I've always known Jesus had physical brothers and sisters, that Mary had children to Joseph after Jesus was born. It says so in the Bible. The author of James is believed to have been the brother of Jesus and leader of the council of Jerusalem. He could not have been the apostle James, who died too early (AD 44) to have written it. The other two men named James had neither the stature nor the influence that the writer of the letter James had. James was one of several brothers of Christ and was probably the eldest since he heads the list in Matthew 13:55 (his brothers James, Jospeph, Simon and Judas, also sisters). James was martyred circa AD 62.
How come then, since this is common knowledge and written down in the Bible, that some people think Mary never had sex with Joseph, never mind bore him any children? Is this a conspiracy by the Roman and Orthadox churches to keep their members in the dark? Did you know Jesus had siblings or is this shocking news to you? Does it matter?
2006-12-25 22:10:26 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
no n - Which Church?
tracy2119 - I agree that Jesus is the Son of God and sinless.
gorilla - Apologies to all Catholics - no offence intended - I have no quibble with the immaculate conception. It's what happened AFTERwards that's being discussed.
Iam 9 - My faith also depends on God and not on men and the truth is what we are trying to expose here.
2006-12-25 22:38:46 · update #1
Athiests Rule - they say imitation is the most sincere form of flatery! However, I did not realise you'd posted a similar question earlier. Still, as we seem to be coming from different points of view then the different answers we've got are interesting.
2006-12-26 02:07:04 · update #2
pargreen19..What a delicious answer! Agree with the false teachings of 'the church' on world was flat, sun revolved round earth, etc., but WHICH church are you referring to? I'm in the process of formulating a question on Richard Dawkins and challenging my intellect (I do have one).
2006-12-26 05:14:24 · update #3
pargreen19..What a delicious answer! Agree with the false teachings of 'the church' on world was flat, sun revolved round earth, etc., but WHICH church are you referring to? I'm in the process of formulating a question on Richard Dawkins and challenging my intellect (I do have one).
2006-12-26 05:16:00 · update #4
To prove that god is alive - thank you so much for your honest and simple answer. It spoke volumes to me. God bless.
2006-12-27 05:04:15 · update #5
Whether you find this controversial depends on:
a) whether you are a roman catholic - then yes, it is
b) you do not read the Bible - then yes, it is news
c) if you read the Bible and you are a christian then you would be well versed in this matter.
At the end of the documentary the programme revealed a book which showed the practices and beliefs of the early christians. The commentator stated that the belief in the virgin birth was not mentioned. Indeed, if you read the New Testatment you will see that this idea of the perpetual virginal state of Mary is not mentioned at all. Indeed, there is some discussion as to the translation of the word virgin actually meaning young woman.
Interestingly, the worship of a virginal goddess who was called "Mother of God" was a feature of Roman pagan religion - I think this explains the origins of the Roman Catholic views of Mary.
One only has to read the Bible to see that Jesus had blood brothers and sisters and that these ideas regarding Mary are part of a distortion of true christainity.
2006-12-26 00:40:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Secret Family Of Jesus
2016-12-18 07:31:53 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What really struck me about this programme is that the guy presenting it spent a whole two hours showing us that the whole of christianity is based on a lie. He then said at the end of the programme that he would still be believing in this distortion of the truth because it has been the traditional teaching of the church for the last two thousand years and therefore it could not be overturned.
What a load of garbage. This is the same church that told us that the world was flat. This was disproved in the 15th century. This is the same church that told us the sun revolved around the earth. This was disproved in the 16th century. This is the same church that claimed the earth was only 6,000 years old and had been created in just a handful of days as described in Genesis. This was finally disproved by Darwin in the 19th century. Bit by bit this superstitious garbage is being discredited.
If you really are feeble minded enough to still believe in this junk then do yourself a favour and read Richard Dawkin's The God Delusion so you can see the error of your ways. But be warned it may be a bit too intellectual for you simple christian folk.
2006-12-26 03:36:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
This came as no surprise to me since I have been reading up on this subject for 20 years now.
I disagree with the presenter when he said that "if Jesus was not the sun of God then there would be no Christianity".
Jesus could be alternatively seen as a teacher, Guru (as Buddha) or seen as a Prophet (as Mohammed or Moses).
It is not the messenger who is important but the message.
I believe such facts offers a chance to review the message of Jesus, disregarding all that is a falsehood to understand purely his teachings and not of the later churches erroneous belief system.
2006-12-26 00:37:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Much of what was said is plain to anyone who reads the New Testament. I do not accept that Jesus was born anywhere but Bethlehem in Judea. Also,
Matthew 1:25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
Shows Mary did not remain a virgin. Whether or not Jesus' brothers and sisters were children of Mary or just Joseph is not relevant.
As for John The Baptist being Jesus' teacher, he was certainly a great man, but he was not that much older than Jesus.
As for the relationship between Him and Mary Magdalene, that is pure speculation. The request to her by Jesus for her not to touch Him does not indicate anything closer than He ahd with other people. The woman that anointed His feet, for instance. He broke the rules of the time concerning behaviour between men and women. the story abot the Samaritan woman, for instance, illustrates this.
2006-12-26 03:35:48 · answer #5 · answered by waycyber 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The point the programme made was not the Jesus had a family. The point was that they were supposed to lead the Christians and not the church as history tells us.
They were also teaching a different doctrine, i.e. that Jesus was not God but a prophet & that the law (Torah) still applied. That in the Dedikay (or whatever he Dr. Beckford was talking about) Jude (Jesus brother) writes about people corrupting the message.
For Example:
St. Paul said he believed (as he wrote in his letter to the Ephesians 2:14-15) that Jesus had abolished the Law with all its commandments and regulations.
He seems, however, to have misunderstood what he heard about Jesus. In the Gospel According to Matthew 5:17-20, Jesus is reported to have said quite the contrary, as follows: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law . . . ."
I personally think this brings a massive doubt over modern day Christianity. I think modern day Christians should infact be Jewish but believe that Jesus was the Messiah (a prophet) and not God.
2006-12-26 01:54:38 · answer #6 · answered by By Any Means Necessary 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't know what the fuss is about. It does not matter one jot whether Jesus had siblings or not. Mary was a virgin when She conceived the Lord. Channel 4 go out of their way to rubbish Christianity, this programme is beginning to show how desperate they are.
What is all this nonsense about the Catholic/Orthodox churches trying to keep its members in the dark? We can and do read!
To my understanding many senior theologians consider the brothers and sisters of Jesus more in the light of cousins. However, cousins or brothers, it does not detract from the person of Jesus!
2006-12-25 22:25:49 · answer #7 · answered by Raymo 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You have just upset all the catholics who believe that Mary never had sex and its only through the immaculate conception that JC was born.
Their church has written out the siblings of JC by saying they were the children that Joseph had from a previous marriage as he was somewhat older than Mary.
Understand that the RC church in Istanbul re-wrote the bible to suit there own dogma hiundreds of years after JC died. There are many passages changed, gospels left out and "ficticious" gospels added to "correct" inconsistencies.
Still the message is correct, just dont believe everything you read.
Merry Christmas.
PS Why did this get downrated? Is there a society of saddos who get pleasure from acting cowardly rather than initiating their own defence?
2006-12-25 22:18:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It doesn't matter if Mary had other children after Jesus was born,so I don't know why the TV station is making it into a big deal by claiming that it was ' a Secret Family'.The information is there in the Bible for all to read.It's no conspiracy.
2006-12-25 22:17:56 · answer #9 · answered by Serena 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its a medieval thing that's been held by the catholic church for century's..The perpetual virginity of Mary!..Born a virgin, died a virgin!..They feel they have to do this to maintain her place as second only to Jesus, therefore her 'purity' had to be established, that Jesus had brothers and sisters is not in doubt, what is in Catholic doubt is the motherhood of the children!..Did Joseph marry again?..Not uncommon in those days, Joseph was probably a member of the 'Essene sect' of Qumran, and multiple marriages was common among them!..Or so the theory goes!The catholic church live a lot of myths and this, like a lot of saints who never existed, is one of them!..
2006-12-25 22:24:42 · answer #10 · answered by paranthropus2001 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋