The "brothers" of Jesus: Who are they REALLY?

Question

When Catholics call Mary the "Blessed Virgin," we mean she remained a virgin throughout her life. Now, there are about ten instances in the NT where "brothers" and "sisters" of the Lord are mentioned. But note that "brother" (Greek: adelphos) has a wide meaning in the Bible. Its not restricted to the literal meaning of a full/half-brother. Same goes for "sister" (adelphe). The Old Testament shows that "brother" had a wide semantic range of meaning and could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended (male relatives from whom you are descended are known as "fathers") and who are not descended from you (your male descendants, regardless of the number of generations removed, are your "sons"). Lot, for example, is called Abraham’s "brother" (Gen. 14:14), even though, being the son of Haran, Abraham’s brother (Gen. 11:26–28), he was actually Abraham’s nephew, and Jacob is called the "brother" of his uncle Laban (Gen. 29:15).

Because neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and his disciples) had a special word meaning "cousin," speakers of those languages could use either the word for "brother" or a circumlocution, such as "the son of my uncle." But circumlocutions are clumsy, so the Jews often used "brother."

So, if it is established that the "brethren of the Lord" were not Jesus’ brothers or half-brothers through Mary, who were they? Today, the most commonly accepted view is that they were Jesus’ cousins. This identification of the "brethren of the Lord" as Jesus’ first cousins is open to legitimate question—they might even be relatives more distantly removed—but our inability to determine for certain their exact status strictly on the basis of the biblical evidence (or lack of it, in this case) says nothing at all about the main point, which is that the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed Virgin Mary’s children.

Comments? Questions?

For more info, go to:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp

God bless you all !!! (...even CJ )

Answer 1

Yes, and not only relatives. We are told that after the resurrection, Jesus appeared to more than five hundred brethren (adelphoi - brothers) at once. Presumably these were not all the children of Mary and Joseph. Either you believe what the Bible states or you don't. The bible states that whatsoever is bound upon earth by the Church Christ founded is also bound in heaven. The perpetual virginity of Mary is binding teaching as defined by the one true Church. End of story.

Answer 2

According to Tradition that has been passed down, Joseph was a much older man. while Mary was a teenager, probably fifteen or sixteen when Joseph married her. Joseph by that time had already had a family as most men of his age, and was likely a widower with grown children or near-grown children. It was not your "normal" husband/wife relationship. The brothers of Jesus were probably Joseph's children by another marriage, but not blood relation to Him. I'm Catholic, and so I believe that Mary is the Blessed Virgin Mary - she remained a virgin throughout her life. I don't think that what I've mentioned is so difficult to believe. And you are correct about the linguistics concerning the term "brother" and the Greek and Aramaic languages. Good and informative post - thanks! And God Bless.......

Answer 3

Yes Jesus had brothers and sisters, they were HALF brothers and sisters, Mary was NOT their mother.

When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother"). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age. Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place.

Now as we can see those children mentioned in the bible that were Jesus's brothers and sisters were His half brothers and sisters. Can someone tell me what other children Mary had besides Jesus.?

Answer 4

Three things in the Bible lead some Protestants to believe that Mary was not ever-virgin: the reference to Jesus' "brothers", the use of the word "until" in Matthew 1:25, and the reference to Jesus as Mary's "firstborn."


The word "brother" or "brethren" is often used in Scripture for relationships other than that of those born of the same parents.

If Jesus had brothers and sisters, don't you think their descendants would know it? At least in the first 300 years or so of the Church? Where were they? Did they speak of "Uncle Jesus" often? I'd think that if He had all of these brothers, sisters, nieces, and nephews around, there'd have been some word of it.

Answer 5

Let me ask you this: When you were baptized into God's family, did you become Jesus' cousin or His direct sibling? Were you actually saved from sin, death & the devil by John the Baptist or Jesus? According to your reasoning how do you know that you aren't just Jesus' distant cousin?

The Bible tells us that Christ is the firstborn of all believers (Romans 8:29). He is our older brother, not our cousin. In Matt.12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21, these are Jesus' half-brothers, the earthly sons of Mary. (Why would His cousins be following around His mother anyway?) If Jesus was making the point that those who do His Father's will are His cousins, that is a pretty weak point to make & why then did this story make it into all three synoptic Gospels for crying out loud? They were His earthly brothers, otherwise as merely cousins, we don't have any rights to the throne, which we know we do directly through Christ (Heb. 4:15-16).

This assertion that Mary remained a virgin after the Virgin Birth of Christ is not biblical, which ever way you try to twist God's Words around. First, just because you've made the case that the Greek word "brother" could mean "cousin, etc.", doesn't mean that it always does mean cousin, etc. Second, why are you using an O.T. example as it was written in Hebrew? I would be willing to wager that when the Greek work 'adelphos' is used with the Greek work for 'mother' it most often takes on the meaning of literal brothers. Third, just like it is not us who make ourselves holy, it was not Mary who herself was holy, but the Christ who was within her that made her holy.

Matt. 23:16-22 warns us not to make gods out of the people or things that come in contact with the Holy God. Romans 1:25 also warns us not to worship the created, but rather the Creator. Last time I checked Mary was created, not the Creator. Although she is indeed a blessed gift to humanity, she is not our Creator & Savior as is Christ Jesus.

Answer 6

"Brother" in the New Testament is seen as a blood brother
(Matt. 4:18; Matt.10:2; Mark 1:19), a close relative or a fellow believer. Sister in the Gospels is never used other than for a blood sister except for two occasions (Matt.12:50; Mark 3:35). If you hold to the "brother means only close relation" thing, then Matt. 12:46 - 50 doesn't make much sense, since Christ used both "brother" and "sister". It would have been very unusual for a Jewish family in the 1st Century to have only one child. I think the onus is on you to prove that the terms "brother" and "sister" do not mean actual brothers and sisters in relation to Christ.
There are at least three instances in the New Testament where "mother" is used that does not mean actual, physical mother. Should we question whether Mary was actually Christ's mother, using your logic?

Answer 7

OK you had me following you all the way, until you made a huge jump in logic. You went about showing that the words used and translated as brother COULD ALSO mean something like cousin. Which I have no reason to doubt, without further study. But then comes the BIG jump in logic: "So, if it is established that the "brethren of the Lord" were not Jesus’ brothers or half-brothers through Mary, who were they?"

You went from it COULD be possible, to 'it is established'. A possibility does NOT constitute a factual imperative. The problem that I have is that it is possible that they were also LITERAL brothers. I see no strong evidence either way as to whether they were literal brothers, cousins, or someone even farther removed! And until I have more (or even 'some') I prefer to reserve judgment.

Answer 8

Oh brother...the great 'pastor' art has spoken..falsely, AGAIN.


Backing up the testimony of Scripture regarding Mary’s perpetual virginity is the testimony of the early Christian Church. Consider the controversy between Jerome and Helvidius, writing around 380. Helvidius first brought up the notion that the "brothers of the Lord" were children born to Mary and Joseph after Jesus’ birth. The great Scripture scholar Jerome at first declined to comment on Helvidius’ remarks because they were a "novel, wicked, and a daring affront to the faith of the whole world." At length, though, Jerome’s friends convinced him to write a reply, which turned out to be his treatise called On the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mary. He used not only the scriptural arguments given above, but cited earlier Christian writers, such as Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr. Helvidius was unable to come up with a reply, and his theory remained in disrepute and was unheard of until more recent times.

Prior to the time of Jerome, the standard theory was that they were Jesus’ "brothers" who were sons of Joseph though not of Mary. According to this view, Joseph was a widower at the time he married Mary. He had children from his first marriage (who would be older than Jesus, explaining their attitude toward him). This is mentioned in a number of early Christian writings. One work, known as the Proto-evangelium of James (A.D. 125) records that Joseph was selected from a group of widowers to serve as the husband/protector of Mary, who was a virgin consecrated to God. When he was chosen, Joseph objected: "I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl" (4:9).

Then look at what John says: "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene" (John 19:25). If we compare these parallel accounts of the scene of the crucifixion, we see that the mother of James and Joseph must be the wife of Clopas. So far, so good.

An argument against this, though, is that James is elsewhere (Matt. 10:3) described as the son of Alphaeus, which would mean this Mary, whoever she was, was the wife of both Clopas and Alphaeus. But Alphaeus and Clopas are the same person, since the Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek either as Alphaeus or as Clopas. Another possibility is that Alphaeus took a Greek name similar to his Jewish name, the way that Saul took the name Paul.

So it’s probable that James the younger is the son of Mary and Clopas. The second-century historian Hegesippus explains that Clopas was the brother of Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus. James would thus be Joseph’s nephew and a cousin of Jesus, who was Joseph’s putative son.

The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was officially defined by Pope Pius IX in 1854. When Fundamentalists claim that the doctrine was "invented" at this time, they misunderstand both the history of dogmas and what prompts the Church to issue, from time to time, definitive pronouncements regarding faith or morals. They are under the impression that no doctrine is believed until the pope or an ecumenical council issues a formal statement about it.

Actually, doctrines are defined formally only when there is a controversy that needs to be cleared up or when the magisterium thinks the faithful can be helped by particular emphasis being drawn to some already-existing belief. The definition of the Immaculate Conception was prompted by the latter motive; it did not come about because there were widespread doubts about the doctrine. In fact, the Vatican was deluged with requests from people desiring the doctrine to be officially proclaimed.

Answer 9

Enjoy The Silence

Answer 10

I agree with you, probably because I am Catholic. There is an alternative explanation that Jesus's siblings could be step brothers from a prior marriage of St. Joseph. As I am not Orthodox, maybe I should not say what the Orthodox believe, but my understanding is that the Orthodox belief is that the brethren of the Lord are step-siblings.