English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

16 answers

Yes. As it is written: "This is the builder's son, isn't it? His mother is named Mary, isn't she? His brothers are James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas, aren't they? And his sisters are all with us, aren't they? So where did this man get all these things?" (Matthew 13:55-56)

2007-02-15 13:15:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Yes.

Of course, Jesus' father was God. After Jesus was born, Mary bore other children by Joseph. These siblings would have been Jesus half- brothers and sisters.

Matthew 13:53-56 mentions his brothers : James, Joseph, Simon and Judas and sisters. That means there must have been at least 6 brothers and sisters.

The Bible writers Jude(Judas) and James were apparently Jesus' brothers.

2007-02-15 13:29:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Many protestants believe that Mary was a Virgin until after Jesus' birth, and assume that "James, the brother of Jesus," (mentioned in Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3, Luke 24:10) could be Jesus' real brother.

Roman Catholics, and some other denominations believe that Mary was a virgin for her whole life, and James and others were actually extended family.

2007-02-15 13:18:42 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. Bad Day 7 · 0 0

That Jesus must have had other brothers and sisters seems indicated by the incident that occurred when Jesus was twelve years old and Joseph took his family to Jerusalem for the festival. On the way back they had traveled a whole day before Mary noticed that Jesus was not with them. Had Jesus been her only child (and miraculously conceived at that), could we imagine her maternal instincts being so dormant that she would have started out without him and not missed him for a whole day? But if by this time she had six or more children by Joseph, we can imagine her having been so busy that she might not have missed Jesus for a whole day.—Luke 2:41-50.

True, the question might be asked, If Mary had other children, why did Jesus entrust his mother to his apostle John instead of to her other children? For one thing, his other brothers may not have been at the site of his impalement, they apparently not yet having become believers. Also, of his disciples, John was closest to Jesus, and had a spiritual relationship with him that exceeded any natural relationship.

Why has the Catholic Church made the matter of Mary’s being a virgin perpetually a teaching of the Church though it is without any support in tradition or Scripture? No doubt because of the sanctity that virginity is supposed to impart. But, according to the Bible, virginity is only a virtue among single persons. The apostle Paul tells married people not to deprive each other of the marital due, which Mary would have done had she remained a virgin after bearing Jesus.—1 Cor. 7:3-5.

2007-02-15 13:14:09 · answer #4 · answered by LineDancer 7 · 2 3

He had at least one kid too. Today it is not unusual for Jewish men to stay at home with their parents until they hit 30, but back then when life expectancies were in the low 40's, you got married and started having kids at 20. Nobody would have followed an odd ball with no wife or kids. Wine was a food and everyone drank it. Some Christan flavors are against drinking and run it back to Jesus. I am sure if Jesus were alive today he would be laughing at most of the churches.

2007-02-15 13:25:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

From Matthew 13:55-57

55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him.
But Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor."

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013:55-57;&version=31;

2007-02-15 13:17:36 · answer #6 · answered by Searcher 7 · 1 0

Yes, he did.

This silly nonsense about "brothers" meaning "cousins" or that James etc were Jesus's half-brothers didn't surface until the 1990's and has absolutely no historical or biblical evidence to support it.

2007-02-15 14:16:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The answer that "Line dance" gave is highly accurate.
To add a bit more to it, when Jesus was doing miracles his brothers and sisters (!/2 since he wasn't Joseph's) were unbelievers for a while.
There are lots of facts that certain Church's conveniently leave out.
The catholic church also likes to work with a trinity, and that doesn't fly either.

2007-02-15 13:28:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

there is a scripture in the bible that says that jesus's mother and brothers were waiting for him. to this jesus replied (paraphrase here so bear with me) "what mother, what brothers? these are my brothers and my mother." he was saying that throug him, there is an eternal family, not just an earthly family. those who accept him are welcomed into the heavenly family.
people will try and tell you that "brother" meant "cousin" and that he didn't have siblings, and that mary was a virgin her whole life. i say to them, if "brother" meant "cousin" then why did they refer to john the baptist as his cousin, and not his brother?
also, James, the apostle, is widely accepted to be the brother of jesus.

2007-02-15 13:18:44 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

Yes he did. And we are all also his brothers and sisters.

2007-02-15 17:14:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers