Blessed assurance Jesus is mine. What a beautiful song.
I do understand what you are trying to explain and what You say makes sense. Thank You for explaining. But I do remember other things in the Bible. You are right - Luke 2 : 41-51 : Joseph and Mary found Yahoshua in the temple when he was at the age of 12 - and at this moment - there is no mention of other children in his family. But please, let's look at the rest of the story.
But please help me to understand, I have been taking a closer look at this verse and reading the entire chapter in context, it was explaining the situation and do You even think that Yahoshua’s little brothers and sisters would have even been old enough to travel such a long distance to attend the Yerusalem feast.
This trip - took Mary many days to travel - to attend the feast and the feast could last up to a week. Yahoshua’s family lived in another city far away, at least 100 miles, in Galilee –.. After the feast, Mary departed from Yerusalem and had traveled a whole day's journey out away from Yerusalem to go back to her home, at least 100 miles away. And Mary was thinking Yahoshua had also left with them but was just traveling with some of the other family / other relatives and acquaintances.
If Mary had actually brought along all of her little babies and children to make this long journey to feast in Yerusalem and spent around a week’s time there and then afterward they left Yerusalem and went a day's journey out / away from Yerusalem and suddenly - She and Joseph - TURNED BACK again and went a day's journey again - back to Yerusalem – Then Mary had to go searching for three or four whole day’s - searching - through the streets and crowds throughout Yerusalem, in a panicked search to find Yahoshua, searching for three whole day's.
If Mary had actually brought along all of her little babies and younger children to make this long journey to feast in Yerusalem and spent a week there and then left Yerusalem and went a day's journey out / away from Yerusalem and suddenly - She and Joseph - TURNED BACK and went a day's journey - again back to Yerusalem - after finding that Yahoshua had not been seen or found among all of her kinsfolk / other relatives and acquaintances - This was out, just a single day's journey from Yerusalem but still a few day's of traveling back to Galilee where she lived ...
To walk 100 miles – both ways and to also add the day departing from Yerusalem then a day to get back again to Yerusalem, Then three more days of searching - then entire the journey back home. - This was over six extra day’s time, that Mary was adding extra days of going out of her way due to Her lost child. These six days were not even counting the travel time that it took to normally travel from Galilee –.. to Yerusalem and back .
Luk 2:44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.
:45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Yerusalem, seeking him.
:46 And it came to pass, that after three day's ( LOOKING ) they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. ......... . :48 . . . and his mother said unto him, .............. thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
Mary did not mention that everyone in the family was looking for Yahoshua - but that She and Joseph were the ones who had been looking for Him. By this time - why would Mary want to drag along all of Her younger aged little babies back to Yerusalem - if she had she could simply leave with safely with Her other kinsfolk / other relatives - out away from Yerusalem. Why drag them all the way back to Yerusalem where they spent the next three whole day's frantically looking for their missing child. ? - Is there any wonder or question why the rest of her other little babies and younger children would not manage to make it to the temple. it would be next to impossible for this to happen ? - Especially after three days of frantically looking. For Mary to bring all of Her little children and they all meet in the synagogue and / or for to even mention them as the first recorded thing that she says to her lost child. Verse 48 His mother said unto him, .... thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
Mary could have even left her babies back in Galilee. This was a 200 mile journey, plus a week spent in Yerusalem - plus the 5 – 6 extra days - in aditional travel - time and search time. It just seems very plausible and understandable how and why Mary would not manage to be able to bring her little babies to the temple. This was a huge traumatic and horrible stressful and sorrowful event. I do not understand why that my Catholic friends cannot understand the trauma and stress and wear and tear and hardship that it would have taken - just to drag little babies through all of this walking around and searching for days on end. Plus a 300 + miles of walking, The situation was not a place nor condition where a loving, caring mother would drag her little children through such harsh conditions in SUCH A SHORT TRAUMATIC TIME. Why not leave the little children back home with another one of Josephs wives, or with an older sibling who was a little younger than Yahoshua, back in Galilee.
After, Yahoshua was fully grown here in - Mar 6: 2 - 4 - - it does mention that His sisters were present - with Him in the synagogue in Galilee - where He and His family lived.. Yahoshua was fully grown here - an adult - teaching in the synagogue. Soon thereafter the people in the synagogue begin to list the family members of Yahoshua, saying :3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us, and offended in him. ?
This verse is literally saying that His little sisters were reasonably embarrassed or uncomfortable for being called and openly mentioned in the synagogue as their brother completely caused every eye there to be directed at them. And they His sisters were " at that moment " being accused of being offended and displeased in Yahoshua - as the people in the temple attempted to dishonor, discredit and scandalize and make an offense - of His words, miracles and teachings, and entire ministry. This Greek word { being offended } “ offended “skandalizō / scandalize - G4624 - σκανδαλίζω - skandalizō - skan-dal-id'-zo - Meaning = To “ scandalize ” To entrap, that is, trip up, stumble (make to) offend or be offended. Yahoshua’s little sisters were here, with him in the temple.
Also - If one was to pay close attention to what the people in the synagogue were saying, they clearly are not saying that Mary His mother and James, Joses, and Juda His brothers were there and present there in the synagogue that day. The people only stated - that His sisters ( Of all of His Family members ) were there and present that day and that they ( HIS SISTERS ) were “ scandalize ” and offended directly “ IN “ Yahoshua. - The Greek word is “ IN “ = G1722 - ε ̓ ν - en / in - - “ IN “ Meaning = (in place, time or state), “ in by, etc.: - about, after, among, as, for (. . . sake of), + (because) of, (-in - .... His little sisters, they were said to be offended IN Him. - Also, another event was mentioned when Yahoshua was fully grown here in Mat_13:54 - 58 - - it does mention that His real blood sisters were again present - with Him, as He walked from his home and addressed the crowds by the sea side. And again - Again this same exact thing happens in - Mat 13:55 as Yahoshua was teaching before the multitudes of people . :55 - is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? : 56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? :57 And they ( His family ) were offended “ IN “ him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, except in his own country, and in his “ own house. ” Here Yahoshua was admitting to them that - IN - His own family, His own household, among His own relatives and his own - Mother, Father and Brothers and very own Sisters - his { family } - He was without any honor ( AS seen as- A PROPHETIC FIGURE OR A RELIGIOUS LEADER ) - Even His own family and his own brothers – the Bible says that even his own FAMILY did not believe in him. If these sisters were His cousins - the Greek language had a word for “ COUSIN “ And - anytime a cousin was mentioned in The New Testament - they always used the word cousin. G4773 - Συγγενη ́ς - Suggenē s - Soong-ghen-ace' - -= A close relative (by blood); cousin, kin.
These sisters were always mentioned as being defined as his literal family, form his own household in his own home and a part of his family. These were not cousins or KIN - now spiritual sisters. Yahoshua clearly says that they were from in his “ own house. ” - they were said to be His literal - sisters. John the Baptist was the Cousin of Yahoshua - the Greek word Cousin is Συγγενη ́ς - Suggenēs - cousin, kin. These sisters were not kin nor cousin – they were blood - sisters. We also notice that these sisters were mentioned in the direct context of being in the family or related to Yahoshua. Sister = G79 - ἀδελφή - adelphē / ad-el-fay'
This is why Yahoshua said that even in His own family - he was not accepted as a prophet. His own family, in his own “ hometown “ his household “ brothers and sisters did not believe in him as a prophet. Sisters under his own roof. I am just saying - does not the Bible also shows that Yahoshua also did have sisters too ? and when his sisters are old enough Mary lovingly sends her young daughters with Yahoshua ( in the care of Yahoshua ) and they do - go to the temple and to other places preaching the Gospel. His little sisters are accompanying Yahoshua in the temple and at other places at the beginning of his ministry. it mentions the disciples and his brothers both being directly ( in one single location ) both at the same time - it makes a differentiation to tell the reader that these disciples there with also his brothers. This happens in several occasions. I just read it for what it says - and I honestly, truly see the Bible leading the reader to understand that Mary and Joseph did not have sex until after the first baby was born.
And Joseph did not have sex with Mary UNTIL that she had borne her first born.
Does not every detail in the Bible point - to a Mary who planned and plotted to have sexual intercourse ? - who planned to get married and did get married and waited to have sex as the Bible describes - she waited to have sex - until - the first born was born. The Bible mentions brothers and sisters of Yahoshua and children of Mary. It just seems so obvious.
The Roman Catholic Church did not produce a Bible translation until nearly 500 years after Yahoshua. - and then they did not produce a Bible into any other language outside of the Latin / Italian language until nearly 2000 years after Yahoshua. I do not find it hard to understand why so many people were teaching the Catholic theologies and teachings about Mary. The translators were being burned to death throughout Europe and hunted down and criminalized by many European authorities - for attempting to translate the Bible into any other language. How can this be proof or evidence to support a faith - based on a popular vote or consensus ?
When no one in the world had a Bible to read ? - unless they could memorize a phrase or a line from the dying Latin language ? It seems that - all biblical data would be determined by what people liked and valued and loved in oral traditions alone.
