Why does it clearly mentions the bible Jesus brothers and sisters but the Catholic and Orthodox sects?

Question

claim them to be half brothers and sister from Josephs previous marriage, very convenient to play along with their version of events dont you think...what are they afraid of.......??? hmmmm

Answer 1

Admitting jesus had real brothers and sisters (he did, it's clear) means that their favorite saint Mary couldn't be "ever virgin" anymore. That's why they keep up the pretense.

Which is really all very silly, since the whole idea of virginity and celibacy being "the ideal" didn't even arise in christian theology until well into the 4th century CE. Before that, all bishops and other church leaders were married and had kids (Peter was married and had kids, clearly stated in the bible), and sex was considered not just normal and natural, but even ordained from god.
The whole virgin thing (even jesus' supposed virgin birth) was an invention that came into christian theology long after jesus was dead.

Answer 2

Good question and one formally investigated by scripture scholars of the Catholic and Lutheran Church along with support from the Orthodox and other Protestant groups in the Catholic-Lutheran dialogue toward reunion. They published a book on the issue called "Mary in the New Testament."

There were two shocks from the commission, the first was that the theologians expected a lot of disagreement between due to differences in churches. They found none. The second was that it was irrational for Mary to be a source of division.

There are a couple of problems and all of them have to do with reading the scriptures in English.

Neither Hebrew nor Greek have a word for cousin, step brother, half brother or sister for that matter. Any same generation family member is a brother or sister in Greek and Hebrew. Further, some passages make no sense at all if they were Mary's biological children. The ultimate conclusion of the commission is that scripture is silent on whose children, mentioned as brothers and sisters, they are. We cannot know. We do know that other early Christian documents describe them in a way such that they could not be biological children of Mary, but we also cannot verify the accuracy of those documents. Though in truth, we cannot go back and ask the authors of scripture if they were accurate or not either. We know that very early documents outside scripture describe Jesus as what we would now call an only child. Multiple such documents exist, but the issue did not come up until the Reformation and 1500 years later is too late to go back and ask people exactly what they meant.

Answer 3

The writers of the gospels did not write it in the King James Version. At the time of Jesus, extended families were more important than nuclear families. Aramaic used the same word for brother, sister and cousin.

The gospel doesn't record who the individuals were when Jesus was told "Your mother and brothers are outside". The epistle writers Jude and James both describe themselves as brothers of the Lord, but that might just have been a way of describing themselves as disciples.

The tradition that Mary was a virgin is observed by an overwhelming majority of Christians. However, the origins of this belief are dubious. The passage in Isaiah "Behold a virgin shall conceive" was a mistranslation from Hebrew into Greek - the original word was equivalent to young girl.

In Ephesus there was a large temple and pilgrimage centre to the godess Artemis, a manifestation of Diana, who was revered as both virgin and mother of all mankind. The apostle Paul converted most of the population and substituted Mary for the virgin mother.

Answer 4

Dear dubaiswayne,

I saw this also in Mark 6:3. I think that the reason the Catholics refuse to acknowledge this is because that would refute their teaching that Mary was ever-virgin. The Bible tells us that Mary was a virgin when she birthed Jesus but afterward she and Joseph had children together. These children were the half-brothers and -sisters of Jesus. The catholics attempt to make Mary a co-redeemer with Christ, which is balshemy. Mary was a humble servant of God who needed a Saviour just as the rest of the world.

Answer 5

You are getting caught up on technical stuff - the manuscripts, although a bit vague, state that Jesus had brothers and sisters -
Mary and Jospeph had other children after Jesus - some of them followed Jesus as apolostles -
When someone calls them half-brothers, all they are doing is making the point that since Joseph was not Jesus' actual father, but a step-father, then the brothers and sisters were half brothers and half sisters. no big deal. no big secret cover up conspiracy to tell you some lie.

Answer 6

Probably because Catholics and Orthodox understand the scriptures better, having access to accurate and authoritative interpretation. In the original Greek text, the same word - adelphoi - is used repeatedly in reference to the "brothers" of Christ, or to use the better translation, the "brethren" of Christ. In one place we read that after the Resurrection Jesus appeared to more than 500 of His "brothers" [adelphoi] at once. Does this mean Mary had over 500 children? Obviously not. Therefore when we read that someone told Jesus, "your brothers [adelphoi] are outside", there is no reason to try to force a different interpretation onto the text. If the word obviously means "Christian brethren" in many different instances, then it most likely means "Christrian brethren" here as well. This is one of the most elementary principles of exegesis.

In addition, we read that "Mary the mother of James and Joses" was at the foot of the cross with Mary, the mother of Jesus. So obviously these two men were not siblings of Jesus, even though they are referred elsewhere to as His "brothers" [adelphoi] - "brethren".

Finally, Jesus, as He was dying, entrusted His mother into the care of John, who was certainly not His sibling. This would be unheard of in Jewish society, if Jesus had other younger siblings. The care of the mother was the responsibility of the oldest son, and passed authomatically to the next oldest son upon the death of the eldest.

This is just one more example of the fanciful interpretations of God's Word that men can generate when they try to interpret it on their own, without the guidance of Christ's Church, the biblical "pillar and foundation of truth".
.

Answer 7

they try to defend the perpetual virginity of Mary

the truth is, the Bible says Josph did not have sexual relations with Mary UNTIL Jesus was born... the normal use of until would allow Jesus to be virgin born but Mary and Joseph would have had sexual relations after... there is nothing related too salvation or the scriptures requiring perpetual virginity of Mary

the whole idea of perpetual virginity casts sexuality in a dim light as if married sex is somehow tainted and does more violence than the indended good.... it would be wise for the Catholic and Orthodox church to abandon this and focus on the important issue that Jesus was virgin born and not embellish it with man made tradition

the brothers and sisters of Jesus would be claimed to be possibly cousins of Jesus by the Catholic church and the idea tha Joseph had other children from a prior marriage is graping at straws to explain the brothers and sisters.... a more serious question is the doubt of Mary... she came with them to pick Jesus up because they thought Jesus lost his mind...

Mary and James Jesus half brother were trophies of grace and mercy and we should focus on that The Bible leaves MAry on her knees in Acts in the upper room and not a bad place to leave her and remember her at instead of resting on human faulty tranditions not from God

Answer 8

I comprehend in the Aramaic of Jesus' time, they used an analogous word for brother as they did for cousin. additionally, in the old testomony a guy replaced into required to marry his brother's widow. if his brother died leaving his widow childless. somebody ask a Jewish buddy think the guy that died did no longer have a brother. the respond replaced into that his nearest male kin member could be considered his brother. as a result the Bible does not incredibly coach or disprove that Mary had the different toddlers. I examine these days on Snopes with reference to a diverse count something it extremely is very actual: "between the 1st themes we ought to evaluate is that the Bible is hundreds of years old, and the debts have come to us via many oral retellings, re-copyings, printings, and translations. we ought to be very careful approximately featuring a particular interpretation of a unmarried English word or word from one particular version of the Bible as being "what the Bible unquestionably says." additionally, why did Jesus on the go supply his mom Mary to the Apostle John to be his mom. it could seem if he had different brothers and sisters they could have sorted Mary.

Answer 9

Good Question! Actually the reasons behind Orthodox and Catholic views of Jesus' brothers and sisiters is actually historical. The early church (pre-Luther and pre-schizm of 1050ish) never believe that Jesus had brothers and sisters. Remember that the Bible was not canonized until almost 300 years after Christ. The belief that Jesus had natural brothers and sisters is actually rather recent in comparison to the other traditional belief. Some of the reasons for this belief is that in the Bible, it makes reference to Jesus "brothers"....but also, in the Old Testament, Abraham makes reference to his 'brother' Lot, but Lot was really his nephew (which protestants agree with). So, in the Bible, the word "brother" is not always used in the natural sense. And in the tradition of the Early Church Fathers and Apostolic Tradition, the theology and belief was that Joseph never had sexual relations with Mary even AFTER Christ's birth. In a completely rational sense, if your wife gave birth to the saviour of the world, would you sleep with her? I certainly wouldn't. And the tradition was that Joseph felt that Mary being chosen by God was something that was to remain even after Christ's birth.
Now, this is what has been believed by Early Christians for AGES. In fact, this is the first belief about Jesus' siblilings. If anything, the idea of Jesus having brothers and sisters by Mary and Joseph is what should be called into questions since it didn't creep into protestant thinking till after Luther (a good 1500 years after Christ AND his 'brothers').

For the sake of not creating strife. The thoughts, and beliefs about Christ's siblilings is not something that we should splits hairs on, or use to magnify the differences between denominations. I'm simply explaining has been believed by christians since the apostles. Lets remember that we believe in the same Jesus, He is the Son of God, who came into the World to save sinners, and resurrected to return for His Church one day.

Answer 10

They would be half brothers and sisters because Christ was the Son of God, not Joseph's. However the Bible plainly states that Christ was Mary's first born son, not her only son, and also states that Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage after Christ's birth. If Joseph had been married before it would have been included in the record that this was so.
So many people find it hard to accept this fact. I was taught the very same thing.