Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | justme | 136636 | ||
What Biblical eveidence is there that the half brothers (except James) and or half sisters of Jesus were or were not believers? | ||||||
2 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | Morant61 | 136637 | ||
Greetings Justme! There is very little direct evidence. John 7:5 says, "For even his own brothers did not believe in him." The indirect evidence that is usually cited is that, other than James, none of His brothers are ever recorded as taking any kind of leadership role in the early chuch. Most assume that they would have if they have been believers from an early time. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | junmeskie | 136842 | ||
No Word for Cousin 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." The writers of the New Testament were brought up using the Aramaic equivalent of "brothers" to mean both cousins and sons of the same father—plus other relatives and even non-relatives. When they wrote in Greek, they did the same thing the translators of the Septuagint did. (The Septuagint was the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible; it was translated by Hellenistic Jews a century or two before Christ’s birth and was the version of the Bible from which most of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are taken.) In the Septuagint the Hebrew word that includes both brothers and cousins was translated as adelphos, which in Greek usually has the narrow meaning that the English "brother" has. Unlike Hebrew or Aramaic, Greek has a separate word for cousin, anepsios, but the translators of the Septuagint used adelphos, even for true cousins. You might say they transliterated instead of translated, importing the Jewish idiom into the Greek Bible. They took an exact equivalent of the Hebrew word for "brother" and did not use adelphos in one place (for sons of the same parents), and anepsios in another (for cousins). This same usage was employed by the writers of the New Testament and passed into English translations of the Bible. To determine what "brethren" or "brother" or "sister" means in any one verse, we have to look at the context. When we do that, we see that insuperable problems arise if we assume that Mary had children other than Jesus. When the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary and told her that she would conceive a son, she asked, "How can this be since I have no relations with a man?" (Luke 1:34). From the Church’s earliest days, as the Fathers interpreted this Bible passage, Mary’s question was taken to mean that she had made a vow of lifelong virginity, even in marriage. (This was not common, but neither was it unheard of.) If she had not taken such a vow, the question would make no sense. Mary knew how babies are made (otherwise she wouldn’t have asked the question she did). If she had anticipated having children in the normal way and did not intend to maintain a vow of virginity, she would hardly have to ask "how" she was to have a child, since conceiving a child in the "normal" way would be expected by a newlywed wife. Her question makes sense only if there was an apparent (but not a real) conflict between keeping a vow of virginity and acceding to the angel’s request. A careful look at the New Testament shows that Mary kept her vow of virginity and never had any children other than Jesus. When Jesus was found in the Temple at age twelve, the context suggests that he was the only son of Mary and Joseph. There is no hint in this episode of any other children in the family (Luke 2:41–51). Jesus grew up in Nazareth, and the people of Nazareth referred to him as "the son of Mary" (Mark 6:3), not as "a son of Mary." In fact, others in the Gospels are never referred to as Mary’s sons, not even when they are called Jesus’ "brethren." If they were in fact her sons, this would be strange usage. Also, the attitude taken by the "brethren of the Lord" implies they are his elders. In ancient and, particularly, in Eastern societies (remember, Palestine is in Asia), older sons gave advice to younger, but younger seldom gave advice to older—it was considered disrespectful to do so. But we find Jesus’ "brethren" saying to him that Galilee was no place for him and that he should go to Judea so he could make a name for himself (John 7:3–4). Another time, they sought to restrain him for his own benefit: "And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying, ‘He is beside himself’" (Mark 3:21). This kind of behavior could make sense for ancient Jews only if the "brethren" were older than Jesus, but that alone eliminates them as his biological brothers, since Jesus was Mary’s "first-born" son (Luke 2:7). Consider what happened at the foot of the cross. When he was dying, Jesus entrusted his mother to the apostle John (John 19:26–27). The Gospels mention four of his "brethren": James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude. It is hard to imagine why Jesus would have disregarded family ties and made this provision for his mother if these four were also her sons. Sources: http://www.catholic.com/library/brethren_of_the_lord.asp |
||||||
4 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | Morant61 | 136847 | ||
Greetings Al! Allow me to address some of your points my friend! 1) Brother or Cousin! Certainly the word 'adelphos' can have a broad meaning then simply two sons of the same father. However, just because a word can mean more than literal brothers does not mean that it ALWAYS means more than literal brothers. Sometimes, it simply means sons of the same father. :-) 2) Mary's Vow? Where does Scripture say that Mary took a vow of virginity? It doesn't say such a thing! Mary's words would make perfect sense from any virgin who had just been told that she was going to bear a child. "How can this be since I have not been with a man?" :-) 3) Jesus and the Temple! This is an argument from silence. The acount in Luke does not say that Jesus was the only child or not. 4) Only Older brothers could give advice? This is a major assumption, not a fact. 5) John and Mary! Again, another assumption is being made. We simply don't know anything about the family situation. Where were the brothers? Why weren't they at the cross? Perhaps they were estrangened from Mary at this time! We simply don't know. However, we can't build an entire believe based upon silence. There simply isn't any place in Scripture that says that Mary did not or could not have other children. Neither is there any reason for her not to have children after Jesus! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
5 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | junmeskie | 136943 | ||
Mary: Virgin and Ever Virgin All Christians believe that Mary was a virgin before and at the time of the birth of her son Jesus. Is 7:14 "The virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel." Mt 1:18-25 "Now this is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about. When his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found with child through the holy Spirit. Joseph her husband, since he was a righteous man, yet unwilling to expose her to shame, decided to divorce her quietly. Such was his intention when, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home. For it is through the holy Spirit that this child has been conceived in her. She will bear a son and you are to name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel," which means "God is with us." When Joseph awoke, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took his wife into his home. He had no relations with her until she bore a son, and he named him Jesus." Lk 1:26-27 "In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David, and the virgins name was Mary." Nicene Creed (325), Constantinopolitan Creed (381) ... Who for us men and because of our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became human. Roman Catholic Christians and many other Christians also believe that Mary remained a virgin for the rest of her life. Constant faith of the Church Great teachers of the Church from at least the fourth century spoke of Mary as having remained a virgin throughout her life: Athanasius (Alexandria, 293 - 373) Epiphanius (Palestine, 315? - 403) Jerome (Stridon, present day Slovenia, 345? - 419) Augustine (Numidia, now Algeria, 354 - 430) Cyril (Alexandria, 376 - 444) and others. Magisterium of the Church Council of Constantinople II (553 - 554) twice referred to Mary as "ever-virgin." Protestant Reformers The great protestant reformers affirmed their belief in Marys perpetual virginity: German reformer Martin Luthers (1483-1546) writings often address the subject of Mary: On the Divine Motherhood of Mary, he wrote In this work whereby she was made the Mother of God, so many and such great good things were given her that no one can grasp them. ... Not only was Mary the mother of him who is born [in Bethlehem], but of him who, before the world, was eternally born of the Father, from a Mother in time and at the same time man and God. (Weimers The Works of Luther, English translation by Pelikan, Concordia, St. Louis, v. 7, p. 572.) Luther, true to Catholic tradition, wrote on the Virginity of Mary: It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a virgin. ... Christ, we believe, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact. (Weimers The Works of Luther, English translation by Pelikan, Concordia, St. Louis, v.11, pp. 319-320; v. 6. p. 510.) The French reformer John Calvin (1509-1564) also held that Mary was the Mother of God It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honor. ... Elizabeth called Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God. (Calvini Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Braunschweig-Berlin, 1863-1900, v. 45, p. 348, 35.) On the perpetual virginity of Mary, "Calvin routinely brushes aside the difficulties sometimes raised from "first born" and "brothers of the Lord." (O Carroll, M., 1983, Theotokos, M Glazier, Inc.: Wilmington, DE, p. 94.) The Swiss reformer, Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531), wrote, on the divine motherhood of Mary: It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she should bring forth the Son of God. (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 6, I, p. 639.) On the perpetual virginity of Mary, Zwingli wrote, I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin. (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424.) In another place Zwingli professed CON'T please click or copy paste to your browser links below http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap080300.htm http://www.geocities.com/junmeskie/BVM.html Thanks God Bless Jun (Al) |
||||||
6 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | Morant61 | 136971 | ||
Greetings Al! What the early church fathers believed is interesting historically to me, but not authoritative. :-) There simply isn't any Scripture that says that Mary remained, or must remain, a virgin after the birth of Christ. Thanks for links though! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
7 | Half Brothers and Sisters of Jesus? | John 7:5 | justme | 136997 | ||
Moran61: Tim this is a fascinating dialogue. Junmeskie presents some information that is most interesting. Frankly I have never really heard the Catholic side of Mary being a Virgin her whole life. He does present a solid case for why he believes as her does, and that is unusual from anyone I have ever asked about this before. I respect his view even though I am of the typical Protestant understanding that Mary gave birth to sons and daughtes after Jesus Christ was born. To be sure we are left wondering how the family of Jesus as close as they were could reject Jesus. I prefer to hope that the were saved. That's as good a thought as any. There is much about the childhood and the family of Joseph and Mary that we are left to simply wonder about. Surely just because His half brothers and sisters are not mentioned about their service to Christ does leave one to draw speculations that are just a guess. Thanks Tim for your response, blessings. justme |
||||||