Did Jesus have brothers and sisters born of Mary

[bbbbbbb]

Thanks, LLoJ, for starting this thread. When I first ran into it I wondered if it might just be a rehash of my much-earlier thread here, "Brothers and Sisters, Oh My!" However, the discussion is different now. For those who are interested in more background on this discussion I recommend my earlier thread. Some, such as Thekla, who is now posting on this thread, made some interesting points which are well worth rereading.

My position, which remains unchanged, is that, given the fact that all English translations of the Bible, including Catholic and Orthodox translations, consistently refer to the "brothers and sisters" of Jesus Christ when the translators could have used other words if they sincerely believed these individuals not to have been biologically related to Jesus Christ in this manner. There are five direct passages in the gospels written by three different authors (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) not to mention other passages which are not as direct.

 

[Thekla]

Do translations typically list all known definitions of a word as a part of the translation -- so, where "adelphn" is used does the sentence read (as in the relationship of Mary and Mary in the Gospel of John) something like: "Mary sister, housemate, half-sister, neighbor, nationmate, aunt of Mary" in English translation ?

 

[narnia59]

Thanks, LLoJ, for starting this thread. When I first ran into it I wondered if it might just be a rehash of my much-earlier thread here, "Brothers and Sisters, Oh My!" However, the discussion is different now. For those who are interested in more background on this discussion I recommend my earlier thread. Some, such as Thekla, who is now posting on this thread, made some interesting points which are well worth rereading.

My position, which remains unchanged, is that, given the fact that all English translations of the Bible, including Catholic and Orthodox translations, consistently refer to the "brothers and sisters" of Jesus Christ when the translators could have used other words if they sincerely believed these individuals not to have been biologically related to Jesus Christ in this manner. There are five direct passages in the gospels written by three different authors (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) not to mention other passages which are not as direct.

I find your post a little confusing. What exactly do the beliefs (sincere or otherwise) of translators have to do with anything? After all, they are simply people. I know of nobody (except some hardcore KJVers) who hold to any belief that any translation is inspired. Most statements of inerrancy (like the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy) apply only to the original texts, and not to copies or translations.

You also apply your own bias (I do not mean that in a negative way, we all have a bias) when assuming they would have chosen different words if they believed the relationship was not biological, as opposed to based on social structure.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Thanks, LLoJ, for starting this thread. When I first ran into it I wondered if it might just be a rehash of my much-earlier thread here, "Brothers and Sisters, Oh My!" However, the discussion is different now. For those who are interested in more background on this discussion I recommend my earlier thread. Some, such as Thekla, who is now posting on this thread, made some interesting points which are well worth rereading.

My position, which remains unchanged, is that, given the fact that all English translations of the Bible, including Catholic and Orthodox translations, consistently refer to the "brothers and sisters" of Jesus Christ when the translators could have used other words if they sincerely believed these individuals not to have been biologically related to Jesus Christ in this manner. There are five direct passages in the gospels written by three different authors (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) not to mention other passages which are not as direct.

Thank you for your input.

I know this is a rather "controversial" subject between Protestants and the Catholics/Orthodox and I do hope this thread can stay civil and edifying.

I was rather disappointed when this thread was moved from the GT board.

I am impartial to whether Mary gave birth to siblings or not, as I really do not focus on Mary much in the Bible. But that is just me and I hold no criticism for those that view Mary the way they do.

 

[brinny]

Question. Did Jesus have brothers and sisters that were born thru Mary after the birth of Jesus?
I would like to see the Scriptures for and against any view rendered on this thread. Thanks and God bless

brinny: Indeed He did....i'll get the scriptures later...gotta go to work...

excellent question, by the way

ok, got a scripture as promised:

"Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?" ~Matthew 13:55

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Indeed He did....i'll get the scriptures later...gotta go to work...

excellent question, by the way

Thanks for droppin by brin!

 

[myanchor]

Jpcedotal gave you some good scriptures. Personally I think it would be kind of mean of God to not allow Joseph to 'know' his wife and to have children with her. So they were his half-siblings. No worries, out of Mary he got His humanity, from the Holy Spirit was the Word made flesh. (and the Word was with God and the Word was God John 1:1) It does not make Him any less than He was (the Son of God and the great I AM) to have Mary's genes in His makeup. Nor did it make his brothers and sisters more holy, they were human and had to accept His sacrifice to make it to heaven too.

 

[brinny]

Thanks for droppin by brin!

Ah'll be bach! as Ahnald would say

 

[simonthezealot]

andreha, Armadillo, boswd, cobweb, Dark_Lite , katherine2001, lionroar0, MrPolo, narnia59, PassthePeace1, polishbeast, prodromos, Yeznik

Which translation do you guys read?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

andreha, Armadillo, boswd, cobweb, Dark_Lite , katherine2001, lionroar0, MrPolo, narnia59, PassthePeace1, polishbeast, prodromos, Yeznik

Which translation do you guys read?

Don't the Catholics use translations from the Latin?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Do translations typically list all known definitions of a word as a part of the translation -- so, where "adelphn" is used does the sentence read (as in the relationship of Mary and Mary in the Gospel of John) something like: "Mary sister, housemate, half-sister, neighbor, nationmate, aunt of Mary" in English translation ?

I know of one translation, the Amplified Bible, which attempts to provide additional possibilities within the text. The result is sometimes cumbersome in its rendition, but is helpful in that the possibilities are not consigned to footnotes or endnotes.

To give you an idea of how the Amplified Bible addresses one of the five texts in question -

Matthew 12:46-50 (Amplified Bible)

46Jesus was still speaking to the people when behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak to Him.
47Someone said to Him, Listen! Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak to You.
48But He replied to the man who told Him, Who is My mother, and who are My brothers?
49And stretching out His hand toward [not only the twelve disciples but all] His adherents, He said, Here are My mother and My brothers.
50For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother!

As you can see they do not provide any additional translation of adelphoi than in any other English translation.

If you can provide the reference in John I will be happy to give the Amplified Bible's rendition of it.

I am also unaware of any translation which provides the additional information concerning adelphoi as a footnote or endnote.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I find your post a little confusing. What exactly do the beliefs (sincere or otherwise) of translators have to do with anything? After all, they are simply people. I know of nobody (except some hardcore KJVers) who hold to any belief that any translation is inspired. Most statements of inerrancy (like the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy) apply only to the original texts, and not to copies or translations.

You also apply your own bias (I do not mean that in a negative way, we all have a bias) when assuming they would have chosen different words if they believed the relationship was not biological, as opposed to based on social structure.

I apologize for any confusion I may have caused.

I agree that translators are simply people. However, they are skilled and trained in linguistics so that their knowledge of other languages surpasses that of most ordinary people such as myself. When translators rend the Hebrew and Greek (and some Aramaic) of the biblical texts into other languages such as English they frequently diverge from each other where other renditions are equally accurate. For example, in John 3:3 many translations use "born again" but many others render it as "born from above". Both renditions are acceptable translations of a Greek phrase which does not have a precise English correlation. Thus, for some to build a mountain of doctrine based upon one as opposed to the other is an error.

When it comes to the five texts in question we have hundreds, if not thousands, of skilled translators representing the full spectrum of Christian thought, all of whom render adelphoi identically. If this word had a meaning which could be translated otherwise it seems to me that at least one translator would have used it. The statistical probability of every single translator being in complete agreement on the correct translation of a pair of terms used in five distinct passages from three different authors is mighty slim.

I assuredly admit my own bias and am aware that none of us is without bias. Some translators reveal their biases more evidently than others. For example, the KJV render episkopoi as bishops with an apparent bias toward episcopalian governance when, in fact, the word has better renditions as reflected in other translations.

My point is that, entirely apart from my own bias, I defer judgment to those with far greater linguistic skills than mine.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I know of one translation, the Amplified Bible, which attempts to provide additional possibilities within the text. The result is sometimes cumbersome in its rendition, but is helpful in that the possibilities are not consigned to footnotes or endnotes.

To give you an idea of how the Amplified Bible addresses one of the five texts in question -

Matthew 12:46-50 (Amplified Bible)

46Jesus was still speaking to the people when behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak to Him.
47Someone said to Him, Listen! Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak to You.
48But He replied to the man who told Him, Who is My mother, and who are My brothers?
49And stretching out His hand toward [not only the twelve disciples but all] His adherents, He said, Here are My mother and My brothers.
50For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother!

As you can see they do not provide any additional translation of adelphoi than in any other English translation.

If you can provide the reference in John I will be happy to give the Amplified Bible's rendition of it.

I am also unaware of any translation which provides the additional information concerning adelphoi as a footnote or endnote.

Ahhh interesting.
I decided to look up the greek rendering of that word in those verses and behold! the last time that form of the word is used is in Revelation 6:11!!!

http://www.scripture4all.org/

#80 used 343 times in NT according to ISA. [346 times in 319 verses using KJV Concordance]
adelfoi <80> This particular form used in Matt 12 shown 145 times in 145 verses.

First time this form used Matt 12:46. Last time used Reve 6:11. Fascinating!!!

Matt 12:46Jesus was still speaking to the people when behold, His mother and brothers/adelfoi <80> stood outside, seeking to speak to Him.
47 Someone said to Him, Listen! Your mother and Your brothers/adelfoi <80> are standing outside, seeking to speak to You.
48 But He replied to the man who told Him, Who is My mother, and who are My brothers/adelfoi <80> ?

Reve 6:11 And was given to them each a white stole and was declared to them that they should be resting still a little time, till may be being filled also their fellow bondservants and their brethren/brothers/adelfoi <80>, those being about to be being killed as also they.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Ahhh interesting.
I decided to look up the greek rendering of that word in those verses and behold! the last time that form of the word is used is in Revelation 6:11!!!

Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

#80 used 343 times in NT according to ISA. [346 times in 319 verses using KJV Concordance]
adelfoi <80> This particular form used in Matt 12 shown 145 times in 145 verses.

First time this form used Matt 12:46. Last time used Reve 6:11. Fascinating!!!

Matt 12:46Jesus was still speaking to the people when behold, His mother and brothers/adelfoi <80> stood outside, seeking to speak to Him.
47 Someone said to Him, Listen! Your mother and Your brothers/adelfoi <80> are standing outside, seeking to speak to You.
48 But He replied to the man who told Him, Who is My mother, and who are My brothers/adelfoi <80> ?

Reve 6:11 And was given to them each a white stole and was declared to them that they should be resting still a little time, till may be being filled also their fellow bondservants and their brethren/brothers/adelfoi <80>, those being about to be being killed as also they.

Thanks!

 

[Thekla]

I know of one translation, the Amplified Bible, which attempts to provide additional possibilities within the text. The result is sometimes cumbersome in its rendition, but is helpful in that the possibilities are not consigned to footnotes or endnotes.

To give you an idea of how the Amplified Bible addresses one of the five texts in question -

Matthew 12:46-50 (Amplified Bible)

46Jesus was still speaking to the people when behold, His mother and brothers stood outside, seeking to speak to Him.
47Someone said to Him, Listen! Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking to speak to You.
48But He replied to the man who told Him, Who is My mother, and who are My brothers?
49And stretching out His hand toward [not only the twelve disciples but all] His adherents, He said, Here are My mother and My brothers.
50For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother!

As you can see they do not provide any additional translation of adelphoi than in any other English translation.

If you can provide the reference in John I will be happy to give the Amplified Bible's rendition of it.

I am also unaware of any translation which provides the additional information concerning adelphoi as a footnote or endnote.

This still leaves the translation of adelphoi incomplete, though.
As noted before, there are many words left incompletely or perhaps misleadingly translated.

I do think that the full meaning of words is not given because of clumsiness.

Here is the Gospel passage:

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.

John 19:25

 

[narnia59]

I apologize for any confusion I may have caused.

I agree that translators are simply people. However, they are skilled and trained in linguistics so that their knowledge of other languages surpasses that of most ordinary people such as myself. When translators rend the Hebrew and Greek (and some Aramaic) of the biblical texts into other languages such as English they frequently diverge from each other where other renditions are equally accurate. For example, in John 3:3 many translations use "born again" but many others render it as "born from above". Both renditions are acceptable translations of a Greek phrase which does not have a precise English correlation. Thus, for some to build a mountain of doctrine based upon one as opposed to the other is an error.

When it comes to the five texts in question we have hundreds, if not thousands, of skilled translators representing the full spectrum of Christian thought, all of whom render adelphoi identically. If this word had a meaning which could be translated otherwise it seems to me that at least one translator would have used it. The statistical probability of every single translator being in complete agreement on the correct translation of a pair of terms used in five distinct passages from three different authors is mighty slim.

I assuredly admit my own bias and am aware that none of us is without bias. Some translators reveal their biases more evidently than others. For example, the KJV render episkopoi as bishops with an apparent bias toward episcopalian governance when, in fact, the word has better renditions as reflected in other translations.

My point is that, entirely apart from my own bias, I defer judgment to those with far greater linguistic skills than mine.

No problem, I am just trying to understand your logic.

For example, they refer to Joseph as Jesus' father, but you do not believe that to be a biological relationship, correct? So why does the reference to 'brother' in your view mandate one?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

No problem, I am just trying to understand your logic.

For example, they refer to Joseph as Jesus' father, but you do not believe that to be a biological relationship, correct? So why does the reference to 'brother' in your view mandate one?

Well, also remember it seems the OC Jews at that time still could not accept the concept of Jesus being born of both a virgin and of YHWH. They still do not accept it to this very day.

What is interesting though is that the Muslims do accept that concept as Christianity does.

Mark 6:3 "Not this is the artificer/tektwn <5045>, the son of Mariam, and brother of iakwbou, and iwsh <2499>, and of iouda, and simwnoV? and not are His sisters here toward us"? And they were offended in Him.

1 Corin 3:10 According to the grace of the God the being given to me as a wise Chief-artificer/arci-tektwn <753> a foundation I lay, another yet is building on it. Each one yet let be heeding! how he is building on it.

 

[simonthezealot]

How do promoters of NO brothers and sisters explain the earliest of christian "church fathers" like Hegessipus being recorded as saying about Jude that he was "the Lord's brother according to the flesh" ?

 

[prodromos]

If, for the sake of argument, Joseph had other children by his former (now deceased) wife, how would scripture describe their relationship to Jesus based on how scripture has rendered the relationship between siblings of different mothers?

Would they not be called his "brothers"? If not, why not, and cite examples from scripture to back up your reasoning.

I believe scripture demonstrates that Jesus' brothers were older than Jesus based on their attempts to take charge of Him or direct His actions. If Jesus was the eldest among them He would have been their head in the absence of Joseph who is presumed to have died by the time Jesus begins His ministry. On this basis they could not be children of Mary's.

John

 

[narnia59]

Well, also remember it seems the OC Jews at that time still could not accept the concept of Jesus being born of both a virgin and of YHWH. They still do not accept it to this very day.

What is interesting though is that the Muslims do accept that concept as Christianity does.

Mark 6:3 "Not this is the artificer/tektwn <5045>, the son of Mariam, and brother of iakwbou, and iwsh <2499>, and of iouda, and simwnoV? and not are His sisters here toward us"? And they were offended in Him.

1 Corin 3:10 According to the grace of the God the being given to me as a wise Chief-artificer/arci-tektwn <753> a foundation I lay, another yet is building on it. Each one yet let be heeding! how he is building on it.

I am not referring to the record in scripture of others claiming Joseph to be the father of Jesus. I am referring to Scripture itself citing Joseph as being his father (Luke 2:33)