petra1:


God is not daft. He knows the difference between cousin and brother and sister.

Ubenedictus:


God is certainly not daft, nobody said he was...

but God used Semitic people - Jews in writing the Bible and for Jews, cousin, brothers, relatives and kinsmen can all be called "brothers" without distinction and that can be seen though out the Bible... the same thing will happen if God used Nigerians in writing the Bible... we too sometimes call relatives brothers.

in case you don't know the Bible didn't fall from heaven, God used men in writing it under the inspiration of the holy spirit and those men wrote according to their cultures and understanding. and it is normal that Jews call their kinsmen brothers, this appears severally in scriptures

JMAN05:

1cor 4:6 helps us with the principle of using what is written to guide us before we act. Whatever you hear from Jesus nor Paul shouldn't contradict what the written word told us, do you agree?

We can see how Jesus himself view oral tradition. We cannot stick to oral tradition as if Jesus never had those in his time who stuck to oral tradition. What did Jesus say about it?

Mark 7:13 Thus you make the word of God invalid by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like this

The pharisees believed that there were other commands given to Moses by God, which was not committed to writing. They thus held those tradition to be as inspired as the scriptures. Jesus never quoted any of those traditions as a proof of his teachings. He rather went along with what was written. Tell me, who would have known all the oral words God gave to Moses that was not committed to writing more than Jesus? But how many times do you see Jesus quoting oral tradition and stating, "well, this one is not written, but God told Moses all these"? Or " must all that God require be writing"? Did he even make a case for the oral tradition of his day? Was he not supporting his points from what was written? And even condemning the oral tradition of his day?

Don't you think we should imitated him by sticking to what is written. Whatever is important for us to serve Him and please Him fully is committed to writing. (Compare 2tim 3:16,17)

petra1:


its not true. the bible specified kinsmen when talking about them .I agree that the term brethren could be used in generic term for family,or church. making reference to collective body even church brethren , this includes male and female. but the context of use in mattthew 13 is blood brothers and sisters.

Matthew 13:55-56
55 Is not this the carpenter’s Son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not His brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
56 And do not all His[b] sisters[/b] live here among us? Where then did this Man get all this?

if the term brother and sister is used . its no longer compund or generic but specific . hope you get my point

Ubenedictus:


not really,

the term brother is also used specifically to refer to a relative who isn't a blood brother.

here is: gen 14:14-16
And when Abram heard that his brother was
taken captive. . .

petra1:


I agree with you on the use of the term there. You made a good point. But the context was very clear that its not in the same sense. concerning jesus. the Mary and her other children were specifically mentioned.

Matthew 13:55-56
55 Is not this the carpenter’s Son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not His brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
56 And do not all His sisters live here among us? Where then did this Man get all this?

if he had said 'HIS BRETHREN' well it could have passed 50- 50 for or against . but he mentioned the father mother sisters and brother. If they were not blood brothers and sisters the name of joseph and mary would not have been mentioned but rather the names of the real father and mother of those siblings would have taken the stage. Besides The bible never indicated that Joseph and Mary adopted relatives or share house with relatives

Ubenedictus:
my dear this thing you are doing is called shifting the goal post and it doesn't lead to a profitable discussion.

first you said God is not daft and must differentiate relatives and brothers, I replied that it is OK in Semitic culture to call kinsmen brothers,
then you shifted and said they are only called brothers in a general not a specific sense, I clearly showed you that they are called brothers even in a specific sense and now you are shifting to discuss context.

OK let us see context.
King James Bible
Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother
called Mary? and his BRETHREN James, and Joses, and
Simon, and Judas?

here is gen 14:14-16
And when Abram heard that his brother was
taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born
in his own house, three hundred and eighteen,
and pursued them unto Dan.
And he divided himself against them, he and
his servants, by night, and smote them, and
pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left
hand of Damascus.
And he brought back all the goods, and also
brought again his brother Lot,

in Matthew they said,is this not the Carpenter's son, is his mother not Mary, are his brothers not.... and in genesis it says Abraham s brother was taken captive, both are specific cases, the context doesn't state if they were blood brothers, or relatives and no Christian of repute ever imagined for the first 1700 years of Christianity that those two passages were about blood brothers.

if you feel confident in holding an opinion that crept into Christendom 350 years ago then I wish you the best just remember that the Bible also warns about teaching that creep in during the end times

petra1:



The people said , his father was Joseph ,his mother ,Mary ,his brothers james and co . His sisters bla bla . You are telling us they were not his direct brothers without any evidedenc or proof .

petra1:



The people said , his father was Joseph ,his mother ,Mary ,his brothers james and co . His sisters bla bla . You are telling us they were not his direct brothers without any evidedenc or proof .

MosesAlex:


My dear let us look at Mk 10:5 &11
Is this a case for what is written or correcting what is written? Here Jesus corrected what was written.

Mark 10: 5-6,11. But Jesus told them,“Moses wrote this commandment for you because your hearts were hard. However, from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female
Mk 10:11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.


Also look at Mt 5:21-43. In this case Christ was correcting what had been said, not necessarily what had been written.
Here Our Lord Jesus would say, you have heard it said that ....But I say to you..

Matthew 4:7 Jesus answered him( the devil), "It is also written.... This shows that the right interpretation of what is written is more paramount than quoting a section of the scriptures.

Now going back to 1 Cor 4:6 there are 3 comments I would make here. First of all Paul was writing to with respect to a particular problem and applied the scriptures using himself and Apollos as an example. Secondly, at the time of Paul writings, when his talks about scripture he was talking about the old testament. But now the Church has elevated Paul's letter to the status of scripture. So if we were to use your logic by extension, Paul writing should not be included as scripture but may be regarded as the tradition of men. Thirdly if I can listen when the Church says Paul writing is scripture and I should also be ready to to others things they said are from Jesus Christ.


I would update this response

MosesAlex:

Mark 15: 40 Acknowledges that the mother of James the less is also the mother of Joseph. Hence James and Joseph are brothers. So with this we can see that James the less, Jude and Joseph listed as brothers of Jesus in Matthew 13:55 have been identified

petra1:


So who is James the less or James the righteous . If he wasn’t a biological brother of christ how did he become an apostle

Ubenedictus:
are all apostles now biological brothers of Jesus? which kind question be that?

petra1:


If you don’t know the answer just leave it

Ubenedictus:
lol, you ask a silly question, the apostles were not biological brothers of Jesus so your question is non seqitur

petra1:


No vex .

James 1:20
20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.

Back to question : who was James ?

irynterri:
because he can't have a half brother and a blood line on earth. imagine if he had a brother who can get married and have kids, people would actually worship them and put them second to God that "blood line" would be termed holy from generation to generation

MosesAlex:

Some people decide to be Virgins for the sake of the Kingdom of God
Mt 19:12
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it

MosesAlex:

You seem to think everyone is interested in sex. The bible says people give up for the sake of the Kingdom of God.

in Rev14.4
These are they who were not defiled with women: for they are virgins. These follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were purchased from among men, the firstfruits to God and to the Lamb:
And in
Mt 19:22
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are somep eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it

MosesAlex:

Why didn't Jesus come through the seed of a man?

Glycolysis:

I know for sure these post is old....but I think you're very wrong here..

Mary don't have a blood line with Jesus Christ,but she is still called the mother of Jesus Christ.
Yea,it's have been proven physiologically, that the blood of a child don't make contacts with the mother during gestation ,if it does, the blood pressure will be too strong for the child own body system.
So ,why can't you also come to term that Jesus don't have blood mother on earth
If Jesus don't have half brothers ,which is not true,then Jesus don't have mother on earth going by your view.
Mary ovums was not involved in Christ formation,her blood was not involved,her genes were not involved but still she is called the mother of Jesus Christ...
Think !

Ubenedictus:
Who told u mary's ovum wasnt involved? the bible says mary concieved, she didnt do surrogacy, she concieved, that mean her ovum was involved. if mary's dna isnt there then JESUS isnt related to david as prophesied

Glycolysis:

She was conceived by Joseph ,right
Even Joseph was also regarded as the father of Jesus Christ,but you & I know that Joseph sperm has no play in the birth of Jesus Christ ....
Mary has no blood & genetic relationship with Jesus whatsoever .hence Jesus never referred to her as "mother ".

Funny how you now remembered that Jesus is a descendant of David who was born with the adamic nature, which Mary was also,but not born with the adamic nature (immaculate conception ) !
Who is deceiving who here ?

lordm:
How does is brothers secure your salvation

MosesAlex:
There is a common question, did Mary have any other children?

Many quote Mt 13:55 that list the brothers of Jesus.

See the identity of the brothers of Jesus so that so may you may understand that these are sons of Alpheus (Two of them are apostles).

The brothers of Jesus listed in Matthew 13: 55 are James and Joseph and Simon and Jude.

Gal 1.19 Identifies one of the apostles James as the brother of Jesus. (Note two of the twelve apostles bear James. One the son of Zebedee and the other son of Alpheus)

Luke 6:15: Says James father is Alpheus (not Joseph, ).
Luke 6:16: identifies the apostle Jude as the brother of James the less.
Mark 15: 40 Acknowledges that the mother of James the less is also the mother of Joseph. Hence James and Joseph are brothers. So with this we can see that James the less, Jude and Joseph listed as brothers of Jesus in Matthew 13:55 have been identified .
John 19:25 Identifies Mary of Cleopas(Alpheus) as the sister of Mary the mother of Jesus.( Note Cleopas is the Greek version of the Aramaic name Alpheus).
Hence the brothers are simply his relatives. Since their Mother is a sister to Mary the Mother of Jesus

Hundredfold4lif:



Luke 2:7 KJV-
"And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn."

Hundredfold4lif:



Luke 2:7 KJV-
"And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn."

Glycolysis:

The same way Jesus did not come to the world through the genetic components of Mary !
Jesus don't have the genes of Mary,the ovums of Mary was not involved in Jesus formation,the same way her blood in her circulatory system did not make contact with that of Jesus..
Yea,the circulatory system of the mother & that of child don't come in contact during foetal development,if it does the blood pressure will be too high for that baby,& could lead to complications.
Hence,the process of diffusion & osmosis in necessary for the child during development..
The key relationship between the child & the mother is the exchange of nutrients from the mother to the child & waste products from the child to the mother through the placenta with the aid of the umbilical cord from the child....

From the above,if we are to go with you views,then Jesus don't even have a mother on earth !
And that is true...
Jesus NEVER referred to Mary as his mother because Jesus don't have any gene of Mary in him ..
Jesus understood these...not even the blood of Mary flows in Him.

UNLESS YOU & I WILL GO TO A TOPIC THAT YOU WILL NOT BE COMFORTABLE WITH & THAT BLEW UP THE WHOLE BELIEVE YOU EVER KNEW ABOUT MARY & THE LORD JESUS CHRIST !

Ubenedictus:
I dont know if u lack understanding, the bible is clear, mary concieved with the power of the spirit, for a woman to concieve it means her genetic material is there. Jesus has human nature, he has david bloodline, if not then he didnt redeem us and he is NOT the messiah.

Glycolysis:

No bible verse / reference recorded that Mary decided to be a virgin for the rest of her life for the kingdom of God.
If she wanted,as you had claimed,she would be married to Joseph in the first place...

MosesAlex:

You shall know the truth and it shall set you free