at everything you believe?

And please be clear, you will believe these lies till your last breathe but I'm interested in your answer as to what you would do.

F2F

@asoul to hard to answer?

 

[Wrangler]

But nowhere in Scripture does it say that Jesus' "brothers" were Mary's (Jesus' mom) son's. Nowhere. Nor does it imply that.

LOL. If he having brothers AND sisters does not imply Mary had other sons and daughters, what would?

 

[RedFan]

LOL. If he having brothers AND sisters does not imply Mary had other sons and daughters, what would?

The word adelphos is broad enough to embrace cousins. Have you considered that?

 

[LuxMundy]

I'm sorry, but I'm certain you are wrong.

If you're certain that I'm wrong, then you should've been able to show that.

If the James of Galatians 1:18 -19 is not one of the original Twelve, your entire house of cards collapses. As it should.

The evidence in post #4 shows James in Gal. 1:19 was Jesus's cousin, the son of Alphaeus, and one of His twelve apostles. The evidence also shows that this James became the first bishop of Jerusalem, which is why Paul saw him there. (Gal. 1:18-19)

By the way, I am not saying that Mary had other children. I want to be clear on that. I don't know that she did. Nobody does.

You can't speak for me, because I have evidence that shows Joseph and Mary didn't have children together.

 

[RedFan]

You can't speak for me, because I have evidence that shows Joseph and Mary didn't have children together.

I wouldn't dream of speaking for you, my friend! But you don't have "evidence." You have an interpretation of Scripture,

 

[LuxMundy]

I wouldn't dream of speaking for you, my friend! But you don't have "evidence." You have an interpretation of Scripture,

You said that nobody knows if Joseph and Mary didn't have other children, which is you including me in that statement, but I'm not included in it, because I have evidence that shows they didn't. Any rejection of that evidence doesn't change that.

 

[face2face]

The word adelphos is broad enough to embrace cousins. Have you considered that?

Mary was a solely mother with children RedFan.
Also the Epistle of James could not have been written as the time it was without James personally knowing the Lord. His conversion would have been rather powerful to behold.
F2F

 

[RedFan]

You said that nobody knows if Joseph and Mary didn't have other children, which is you including me in that statement, but I'm not included in it, because I have evidence that shows they didn't. Any rejection of that evidence doesn't change that.

Well, I didn't mean to speak for eight billion people. I was just expressing my own opinion that Mary's having other children vel non is uncertain.

And you haven't given me an opportunity to reject your "evidence," because you haven't present "evidence." Only argument that the context of Galatians 1:18-19 indicates Paul's view that James the brother" of the Lord was one of the twelve original apostles. Let's leave it there.

 

[LuxMundy]

Well, I didn't mean to speak for eight billion people. I was just expressing my own opinion that Mary's having other children vel non is uncertain.

Then, next time don't say "nobody knows".

And you haven't given me an opportunity to reject your "evidence," because you haven't presented "evidence."

I haven't presented evidence that shows those believed to be Jesus's half-siblings were actually His cousins? Again, all the evidence is in post #4. The only part of that post you presented a counterargument to was the bit about Gal. 1:18-19 which I addressed and refuted, whether you accept that or not. If you have anything to present regarding the evidence, for example, the testimonies of early Christians, etc., I trust that you will.

 

[Wrangler]

The word adelphos is broad enough to embrace cousins. Have you considered that?

You can’t answer a question with a question. My question was about logic. Your question is about definition, which I already addressed in my quantitative post.

 

[RedFan]

Then, next time don't say "nobody knows".



Again, all the evidence is in post #4. The only part you've presented a counter-argument to was the bit about Gal. 1:18-19 which I addressed and refuted, whether you accept that or not. If you have a counter-argument to the rest of the evidence, I trust that you'll present it.

Actually, I'm done. We can't have an intelligent discussion without agreeing on what constitutes evidence and what constitutes argument.

 

[Biblepaige]

Also, the Lord knew John was well established (properties) and capable of providing for her, whereas the Lord's family was known to be poor.

No,his family was not at all poor. Jesus was at the very least a second generation carpenter if Joseph was before him.
Also, the gifts the wise men,Magi,bestowed on his family when he was born was to insure their king lived like one.

 

[face2face]

No,his family was not at all poor. Jesus was at the very least a second generation carpenter if Joseph was before him.
Also, the gifts the wise men,Magi,bestowed on his family when he was born was to insure their king lived like one.

“a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons Lk 2:24.

Alternative for lamb!

Allowed for the poor Lev 12:8

And if she cannot afford a lamb, then she shall take two turtledoves or two pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. Le 12:8.

....but then Mary held the real lamb!

F2F

 

[face2face]

@Biblepaige if you need more evidence there is plenty

 

[Biblepaige]

@Biblepaige if you need more evidence there is plenty

Matthew 2 holds evidence.

 

[LuxMundy]

Actually, I'm done. We can't have an intelligent discussion without agreeing on what constitutes evidence and what constitutes argument.

Excuses, excuses.