My mothers children

[Fireinfolding]

A brother was talking about this on another thread and I thought it was right on, I see them confirming other portions of scripture

Mat 1:23-24 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Then of Joseph

Mat 1:25 And knew her not TILL SHE had brought forth HER FIRSTBORN SON: and he called his name JESUS.

30 years after her "firstborn son"... they said

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not HIS MOTHER called Mary? AND HIS BRETHREN, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

The "I am" here is speaking Jesus here where it says...

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Confirmed here..

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN believe IN HIM.

Mat 13:57 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, SAVE IN his own country, AND IN HIS OWN HOUSE.

It doesnt say to my Father's children, because Jesus was not born of a woman knowing a man and neither would Jesus brethren be born the same way Jesus was anyway. So they didnt share the same Father, or manner of birth. But Psalms 69:8 says My mothers children.

I have heard the argument that because it doesnt say Marys children (specifically) but rather HIS mother and HIS brethren (rather) in Mat 13:55 that it basically means they were Joseph's children (but add in from a previous marriage but not by Mary) whereas in the psalms he calls them my mothers children.

The other children (from a previous marraige) didnt seem to accompany Joseph as he was being instructed of the angel to flee out of Egypt and into Isreal after Mary's firstborn (Christ) was born. His instruction was to take the child (singularly) and his mother and flee (here and there). Any other children (or brethren) were never mentioned until 30 years later in Mat 13:55

Again of Joseph...

Mat 1:25 And knew her notTILL SHE had brought forth HER FIRSTBORN SON: and he called his name JESUS.

Yet...

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not HIS MOTHER called Mary? AND HIS BRETHREN, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Of Jesus...

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Same reflected here...

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN believe IN HIM.



So theres Jesus her firstborn, and Joseph knew her not TILL she brought forth her firstborn, then they travel (just the three of them) around 30 years later theres other brethren (He calls "my mothers children"). Looks like Joseph did know her just by looking at the scripture.

 

[Lion King]

You know, I even sat down and read some of Psalm 69 yesterday, trying to fully figure out how it was connected to Jesus Christ..

..think I'm beginning to understand now.

 

[narnia59]

Psalm 69:

1 To the choirmaster: according to Lilies. A Psalm of David. Save me, O God! For the waters have come up to my neck. 2 I sink in deep mire, where there is no foothold; I have come into deep waters, and the flood sweeps over me.

Where do we see Jesus literally drowning in water?

This is the problem with taking an OT prophetic psalm and reading it in a literalistic sense, as you are attempting to do.

8 I have become a stranger to my brethren, an alien to my mother's sons

This is quite well interpreted as the rejection of the Jewish people of Christ -- his 'brethren' (except for a small remnant) do indeed reject him as their God and king. The 'motherhood' assigned to both Sarah and specifically Rebecca in the OT reflect this. Rebecca, who is the mother of Jacob (Israel), remember?

Genesis 24:60
And they blessed Rebekah, and said to her, "Our sister, be the mother of thousands of ten thousands; and may your descendants possess the gate of those who hate them!"

By the way, in the Greek translation of the OT, the word used for 'sister' in Genesis 24:60 is adelphé, the feminine of the word adelphos you use here:

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN believe IN HIM.

However, the "they" who are calling Rebekah their "sister" is her brother and mother. Yes, her mother refers to her as her adelphé, even though she is her daughter. Yet another example (there are many throughout Scritpure) of the broad use of the word in terms of 'relative' or 'kinsman' that isn't restrictive to those born from the same parents.

 

[JesusFreak78]

A brother was talking about this on another thread and I thought it was right on, I see them confirming other portions of scripture

Mat 1:23-24 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Then of Joseph

Mat 1:25 And knew her not TILL SHE had brought forth HER FIRSTBORN SON: and he called his name JESUS.

30 years after her "firstborn son"... they said

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not HIS MOTHER called Mary? AND HIS BRETHREN, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

The "I am" here is speaking Jesus here where it says...

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Confirmed here..

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN believe IN HIM.

Mat 13:57 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, SAVE IN his own country, AND IN HIS OWN HOUSE.

It doesnt say to my Father's children, because Jesus was not born of a woman knowing a man and neither would Jesus brethren be born the same way Jesus was anyway. So they didnt share the same Father, or manner of birth. But Psalms 69:8 says My mothers children.

I have heard the argument that because it doesnt say Marys children (specifically) but rather HIS mother and HIS brethren (rather) in Mat 13:55 that it basically means they were Joseph's children (but add in from a previous marriage but not by Mary) whereas in the psalms he calls them my mothers children.

The other children (from a previous marraige) didnt seem to accompany Joseph as he was being instructed of the angel to flee out of Egypt and into Isreal after Mary's firstborn (Christ) was born. His instruction was to take the child (singularly) and his mother and flee (here and there). Any other children (or brethren) were never mentioned until 30 years later in Mat 13:55

Again of Joseph...

Mat 1:25 And knew her notTILL SHE had brought forth HER FIRSTBORN SON: and he called his name JESUS.

Yet...

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not HIS MOTHER called Mary? AND HIS BRETHREN, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Of Jesus...

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Same reflected here...

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN believe IN HIM.



So theres Jesus her firstborn, and Joseph knew her not TILL she brought forth her firstborn, then they travel (just the three of them) around 30 years later theres other brethren (He calls "my mothers children"). Looks like Joseph did know her just by looking at the scripture.

Good post.

Another argument they will come with is back in the time when Jesus walked among us it was normal to call close friends for brother and that's what "Jesus' brothers" are referred to, but I don't buy it because of the obvious verses from Matthew 1:25 and you also have verses like Matthew 13:55-56 and Mark 6:3 were it says Jesus had not only brothers but also sisters.

Matthew 13:55-56
55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”

Mark 6:3
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?” And they took offense at Him.

 

[Fireinfolding]

You know, I even sat down and read some of Psalm 69 yesterday, trying to fully figure out how it was connected to Jesus Christ..

..think I'm beginning to understand now.

Hey bro! Peace to you!

Yeah...GW shared on this yesterday, and I thought, wow! I so overlooked that one! I just find the scriptures always affirm again and again.

Just taking what is written, the word brethren wouldnt even be an issue then because we know his brethren were simply not born the same way Jesus Christ (the firstborn) was, threee are mentioned here (together) in the same context itself...(brother, own kin and own house)

Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother (adelphos) of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin,(syggenēs) and in his own house.

And if you click on the word brother (adelphos) as opposed to ones own kin (syggenēs)which was used in the case of Elizebeth (Marys cousin) they two (at least) are used here (together) in contrast. And really, the word brthren still becomes irrelevant (as full blooded) given they would still be the HALF brethren of Jesus (no matter what) even though both words are shown together in the context of discussing them.

The Lexicon shows of the same womb here

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

Scroll down to the lexicons entry, its not copy pastable (keeping in mind the prophecy of ("my mothers children")

Brother adelphos

1) a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother
2) having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman
3) any fellow or man
4) a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection
5) an associate in employment or office
6) brethren in Christ
a) his brothers by blood
b) all men
c) apostles
d) Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place

The rest of the definition could include a fellow believer, but we know his brethren did not believe in Him

The contrast is shown again between these verses...


Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Same reflected here...

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN ( adelphos) believe IN HIM.

And you can distinguish between the same there as well because within its own context brethre (adelphos) and fellow believer (which they were not) could be shown, even as they said just this...

John 7:3 His brethren ( adelphos)therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest. (again) verse 7:5 For neither did his brethren believe in him.

And we know Jesus said this, to show both could be as the same, but the context woud rule as to whom he was speaking

Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, THY MOTHER AND BRETHREN (adelphos) stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

Mat 12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, WHO is MY mother? and WHO are MY BRETHREN (adelphos)?

Mat 12:49 And he stretched forth his hand TOWARD HIS DISCIPLES, and said, BEHOLD MY MOTHER AND MY BRETHREN (adelphos)!

So the definition would show it that way because Jesus used it that way, thus, adelphos "is used for"

1) a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother

And

4) a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection


And these two examples are shown even as Jesus defines them, in one they are knowing him after the flesh, in the other Jesus wants to show us (by teaching us) who he considers the same.

In one both the word, brother (adelphos) and that which is referred to mean cousin (syggenēs) are shown in the same context. His mothers sons (as shown in the OT) were not believers, and they are the very ones who mention his own disciples (there in that context) of whom Jesus himself says, who is my adelphos (brethren).

syggenēs here...

Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin (syggenēs) Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

They said...

Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, THY MOTHER AND BRETHREN (adelphos)

And here is both in the same context

Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother (adelphos) of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin (syggenēs) and in his own house.

The context shows it in accord with the OT and the contrasts show it within their own contextes as both words are used in one. Not only that, the place where they say, "behold thy mother and brethren" and Jesus redfining who that is (pointing to his own disciples). shows the same brethen afterward (which believed not) telling him to go to his disciples (of whom he redefined the word adelphos to, when prior others were offended at him seeing his mother (as named) and his brethren after the flesh (as named) and Jesus pointing out three, his own country, his own kin and his own house (where a prophet would be without honour). And was rejected of the same (as they were offended at him) his brethren didnt believe in him, and whether his own house (meaning family) or the house of Isreal in both the unbelief is shown.

God bless you Lion King

 

[Fireinfolding]

Good post.

Another argument they will come with is back in the time when Jesus walked among us it was normal to call close friends for brother and that's what "Jesus' brothers" are referred to, but I don't buy it because of the obvious verses from Matthew 1:25 and you also have verses like Matthew 13:55-56 and Mark 6:3 were it says Jesus had not only brothers but also sisters.

Matthew 13:55-56
55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”

Mark 6:3
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?” And they took offense at Him.

JesusFreak78! Here freinds, brethren, kinsmen, and neighbors are shown together too by Jesus

Luke 14:12 Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends 5384 nor thy brethren80, neither thy kinsmen 4773, nor thy rich neighbours 1069; lest they also bid thee again , and a recompence be made thee.

Even though Jesus called his own disciples freinds after making known his will, but the above is basically a casual sense

Used here as well...

Luke 21:16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents 1118, and brethren 80, and kinsfolks4773

Mary's *perpetual* virginity isnt really my gospel (so to speak) so I wouldnt have that gospel to defend. Anything after Jesus Christ is to me (irrelevant) to the gospel of Jesus Christ. (her firstborn) who come about by the Holy Ghost. Just says Joseph knew her not TILL she brought forth her FIRSTborn. And seeing later he has brethren would have to be half related any way you spin it because his brethren would not have been fathered in the same way as Jesus (obviously so).

So the word brethren there (whether of two parents, or just one) sits with me just fine. Besides the both words, his brethren and his kin are used together alongside of his own country in the same context. Those specifically pointing out his brethren (which believed not) were just as offended at him as even his own brethren did not believe, but also includes kin as well. Shows threefold there. And house, whether of the house of Israel or ones own household (after the flesh) whichever all are there.

God bless you

 

[Fireinfolding]

Psalm 69:

1 To the choirmaster: according to Lilies. A Psalm of David. Save me, O God! For the waters have come up to my neck. 2 I sink in deep mire, where there is no foothold; I have come into deep waters, and the flood sweeps over me.

Where do we see Jesus literally drowning in water?

I just compare, I dont look to strive over words by themselves

For example

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

Luke 22:44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

Mat 26:38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.

Psalm 116:3 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell gat hold upon me: I found trouble and sorrow.


Mat 26:39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Acts 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

The sorrows of death are used with the floods of ungodly men as well.

In Psams 18:4 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men made me afraid.[/quote]

So I look to compare to find Christ, there are floods of ungodly men as well.

Im really not literally minded, but if the carnal sex life of Mary is being discussed, dont you find you must come down to anothers level to discuss it.

I have no problem seeing a similitude, however in my experience of discussing this with others, its reduced to minding her flesh, her sexlife after Jesus was born and being ready to die for that gospel which (to me) isnt the gospel of Jesus Christ, and I cannot see how it affects it one ioda.

This is the problem with taking an OT prophetic psalm and reading it in a literalistic sense, as you are attempting to do.

Not really, but I get what you are saying, I really dont, I just come down and entertain the minding her flesh literally so, and the irrelevancy of her sexlife with Joseph after Jesus Christ.

8 I have become a stranger to my brethren, an alien to my mother's sons

This is quite well interpreted as the rejection of the Jewish people of Christ -- his 'brethren' (except for a small remnant) do indeed reject him as their God and king. The 'motherhood' assigned to both Sarah and specifically Rebecca in the OT reflect this. Rebecca, who is the mother of Jacob (Israel), remember?

Whereas three are noted in Jesus words, his brethren, his own country and kinfolk, then Jesus redefined who his brethren were

Genesis 24:60
And they blessed Rebekah, and said to her, "Our sister, be the mother of thousands of ten thousands; and may your descendants possess the gate of those who hate them!"

By the way, in the Greek translation of the OT, the word used for 'sister' in Genesis 24:60 is adelphé, the feminine of the word adelphos you use here:

John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN believe IN HIM.

This must be good to know somehow, but Im not sure howso

However, the "they" who are calling Rebekah their "sister" is her brother and mother. Yes, her mother refers to her as her adelphé, even though she is her daughter. Yet another example (there are many throughout Scritpure) of the broad use of the word in terms of 'relative' or 'kinsman' that isn't restrictive to those born from the same parents.

Even Jesus says, who is my mother, brethren or sister? and that after being shown his mother and brethren (known after the flesh) as pointed out to Christ. He redirects them and streches forth his hand to (an equal to) in respects to his own disciples (as to be spiritually understood). Which to me is pointing more to the teaching of not regarding any man after the flesh (even though Christ was known by the same) yet from henceforth know we him (no more) by the same.

So I get how it can be seen in various ways, but I was just pointing out His mothers sons (given his own brethren did not believe). Its Jesus who adds own country and kin into the same even as it speaks of his own house. And all of them can be shown.

Gotta head out, fridays are grocery shopping days

God bless

 

[Standing Up]

Wow. Great OP. Fulfillment of prophecy.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Wow. Great OP. Fulfillment of prophecy.

Hey bro how are you? Yeah, rather God be true and compare wordings between places and let them be.

But even though he says "my mothers children" (and its danced around) to defend (to the death) Mary's unsexed life (in the "for ever sense") it might be fruitless to argue over his brethren. The only thing her having children ovethrows "the perpetuality" of her virginity (which doesnt harm the gospel of Christ) given they (his brethren) through Joseph would have come after him (who was her firstborn). So I guess, so what?

However, on the otherhand even if she never had any more children (and it could actually be proven she didnt) beyond a shadow of a doubt, that still does not prove she remained a virgin.

Having other children (in her case) only voids "the perpetuality" of her virginity. Yet if she had no others it still doesnt prove the other side's "perpetual" virginity deal.

There are married couples who have sexual relations but just dont have children. So just as we would see a married couple without any children we never "assume" (or most of us dont "assume") they are not having sex. Thats not an evidence. So the lack of any children here (also) doesnt prove her ever lasting virginity. It wouldnt be an evidence.

But there are folks who die all over the world (every day) who have never had sex in their lifetimes, So really...?? What would we have here? If not alot of perpetual virgins ?

So then, if it could be proven Mary was still a virgin, she would just be (in the same sense) one among many "perpetual vigins" (in the same sense)

Why not just say they died without having sex? Or folks who died sexless?

Not, that I believe Mary did, just sayin though.

So really... Her not having anymore children wouldnt prove she did not have sex with Joseph.

God bless you brother

 

[Fireinfolding]

Okay, Im trying to see if I can better do this through scripture, maybe more clearly (maybe not)


To Mary...

Luke 1:36 And, behold, THY COUSIN (syggenēs) Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

They said...

Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, THY MOTHER AND BRETHREN (adelphos)

Elisabeth to Mary...


Luke 1:43 And whence is this to me, that THE MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me?


Of Joseph in relation to her...


Mat 1:25And knew her not till she had brought forth HER FIRSTBORN SON: and he called his name JESUS.


So obviously Jesus is HER "firstborn Son"... however many years later....


Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter,THE SON OF MARY, THE BROTHER OF (adelphos) James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon?


Scipture beforehand calls his brethren "My mothers children"

Whereas he (her firstborn) says...

Psalm 69:8I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.


And adelphos (which can be used for believers) cant apply to believers here (in that sense) because it says of them...


John 7:5 FOR NEITHER DID HIS BRETHREN (adelphos) believe IN HIM.


I am looking to show (much better) how these can be shown as his natural brothers (as through Mary) as the definition allows (see next post examining the definition in context of Mark).

Those who could only judge by the flesh (and know after the flesh) recognized them (in Mark and Mat) as his mother and brethren

Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, THY MOTHER AND BRETHREN (adelphos)


I cant see how they can only apply to being Josephs children (from a previous marraige) because scripture says...


Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Scripture calls them (His brethren) "MY MOTHER'S children"


Obviously we know Mary is His mother

Luke 1:43 And whence is this to me, that THE MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me?

And speaks of James (The LORDS brother)

Gal 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James THE LORD'S BROTHER (adelphos)

Same word here...

Mark 6:3 Is not this the carpenter,THE SON OF MARY, THE BROTHER(adelphos) OF James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon?

But again scripture calls them (His brethren) "MY MOTHER'S children"

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.


Was looking at the definition within the context adelphos is in (in relation to his brethren) in the next post.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Looking at Brother adelphos in the context of Mark 6:3 and Mat 12:49


And first looking at HOW it "can be" used (as context can better determine HOW a word is being used. Definitions of words used in scriptures are compiled under HOW the word is shown used in various places in scripture (one of which) is found in Mark 6:3


These would include...


1) a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother

2) having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman

3) any fellow or man

4) a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection

5) an associate in employment or office

6) brethren in Christ

a) his brothers by blood

b) all men

c) apostles

d) Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place


Okay...One at a time


------------------------------


# 1 a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother


#1 It cannot apply to being born of the same two parents (as mentioned in the defintion) given Jesus was born of the Holy Ghost which come upon Mary, and not of knowing a man (Joseph her husband). So we can rule this out (as applying to them being brethren of his after this manner) even if those who believed this was so were sorely mistaken. It cant apply here.



However, IT CAN apply to having either/ or parent being the same as the definition allows for the same. Whether of mother or father. Jesus could not have shared the same father (Joseph) with his brethren regardless (given He was not fathered by Joseph).

If his brethren were of both Joseph and Mary, sharing her (as their mother) this would fit perfectly within the definition itself and also confirm Psalm 69:8 when He speaks of "MY MOTHERS children". Thus these brethren can be shown to have come forth after her firstborn (Jesus) from the lawful marraige and the sexual union of Joseph and Mary).

Joseph as their father (not Jesus') but still HIS MOTHERS children. Indicating he knew her after the birth of Jesus.

Marys children (or MY mothers children) after (her firstborn) Jesus Christ. Scriptures keeping her virginity in tack, yet not in any perpetual (unscriptural) sense.



#2 having the same national ancestor, belonging to the same people, or countryman



Given Jesus mentions two here, and one within the definition (in contrast to brother and kin) saying...


Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.


I cant see how it is speaking of ones own countrymen (as brethren "can be" used). They were speaking in a more "personal sense", "Mary as named of them (his mother more intimately so) and his brethren adelphos (as specifically named). "They knew them", his "sisters" also. So they were speaking more in the respects of a household (whom they knew their names) not of countrymen in a general overall sense" (but specifically so). Son of, mother, brethren, and sisters are mentioned (these are found in a household).

Jesus mentions all three in the context following, speaking of countrymen, kin (such as cousins as was Elizabeth) and his own house, They were speaking as after a household in a very personal way (and naming those who they were familiar with).

If someone would say of you, is this not your mother (named) and brethren (4 named) and sisters also, you would know (from the context) they are not inquiring of countrymen, or ANY fellow man but of a household, family members.


#3 ANY fellow man



The context doesnt permit they were speaking of just ANY fellow man, but specifically OF his Mother (as named) and brethren (as named) they knew them and were offended by him and not because of ANY fellow man but after who they (themselves) named.



# 4) a fellow believer, united to another by the bond of affection



Given his brethren did not believe in Him John 7:5 and His Mothers children are mentioned as being strangers to him, I cannot see how this defintion could apply in this context. Not only so but Jesus gets done saying where a prophet is without honour. Not only were those who asked after members of his personal family offended, we know His brethren did not believe and a prophet is without honour in his own house is included. This alongside of "countrymen" and kin (as opposed to brothers)


#5 an associate in employment or office



I cannot possibly see how they were speaking of adelphos (his brethren) in this particular context


# 6 brethren in Christ


This cannot be as the context shows it, but CAN BE be used this way. Jesus Himself showed this one in the context where someone said to him "BEHOLD thy MOTHER and BRETHREN adelphos (after the flesh) and Jesus asked WHO is my mother and brethren (adelphos)? Then stretched out his hand toward his disciples and declared them adelphos (brethren in the same sense).Its the complete opposite sense those in Mark meant it. They were speaking the same as the one who said to him "behold thy mother and brethren" before Jesus showed to the contrary.

So the context does not allow for adelphos to be used as speaking of his brethren this way. Again falling under the context of #1 (with the mentioned exception)


a) his brothers by blood


This one would also fall under #1 but only for one parent (the obvious exception) as "my mothers children" (his brethren) were not conceived in the same way Jesus (her firstborn) was.


b) all men


Context doesnt allow it to be speaking of "all" men either, because they were not speaking of all men but "of certain" (specifically so). Likewise (again) as Jesus points out a prophet is without honour (not by all men all of the time) but his own countrymen, kin and his own house


c) apostles


Its obvious that the context is not speaking of the apostles as adelphos there. It can be, but not there. Even In Gal 1:19 when Paul speaks of seeing the Lords brother (James) but none other of the apostles it was used in contrast there as well


d) Christians, as those who are exalted to the same heavenly place


It can be speaking of christians ( followers of Christ) but it says his brethren did not believe. They were asking after an earthly family (and personally so) and as named between such. Though we know disciples were called Christians first in Antioch in Acts 11:26

Still examining these

 

[narnia59]

However, IT CAN apply to having either/ or parent being the same as the definition allows for the same. Whether of mother or father. Jesus could not have shared the same father (Joseph) with his brethren regardless (given He was not fathered by Joseph).

False assumption from the get-go. The same people who are calling these men 'brothers' of Jesus are the ones who also ask in Matthew 13:55 "Is not this the carpenter's son?". So while Jesus was not biologically fathered by Joseph, he is legally and culturally his earthly father (scripture itself refers to Joseph as his father in Luke 2:33), and anyone referring to individuals as being the 'brothers' of Christ would certainly have considered any children fathered by Joseph as being his 'brothers'.

 

[Fireinfolding]

False assumption from the get-go. The same people who are calling these men 'brothers' of Jesus are the ones who also ask in Matthew 13:55 "Is not this the carpenter's son?". So while Jesus was not biologically fathered by Joseph, he is legally and culturally his earthly father (scripture itself refers to Joseph as his father in Luke 2:33), and anyone referring to individuals as being the 'brothers' of Christ would certainly have considered any children fathered by Joseph as being his 'brothers'.

I am going by the definition itself and what it allowed for within the context

The sign that a virgin would be with child was specifically to "the house of David" Isaiah 7:13-14 of which Joseph was Luke 2:4. It was he to whom the sign come (to consider) and had to think on Mat 1:20 (because he knew her not). It was only until an angel of the Lord in a dream told him to fear not this was of the Holy Ghost (not of another) ie "the sign" (to the house of David)

And it says...

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was [the son] of Heli,

But Joseph knew he had nothing to do with the virgin being with child, especially if he had to be convinced of the angel (to the very sign) in relation to his own wife. So people would have naturally supposed he was the son of Joseph.

However the definition uses those instances for adelphos

And we would know by other scriptures which tell us

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Fits perfect with

1) a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother

a) his brothers by blood


They could only know by the flesh anyway, thats all they could know (its all Joseph knew if he (also) had considered putting Mary away quietly. It was revealed to him (divinely so). So had they KNEW he was the Son of God under the gaurdianship of Joseph they wouldnt have been offended at him at all. Unless they were just doubting she was ever a virgin with all those children and offended that she didnt remain a virgin? Now theres a thought

I wouldnt consider them in "the know". Besides I have considered this given what is given me to work with within the definition itself. Given it confirms Psalms 69:8. And the definition allows for one of the same biological parents (in this case too) and so would be Mary, "My mothers children". So makes sense to me, the other descriptions under the definition didnt fit into the context.

So having one and the same parents appears more in a biological sense then a legal sense in that portion of the definition. They would only know any legal sense, otherwise they wouldnt have been offended.

Though if you think about it, it could somewhat appear they were offended at the flesh, the other brothers... if they knew she was a virgin with child, maybe they were just as offended that there were other children in the mix, just as some folks are today, you know... the ol' blessed is th paps that nursed thee and the womb (etc) taking offense that her womb could have been somehow known by a man (after)?

... ok thats a strech... but not in my mind

 

[narnia59]

I am going by the definition itself and what it allowed for within the context

The sign that a virgin would be with child was specifically to "the house of David" Isaiah 7:13-14 of which Joseph was Luke 2:4. It was he to whom the sign come (to consider) and had to think on Mat 1:20 (because he knew her not). It was only until an angel of the Lord in a dream told him to fear not this was of the Holy Ghost (not of another) ie "the sign" (to the house of David)

And it says...

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was [the son] of Heli,

But Joseph knew he had nothing to do with the virgin being with child, especially if he had to be convinced of the angel (to the very sign) in relation to his own wife. So people would have naturally supposed he was the son of Joseph.

However the definition uses those instances for adelphos

And we would know by other scriptures which tell us

Psalm 69:8 I AM become a stranger UNTO MY BRETHREN, and an alien UNTO MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN.

Fits perfect with

1) a brother, whether born of the same two parents or only of the same father or mother

a) his brothers by blood


They could only know by the flesh anyway, thats all they could know (its all Joseph knew if he (also) had considered putting Mary away quietly. It was revealed to him (divinely so). So had they KNEW he was the Son of God under the gaurdianship of Joseph they wouldnt have been offended at him at all. Unless they were just doubting she was ever a virgin with all those children and offended that she didnt remain a virgin? Now theres a thought

I wouldnt consider them in "the know". Besides I have considered this given what is given me to work with within the definition itself. Given it confirms Psalms 69:8. And the definition allows for one of the same biological parents (in this case too) and so would be Mary, "My mothers children". So makes sense to me, the other descriptions under the definition didnt fit into the context.

So having one and the same parents appears more in a biological sense then a legal sense in that portion of the definition. They would only know any legal sense, otherwise they wouldnt have been offended.

Though if you think about it, it could somewhat appear they were offended at the flesh, the other brothers... if they knew she was a virgin with child, maybe they were just as offended that there were other children in the mix, just as some folks are today, you know... the ol' blessed is th paps that nursed thee and the womb (etc) taking offense that her womb could have been somehow known by a man (after)?

... ok thats a strech... but not in my mind

The definition of adelphos supplies many possibilities...

But explain this? When in the book of Revelation a woman is portrayed as actually giving birth to Christ, this is seen as being about Israel, not Mary. But in a Jewish psalm written by the king of Israel, primarily about himself (after all, he says O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sinshttp://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/psalms/69.html#fn-descriptionAnchor-b are not hid from thee -- this is about David, not Christ) -- here the 'my mother' is seen as being specifically about Mary?

While David is indeed here a 'type' of Christ and this psalm can be seen as a prophecy, it is identifying a much broader rejection of Christ than merely by his closest of relatives..... his mother Israel rejects him (other than a remnant), for which God does not spare the natural branches.

 

[Fireinfolding]

The definition of adelphos supplies many possibilities...

I know narnia, I listed all of theose definitions and went through them one by one

But explain this? When in the book of Revelation a woman is portrayed as actually giving birth to Christ, this is seen as being about Israel, not Mary. But in a Jewish psalm written by the king of Israel, primarily about himself (after all, he says O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from thee -- this is about David, not Christ) -- here the 'my mother' is seen as being specifically about Mary?

If you follow it


Psalm 69:8 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children.


Psalm 69:9 For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

John 2:17 And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

And ofcourse of the same zeal..

Isaiah 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

I am not against similitudes however the EVER virginity of Mary after the flesh is always brought up, and that would be discussed carnally not spiritually so.

While David is indeed here a 'type' of Christ and this psalm can be seen as a prophecy, it is identifying a much broader rejection of Christ than merely by his closest of relatives..... his mother Israel rejects him (other than a remnant), for which God does not spare the natural branches.

Narnia I can see the types, I used to post them when I first come to CF and until every type and similitude I was showing (which I thought were beautiful at the time) would be knocked back down to keep your eyes upon Mary, and the ever constant harping on the carnal sex life of Mary. So my thought (over time) was, well if I cant discuss with them (after that fashion) spiritually so then I too will discuss the carnal sex life of Mary. Even after Christ (her firstborn) where it really becomes irrelevant (even to me).


So instead of speak of spiritual things (types and similitudes etc) I figured I'd switch, because its the only thing folks in these parts seem to care about. Minding her flesh, her sex life (or lack thereof) her holy womb, her blessed paps and anything of that sort. It just seems to be everyones cup of tea... so I do that now (here) and save the good stuff for elsewhere...

 

[narnia59]

I know narnia, I listed all of theose definitions and went through them one by one



If you follow it


Psalm 69:8 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother's children.


Psalm 69:9 For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

John 2:17 And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

And ofcourse of the same zeal..

Isaiah 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

I am not against similitudes however the EVER virginity of Mary after the flesh is always brought up, and that would be discussed carnally not spiritually so.



Narnia I can see the types, I used to post them when I first come to CF and until every type and similitude I was showing (which I thought were beautiful at the time) would be knocked back down to keep your eyes upon Mary, and the ever constant harping on the carnal sex life of Mary. So my thought (over time) was, well if I cant discuss with them (after that fashion) spiritually so then I too will discuss the carnal sex life of Mary. Even after Christ (her firstborn) where it really becomes irrelevant (even to me).


So instead of speak of spiritual things (types and similitudes etc) I figured I'd switch, because its the only thing folks in these parts seem to care about. Minding her flesh, her sex life (or lack thereof) her holy womb, her blessed paps and anything of that sort. It just seems to be everyones cup of tea... so I do that now (here) and save the good stuff for elsewhere...

The only people I have seen discussing the 'carnal sex life of Mary' in these forums have been non-Catholics/non-Orthodox. The reduction of the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary to such a view is more reflective of the carnality of modern society than anything to do the historical teaching of our respective churches.

I continue to find it quite odd though that people enter a Mariology subforum and then want to profess disdain towards others that Mary is the only thing people in 'these parts' care about. But paint with any broad brush you wish I suppose.

 

[Fireinfolding]

The only people I have seen discussing the 'carnal sex life of Mary' in these forums have been non-Catholics/non-Orthodox. The reduction of the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary to such a view is more reflective of the carnality of modern society than anything to do the historical teaching of our respective churches.

I continue to find it quite odd though that people enter a Mariology subforum and then want to profess disdain towards others that Mary is the only thing people in 'these parts' care about. But paint with any broad brush you wish I suppose.

There are many who regard it as a fable. And turning ones ears from the truth unto fables is spoken of in scripture also. Even the "supposing of" a thing (which is equal to "assuming" something) can also be inclusive of being destitue of the truth (in the assuming) of it.

Assumption.....The thing supposed


A statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn

Examples...

Mat 20:10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more;


Mat 6:49 But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit


Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph


Acts 7:25 For he supposed his brethren would have understood


Luke 2:44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company


John 20:15 She, supposing him to be the gardener


Acts 14:19.... having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead.


Acts 27:13 And when the south wind blew softly, supposing that they had obtained their purpose.

And lastly..one can be desitute of the truth "supposing" in certain things

1Titus 6:5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

And likewise...

2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

So to some its considered a fable or an assumption, where theres not many examples of of supposing that seem to be correct there.

 

[Standing Up]

Septuagint:

69:8 I became strange to my brethren, and a stranger to my mother's children.

Can it get any clearer than that?

Brethren may be the whole race, but my mother's children narrows it down to the 4 (james, jude, ??, ??).

69:9 For the zeal of thine house has eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

 

[narnia59]

Septuagint:

69:8 I became strange to my brethren, and a stranger to my mother's children.

Can it get any clearer than that?

Brethren may be the whole race, but my mother's children narrows it down to the 4 (james, jude, ??, ??).

69:9 For the zeal of thine house has eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

So when in the book of Revelation we see a woman actually giving birth to Christ, can it get any clearer than that it is referring to Mary?

Regarding the use of 'mother' in Psalm 69 -- is this really a prophecy that Christ will be rejected merely by his nearest of kin? Nothing to do with his rejection by the majority of Israel?

When Christ refers to Abraham as Father Abraham -- does this clearly mean he is referring to his physical father?

Options for "my mother" in the broader context than simply rejection by nearest of kin:

Eve. After all, scripture refers to her as the mother of all the living

Sarah. If Abraham is father Abraham, Sarah is indeed mother.

Rebecca. The actual mother of "Israel" -- "And they blessed Rebekah, and said to her, "Our sister, be the mother of thousands of ten thousands; and may your descendants possess the gate of those who hate them!" Yep, could be her. Not literally the mother of all those of course, but referred to as their mother nonetheless. How many of those descendants is Jesus a stranger to?

Deborah. Although Scripture does not record her as having children of her own, Scripture claims she "arose as a mother in Israel."

Rachel. Weaping for her 'children' -- those Israelites being removed from their homeland and those innocents massacred when Herod is looking for Christ.

Certainly many possibilities and a very limited view to think this prophecy is referring to Christ's rejection only by his nearest of relatives I would contend.

 

[narnia59]

There are many who regard it as a fable. And turning ones ears from the truth unto fables is spoken of in scripture also. Even the "supposing of" a thing (which is equal to "assuming" something) can also be inclusive of being destitue of the truth (in the assuming) of it.

Assumption.....The thing supposed


A statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn

Examples...

Mat 20:10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more;


Mat 6:49 But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit


Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph


Acts 7:25 For he supposed his brethren would have understood


Luke 2:44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company


John 20:15 She, supposing him to be the gardener


Acts 14:19.... having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead.


Acts 27:13 And when the south wind blew softly, supposing that they had obtained their purpose.

And lastly..one can be desitute of the truth "supposing" in certain things

1Titus 6:5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

And likewise...

2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

So to some its considered a fable or an assumption, where theres not many examples of of supposing that seem to be correct there.

And many regard the virgin birth and resurrection as 'fable'. Yet the church has provided witness to those events for 2000 years.