Were Jesus's brothers born of another woman?

[RedFan]

What part of “ALL SCRITURE is God-breathed” do you not understand? The ENTURE Bible is Scripture. “Scripture” simply means the Word of God that is written down.

What part of CIRCULAR REASONING don't you understand? Pointing to Scripture to prove the validity of Scripture! Wow. Talk about lifting yourself by your own bootstraps!

How Not to Argue for the Truthfulness of the Bible

Tim points out a common mistake when trying to argue for the Bible’s reliability.

www.str.org

Paul writes a letter to one of his disciples declaring that all Scripture is God-breathed. Centuries later, the Church leadership decides to include Paul's letters in the compilation we know as the Biblical canon and call "Scripture." And you say, by dint of that compilation, Paul's letter is declaring itself God-breathed (as well as all the other NT writings, most of which weren't even written in Paul's lifetime).

 

[Matthias]

“Women become mothers at conception because life starts at conception.” - Dr. Abby Johnson

x.com

x.com

Dr. Johnson is Catholic.

Dr. Abby Johnson

Here's the deal. I am a Catholic Christian. I love Jesus. I have a personal relationship with Him. I pray only to Him. I ask His Mother to pray for me...just like I would ask any of you for prayer....

www.facebook.com

She knows that Mary became a mother when she conceived Jesus. What she should acknowledge, but can’t, is that the origin of Jesus is in the womb of his mother.

Anyone who believes that Mary had other children should also believe that the origin of those children is in the womb of their mother.

 

[Matthias]

… the question is why go beyond what he himself believed? (Which is what Church history documents happened.)

It was done out of a sincere desire by gentile early Church Fathers to elevate, glorify, and honor Jesus; but it necessitated destroying Jesus’ own Jewish monotheism / dogma - something which Paul and the other apostles didn’t do.

P.S.

This is why I highly recommend reading the early Church Fathers and Church history to one and all.

 

[BreadOfLife]

What part of CIRCULAR REASONING don't you understand? Pointing to Scripture to prove the validity of Scripture! Wow. Talk about lifting yourself by your own bootstraps!

Because I’m defending a SCRIPTURAL position, Einstein. What else am I supposed to use as evidence?

YOUR position is that Scripture is NOT from God but from the writers themselves – and the Scriptures prove you wrong.

If you made a false claim about an Amendment of the Constitution – I would use the Constitution to prove you wrong.

How Not to Argue for the Truthfulness of the Bible

Tim points out a common mistake when trying to argue for the Bible’s reliability.

www.str.org

Tim points out a common mistake when trying to argue for the Bible’s reliability.

www.str.org

I don’t think you understand what “circular reasoning“ is because I’m NOT trying to prove the truthfulness of Scripture. I am pointing to what Scripture claims about ITSELF. - and it doesn’t say what YOU are claiming.

Paul writes a letter to one of his disciples declaring that all Scripture is God-breathed. Centuries later, the Church leadership decides to include Paul's letters in the compilation we know as the Biblical canon and call "Scripture." And you say, by dint of that compilation, Paul's letter is declaring itself God-breathed (as well as all the other NT writings, most of which weren't even written in Paul's lifetime).

First of all – Paul didn’t “declare” that ALL Scripture was God-breathed in 2 Tim. 3:16. The Holy Spirit did . The SAME Holy Spirit that declared from the pen of Peter that Paul’s Epistles were Scripture (2 Pet. 3:16).

YOUR refusal to believe this Biblical fact is a matter of faith - and the LACK of it . . .

 

[RedFan]

YOUR position is that Scripture is NOT from God but from the writers themselves – and the Scriptures prove you wrong.

Scripture's being God-breathed is something to be proven. That proof cannot be in the form of ipse dixit. Scripture cannot prove itself God-breathed simply by declaring itself to be God-breathed. Got any other proof? (I do, but I want to hear yours.)

Saying "Paul didn’t “declare” that ALL Scripture was God-breathed in 2 Tim. 3:16. The Holy Spirit did " begs the question.

 

[Skovand]

You can present arguments in either direction. Personally I think Mary had other sons. Catholics primarily think he does not have full brothers, or half brothers through Mary, because they believe she remained a virgin her whole life.

Matthew 1:25 states this.
24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife 25 but had no marital relations with her until she had given birth to a son, and he named him Jesus.

That verse assumes that Joseph did not have sex with Mary until after Jesus was born. That makes sense. Joseph seemed to have been an upright man. He was going to quietly divorce Mary before being stopped in a dream. So they were married, but their marriages had two parts. The “vows” of uniting and the consummation the act of physically uniting. So it presumes Joseph stayed with Mary, they eventually consummated their marriage through sex. The chances that they had sex and she did not get pregnant is unlikely. First of all, I’m hard pressed to presume anyone questioned Mary on if she had sex. So they most likely presumed she had sex since she had other kids which were her sons. Now Joseph never gets mentioned again really. So it’s possible, they had some kids together and that after he passed she got with another one of his brothers and had kids by him as well which would make the brothers also his cousins which was pretty normal back then.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You can present arguments in either direction. Personally I think Mary had other sons. Catholics primarily think he does not have full brothers, or half brothers through Mary, because they believe she remained a virgin her whole life.

Matthew 1:25 states this.
24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife 25 but had no marital relations with her until she had given birth to a son, and he named him Jesus.

That verse assumes that Joseph did not have sex with Mary until after Jesus was born. That makes sense. Joseph seemed to have been an upright man. He was going to quietly divorce Mary before being stopped in a dream. So they were married, but their marriages had two parts. The “vows” of uniting and the consummation the act of physically uniting. So it presumes Joseph stayed with Mary, they eventually consummated their marriage through sex. The chances that they had sex and she did not get pregnant is unlikely. First of all, I’m hard pressed to presume anyone questioned Mary on if she had sex. So they most likely presumed she had sex since she had other kids which were her sons. Now Joseph never gets mentioned again really. So it’s possible, they had some kids together and that after he passed she got with another one of his brothers and had kids by him as well which would make the brothers also his cousins which was pretty normal back then.

Ummmm - NOT so fast ,. . .

This “proof” against the idea of Mary’s perpetual virginity is based on the word “until”.
Matt. 1:25 says: "...but kept her a virgin UNTIL she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? the Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us:
Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Moses was buried by God in the valley of Moab after his death. Deut. 34:6 explicitly states:
And he buried him in the valley of the land of Moab over against Phogor: and no man hath known of his sepulchre UNTIL this present day.
Sooooo – did they find his grave after this??

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44):
For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand UNTIL I make your enemies your footstool."'

Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?
The problem here is that the non-Catholic attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

 

[Lambano]

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? the Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us:
Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

And THAT is what I call an "unnatural act" against the text. Note that the terminus of the "until" statement is Jesus's birth. NOT the day of her death, like Michal, which would certainly be definitive. NOT until this present day, like Moses. The choice of Jesus birth as the terminus and not a different checkpoint strongly implies that Mary and Joseph enjoyed normal marital relations after this point. That is how language is naturally used.

 

[RedFan]

Ummmm - NOT so fast ,. . .

This “proof” against the idea of Mary’s perpetual virginity is based on the word “until”.
Matt. 1:25 says: "...but kept her a virgin UNTIL she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? the Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us:
Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Moses was buried by God in the valley of Moab after his death. Deut. 34:6 explicitly states:
And he buried him in the valley of the land of Moab over against Phogor: and no man hath known of his sepulchre UNTIL this present day.
Sooooo – did they find his grave after this??

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44):
For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand UNTIL I make your enemies your footstool."'

Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?
The problem here is that the non-Catholic attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

I've got a better idea. Let's see how Matthew uses the word ἕως.

Matt. 2:9 says "After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was." Are we to assume that this star is still fixed in the sky at that very spot to this day?

Matt. 2:14-15 says "So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod." Are we to assume that Joseph stayed in Egypt the rest of his life?

Matt. 5:18 says "For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Are we to assume that even after heaven and earth disappear and everything is accomplished, the Law will still be in play?

Matt. 5:26 says "Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny." Are we to assume that even after the last penny is paid, you won't get out of prison?

Matt. 10:11 says "Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave." Are we to assume that the stay should continue after the leaving?

Matt. 11:12 says "From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it." Are we to assume that the kingdom heaven is still subjected to violence today?

Matt. 13:33 says "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into about sixty pounds of flour until it worked all through the dough.” Are we to assume that she continued to mix it in for the rest of her life?

Matt. 16:28 says "Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” Did they never taste death even afterwards, such that they never died at all?

Matt. 17:9 says "As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.” Were they not supposed to tell anyone abut it even afterwards?

Matt. 23:39 says "For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’" Did theY never see him again even after so stating?

Matt. 24:34 says "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." Even after they happen, are we to understand that this generation will not ever pass away?

Matt. 26:29 says "I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” Does this mean he will never drink it new, ever?

Matt. 27:45 says "From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land." Did darkness stay over the land beyond three in the afternoon?

AS YOU SEE FROM THESE VERSES, "UNTIL" IN MATTHEW OFTEN CARRIES THE CONNOTATION "BUT NOT THEREAFTER." PERMANENCY IS NOT IMPLIED.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Read the bible and stop adding words to it. that is all the response you need.

This is a cowardly "defense" of your weak position.

 

[Lambano]

And here we are, defending Mary's honor as a good loving wife to Joseph.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Scripture's being God-breathed is something to be proven. That proof cannot be in the form of ipse dixit. Scripture cannot prove itself God-breathed simply by declaring itself to be God-breathed. Got any other proof? (I do, but I want to hear yours.)

Saying "Paul didn’t “declare” that ALL Scripture was God-breathed in 2 Tim. 3:16. The Holy Spirit did " begs the question.

WRONG.
It doesn’t need to be proven because it is THERE in Scripture.

My argument has never been to prove what the Scripture say are “true”.
MY argument all along has been that THIS is what Scripture says about itself. This is NOT up pfor debate, as 2 Tim. 3:16 makes this claim clearly.

You’re barking up the wrong tree . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

And here we are, defending Mary's honor as a good loving wife to Joseph.

Because there's NO Scripural or extra-Biblical reason NOT to . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I've got a better idea. Let's see how Matthew uses the word ἕως.

Matt. 2:9 says "After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was." Are we to assume that this star is still fixed in the sky at that very spot to this day?

Matt. 2:14-15 says "So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod." Are we to assume that Joseph stayed in Egypt the rest of his life?

Matt. 5:18 says "For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Are we to assume that even after heaven and earth disappear and everything is accomplished, the Law will still be in play?

Matt. 5:26 says "Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny." Are we to assume that even after the last penny is paid, you won't get out of prison?

Matt. 10:11 says "Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave." Are we to assume that the stay should continue after the leaving?

Matt. 11:12 says "From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it." Are we to assume that the kingdom heaven is still subjected to violence today?

Matt. 13:33 says "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into about sixty pounds of flour until it worked all through the dough.” Are we to assume that she continued to mix it in for the rest of her life?

Matt. 16:28 says "Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” Did they never taste death even afterwards, such that they never died at all?

Matt. 17:9 says "As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.” Were they not supposed to tell anyone abut it even afterwards?

Matt. 23:39 says "For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’" Did theY never see him again even after so stating?

Matt. 24:34 says "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." Even after they happen, are we to understand that this generation will not ever pass away?

Matt. 26:29 says "I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” Does this mean he will never drink it new, ever?

Matt. 27:45 says "From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land." Did darkness stay over the land beyond three in the afternoon?

AS YOU SEE FROM THESE VERSES, "UNTIL" IN MATTHEW OFTEN CARRIES THE CONNOTATION "BUT NOT THEREAFTER." PERMANENCY IS NOT IMPLIED.

Soooo, you forbid Matthew from using ANY other connotation of the word “until”, based on hi usages of it in other verses? That doesn't make much sense.

For example - his use of “Adelphos” means uterine brother in one verse – and soothing completely different in other verses (Matt. 18:35, Matt. 28:19). Why NOT apply your prohibition to that word??

 

[BreadOfLife]

And THAT is what I call an "unnatural act" against the text. Note that the terminus of the "until" statement is Jesus's birth. NOT the day of her death, like Michal, which would certainly be definitive. NOT until this present day, like Moses. The choice of Jesus birth as the terminus and not a different checkpoint strongly implies that Mary and Joseph enjoyed normal marital relations after this point. That is how language is naturally used.

That;s a "choice" that YOU'VE made.
It's NOT automatically inferred by the text.

Sayig that Mary and Joseph had marital relations is simply NOT supported by Scripture.
As a matter of fact - ALL of yourr Protestant Fathers rejected this idead. It only came into popular belief in the last few centuries . . .

Martin Luther
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, editors. 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, vol. 22:23 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 [1539] )

John Calvin
[On Matt 1:25:] 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 . . . No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation. (Pringle, ibid., vol. I, 107)

Huldreich Zwingli
He turns, in September 1522, to a lyrical defense of the perpetual virginity of the mother of Christ . . . To deny that Mary remained ‘inviolata’ before, during and after the birth of her Son, was to doubt the omnipotence of God . . . There is a special insistence upon the perpetual virginity of Mary. (G. R. Potter, Zwingli, London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976, 88-89, 395 / The Perpetual Virginity of Mary . . ., Sep. 17, 1522)

John Wesley
I believe… he [Jesus Christ] was born of the blessed Virgin, who, as well after as she brought him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin. (“Letter to a Roman Catholic,” quoted in A. C. Coulter, John Wesley, New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 495)

 

[Skovand]

Ummmm - NOT so fast ,. . .

This “proof” against the idea of Mary’s perpetual virginity is based on the word “until”.
Matt. 1:25 says: "...but kept her a virgin UNTIL she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? the Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us:
Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Moses was buried by God in the valley of Moab after his death. Deut. 34:6 explicitly states:
And he buried him in the valley of the land of Moab over against Phogor: and no man hath known of his sepulchre UNTIL this present day.
Sooooo – did they find his grave after this??

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44):
For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand UNTIL I make your enemies your footstool."'

Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?
The problem here is that the non-Catholic attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

I feel like you did not read my post.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I feel like you did not read my post.

Yes, I did.

You invoked Matt. 1:25 as possible proof that Joseph and Mary had other children. I simply showed that the word "until" (heos) doesn't always point to a subsequant consequence.

 

[RedFan]

Soooo, you forbid Matthew from using ANY other connotation of the word “until”, based on hi usages of it in other verses? That doesn't make much sense.

For example - his use of “Adelphos” means uterine brother in one verse – and soothing completely different in other verses (Matt. 18:35, Matt. 28:19). Why NOT apply your prohibition to that word??

I forbid no such thing. You are missing my point. The word "until" often refers to a termination of the status carried up to a designated point in time. Which connotation applies to Joseph's sex life cannot be proven by references to instances where it doesn't (like those you mention in #907). Your argument that occasionally "until" tells us nothing about what happens after the designated point in time, therefore Joseph never had sex with Mary their entire marriage, is just a non sequitur. For every instance in which "until" indicates no subsequent change of status, I can show you ten where it does. So your argument limps.

 

[Skovand]

Yes, I did.

You invoked Matt. 1:25 as possible proof that Joseph and Mary had other children. I simply showed that the word "until" (heos) doesn't always point to a subsequant consequence.

If you say so. To me it still seems like you’re that far and stopped. But whatever.

Your argument makes no sense. It’s not how English or Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic works. The sentence is not confusing at all. The biggest confusion is if she was still a virgin after the angel talked with her and the time she got pregnant with Jesus. Being conceived by the Holy Spirit is the confusing aspect.

What’s not confusing is this sentence.

Joseph did not have sex with her until after Jesus was born. Until is presenting a time frame. The time is after the birth of Jesus. The event that did not happen until then is Joseph consummating their marriage. Essentially all marriages were consummated.

Strong's Greek: 2193. ἕως (heós) -- until, till, as far as, up to

It’s being used the same in genesis 4:1. The Greek and Hebrew equivalents.

Even in 1 Samuel 15:35 it means the same thing.

Until the day Samuel died, he did not go to see Saul again, though Samuel mourned for him. And the LORD regretted that he had made Saul king over Israel.

Until the day he died is the time frame. What did Samuel not do until he died. He did not visit Saul. Nothing there is denoting a change in status. It’s a time frame leading up to death. Joseph’s timeframe was leading up to the birth of Jesus.

If the time frame in Samuel said instead…. Until Samuel’s bath he did it see Saul would have made the time frame from that point until the bath, implying after the bath he did. Death signifies the end of the time frame.

Otherwise, the verse in Matthew 1:25 would make no sense. It would have said Joseph never knew her until his or her death.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I forbid no such thing. You are missing my point. The word "until" often refers to a termination of the status carried up to a designated point in time. Which connotation applies to Joseph's sex life cannot be proven by references to instances where it doesn't (like those you mention in #907). Your argument that occasionally "until" tells us nothing about what happens after the designated point in time, therefore Joseph never had sex with Mary their entire marriage, is just a non sequitur. For every instance in which "until" indicates no subsequent change of status, I can show you ten where it does. So your argument limps.

I’m not using “until” in Matt. 1:25 to prove Mary’s Perpetual Virginity. I’m using it to illustrate that it does not always carry the connotation of being followed by a subsequent action. Bery often in Scripture, “until” carries a connotation of finality.

Frankly, it’s the total absence of Scriptural reference to the “children of Mary” that is the greater evidence of her perpetual virginity. It has been shown repeatedly that the “brethren” of Jesus are the children of the other Mary at the foot of the cross - the wife of Clopas/Alphaeus.