Jesus's "half-siblings"

[simplefaith]

Actually, the evidence in the opening post that proves Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's cousins doesn't in and of it itself prove the perpetual virginity of Jesus's Mother. Besides, defending the perpetual virginity of Mary is not my hidden agenda in this thread. The purpose of this thread was to provide scriptural and historical facts that disprove the false teaching that Joseph, Simon, James, and Judas (Jude/Thaddeus) were Jesus's half-siblings. @AlexB23 and others recognize the importance of truth, or accuracy, in general, especially about the life of Jesus which is always a good thing.

People can make the bible say whatever they want it to say. Differing translations, turning to the ancient manuscripts, greek, aramaic or hebrew etc.

 

[Soulx3]

People can make the bible say whatever they want it to say. Differing translations, turning to the ancient manuscripts, greek, aramaic or hebrew etc.

So, your understanding of this matter could be wrong, willfully or not?

Jesus’ brothers said to him, “Leave Galilee and go to Judea, so that your disciples there may see the works you do. 4 No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.” 5 For even his own brothers did not believe in him. John7:3-5niv

What evidence do you have to show the definition "kinsman, or relative” of the Koine Greek word "ἀδελφοί" (adelphoi) applies in Jn. 7:3-5? Which family members were these brothers of Jesus, and what is your evidence to support this?

My answer: In Jn. 7:3-4, Jesus's brothers speaking were two of His four cousins, Joseph and Simon of Alphaeus, who at that time were unbelievers, though they later came to believe. (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. IV, ch. 476, pp. 249-253)

The bible tells us husband and wife should consumate the marriage and not withold such from each other

Actually, in Israel, also at the time of Joseph and Mary, a marriage consisted of two phases: the engagement and the wedding. The rite of the engagement, by which the marriage was essentially established, implied that the young couple should be blessed by a priest while holding each other's right hand; a legal contract was made in regard to property and rights. During this first phase they did not live together. The wedding was the solemn accomplishment of the contract and the couple began to live together. This shows sexual intercourse wasn't what consummated a marriage.

Therefore, in Matt. 1:18 where we read, "When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child by the Holy Ghost," the meaning is Mary conceived Jesus before Her and Joseph began to live together, not before Her and Joseph began to have sexual intercourse, and thus this verse shouldn't be used as proof they had or didn't have sexual relations during their marriage. However, other sources show they mutually decided to be chaste throughout their marriage for God.

 

[simplefaith]

What evidence do you have to show the definition "kinsman, or relative” of the Koine Greek word "ἀδελφοί" (adelphoi) applies in Jn. 7:3-5? Which family members were these brothers of Jesus, and what is your evidence to support this?

My answer: In Jn. 7:3-4, Jesus's brothers speaking were two of His four cousins, Joseph and Simon of Alphaeus, who at that time were unbelievers, though they later came to believe. (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. IV, ch. 476, pp. 249-253)



Actually, in Israel, also at the time of Joseph and Mary, a marriage consisted of two phases: the engagement and the wedding. The rite of the engagement, by which the marriage was essentially established, implied that the young couple should be blessed by a priest while holding each other's right hand; a legal contract was made in regard to property and rights. During this first phase they did not live together. The wedding was the solemn accomplishment of the contract and the couple began to live together. This shows sexual intercourse wasn't what consummated a marriage.

Therefore, in Matt. 1:18 where we read, "When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child by the Holy Ghost" the meaning is Mary conceived Jesus before Her and Joseph began to live together, not before Her and Joseph began to have sexual intercourse. Therefore, Matt. 1:18 can't be used as proof they had or didn't have sexual relations during their marriage. However, other sources show they mutually decided to be chaste throughout their marriage for God.

I view the bible simply, never read of the greek, aramaic or hebrew. I don't think it has really helped people who have. We can add concordances such as strongs to that too

 

[Soulx3]

Thank you. Sorry about being quick to judge, when I responded to you yesterday. This information is useful from a theological and genealogical perspective.

I didn't think you were quick to judge, but I appreciate it. Your appreciation of this topic from a theological and genealogical perspective is a breath of fresh air.

So, what got you into theology?

I think it's a blend of different factors, such as being Catholic, having a natural interest in theology, as well as learning more about God and the world through reading the writings of certain visionaries, mainly Maria Valtorta. How about you?

 

[Soulx3]

I view the bible simply, never read of the greek, aramaic or hebrew. I don't think it has really helped people who have. We can add concordances such as strongs to that too

I currently can't read or write Koine Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew. However, what I've started to do more on a forum when referencing Scripture is provide the verse in the original language, along with that verse's closest English translation, such as the Douay–Rheims, for example.

The reason I think it's important to do that is because, for example, in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3, the Koine Greek word "ἀδελφοί" (adelphoi) is used, its English transliteration being "brothers", but many people make the mistake of reading Scripture simply by applying a modern-day definition to its ancient equivalent word that doesn't share the same definitions. Therefore, when negligence like that happens, that's when misinterpretations or baseless assumptions occur, etc.

 

[simplefaith]

I currently can't read or write Koine Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew. However, what I've started to do more on a forum when referencing Scripture is provide the verse in the original language, along with that verse's closest English translation, such as the Douay–Rheims, for example.

The reason I think it's important to do that is because, for example, in Matt. 13:55/Mk. 6:3, the Koine Greek word "ἀδελφοί" (adelphoi) is used, its English transliteration being "brothers", but many people make the mistake of reading Scripture simply by applying a modern-day definition to its ancient equivalent word that doesn't share the same definitions. Therefore, when negligence like that happens, that's when misinterpretations or baseless assumptions occur, etc.

I discuss the reputable english translations of the bible. No offence to you, but I am not interested in going outside of that. They are reputable. The scholars and theologians who translated them are I am sure perfectly credible people to do it. To go to greek words or elsewhere, suggests the english translations are not reliable and will lead people into error. In any case, this subject has little interest to me. I only intended to write a brief comment to someone on this thread.
People in general will seek out translations, or greek words for instance, and theologise in order to defend their denominational belief. It happens all the time. You are a catholic, so I understand what you are doing here, though you may say you are not.
You need to discuss anyway with the ''theologically minded'' For me, a person best understands the bible if they simply get on their knees and asks God to guide them into truth through the only one who can lead them into spiritual truth, the Holy Spirit. And I am very confident the Holy Spirit does not rely on anyone understanding greek words to lead them into the truth he wants them to know

 

[AlexB23]

I didn't think you were quick to judge, but I appreciate it. Your appreciation of this topic from a theological and genealogical perspective is a breath of fresh air.



I think it's a blend of different factors, such as being Catholic, having a natural interest in theology, as well as learning more about God and the world through reading the writings of certain visionaries, mainly Maria Valtorta. How about you?

It is cool that you studied the visionaries. I am not much into theology, but with the help of AI, I can understand it more. What a time to live in nowadays. The AI does make my laptop run hot when I ask it questions, as it is run locally on my laptop's motherboard, and not some server hundreds of miles away.

 

[Soulx3]

You need to discuss anyway with the ''theologically minded''. For me, a person best understands the bible if they simply get on their knees and asks God to guide them into truth through the only one who can lead them into spiritual truth, the Holy Spirit. And I am very confident the Holy Spirit does not rely on anyone understanding greek words to lead them into the truth he wants them to know

Theology is not the study of Greek words, but rather the study of God and His relation to the world. For someone who seems to take pride in being anti-theological, you immerse yourself in theology everyday being Christian.

I discuss the reputable english translations of the bible. No offence to you, but I am not interested in going outside of that.

What do you mean by "reputable?" Because based on what you just said, it appears "reputable" to you means "What my biases have already told me is right."

 

[simplefaith]

Theology is not the study of Greek words, but rather the study of God and His relation to the world. For someone who seems to take pride in being anti-theological, you immerse yourself in theology everyday being Christian.



What do you mean by "reputable?" Because based on what you just said, it appears "reputable" to you means "What my biases have already told me is right?"

Some rely on their natural minds to learn, and some do not. Those who revel in learning through the academic mind are different from those who totally rely on the Holy Spirit to learn. In relation to ''reputable translations'' Who better understands the greek? People on the internet, or the translators of the bible into english, the compilers of NIV for example?
On websites such as these, I often see people arguing as to the correct understanding of the greek.

 

[Soulx3]

Some rely on their natural minds to learn, and some do not. Those who revel in learning through the academic mind are different from those who totally rely on the Holy Spirit to learn. In relation to ''reputable translations'' Who better understands the greek? People on the internet, or the translators of the bible into english, the compilers of NIV for example? On websites such as these, I often see people arguing as to the correct understanding of the greek.

Those translators you rely upon have academic backgrounds. So, again, it's your biases that allow you to choose what is and what is not "reputable" and "academic."

 

[simplefaith]

Those translators you rely upon have academic backgrounds. So, again, it's your biases that allow you to choose what is and what is not "reputable" and "academic."

No, I rely on the Holy Spirit ultimately, do you?
I know this is a bit off topic, but do you agree with the following ?

I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he Luke7:28

 

[Soulx3]

No, I rely on the Holy Spirit ultimately, do you?

Why do you feign respect for me by asking that as if you haven't already accused me of not? Also, explain what you mean by you rely on translators with academic backgrounds and rely on the Holy Spirit ultimately at the same time?

...do you agree with the following?

I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he Luke7:28

I agree with what Jesus meant by those words. Your understanding of what Jesus meant by them may or may not be correct.

 

[simplefaith]

Why do you feign respect for me by asking that as if you haven't already accused me of not? Also, explain what you mean by you rely on translators with academic backgrounds and rely on the Holy Spirit ultimately at the same time?



I agree with what Jesus meant by those words. Your understanding of what Jesus meant by them may or may not be correct.

The words are very plainly written. I do not need to theologise to overturn them to fit in with personal, or denominational beliefs

 

[Soulx3]

The words are very plainly written. I do not need to theologise to overturn them to fit in with personal, or denominational beliefs

But you do need translators who had academic backgrounds, otherwise it'd be words not very plainly written, as you don't know how to read the New Testament in its original language: Koine Greek. What do you believe Jesus meant by those words in Lk. 7:28?

 

[simplefaith]

But you did need translators who had academic backgrounds, otherwise it'd be words "not very plainly written," as you can't read Koine Greek. What do you believe Jesus meant by those words in Lk. 7:28?

Just what he stated

 

[Soulx3]

Just what he stated

What did He mean by what He stated?

 

[simplefaith]

What did He mean by what He stated?

He meant what he stated. Read it again.

 

[simplefaith]

What did He mean by what He stated?

Let's try another one. I will assume you believe no one can be in a saved state until they have been baptised in water. Therefore, you believe people can receive the Holy Spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and speak in tongues whilst in an unsaved state? Acts ch 10

 

[Soulx3]

He meant what he stated.

If you think you understand what Jesus meant in Lk. 7:28, then explain why of those born of women there is no one greater than John, and name those who are the least in the kingdom of God that are greater than John.

 

[simplefaith]

If you think you understand what Jesus meant in Lk. 7:28, then explain why of those born of women there is no one greater than John, and name those who are the least in the kingdom of God that are greater than John.

Im not going to go down rabbit holes in order for you to try and justify your denominational thinking, by trying to overturn the plain words of Christ