[classyT]

Galatians 1:19 (New King James Version)
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.

This clearly states that James, the Lord's brother, is one of the Apostles but there are only Twelve Apostles of which two were called James.

Matthew 10:2-4
2These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; 3Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; 4Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

So Jesus' father must have been either Zebedee or Alphaeus! And all this time I thought that Joseph married Mary and was Jesus' earthly father. How did I ever get that wrong!

Paul wasn't talking about James the son of Zebedee! He was clear... it was James the Lord's brother. There were other APOSTLE"S... Paul was an apostle... gosh I didn't see him in that list in Mathew. Now how did I ever miss THAT? See what I mean.. it is in BLACK and WHITE and you all still explain it away.

450donn,

You are right.. I said I was done and then I went right back and argued this.. UGH. Will I ever learn?

[elscarta]

Apostle:
One of the twelve disciples of Christ, specially chosen as his companions and witnesses, and sent forth to preach the gospel. [1913 Webster]

Matthew, Mark and Luke wrote their gospels years later. They knew how many apostles there were.

If as you try to claim that there were more that 12 apostles do you suppose Matthew(Matthew 10:2), Mark(Mark 3:14) and Luke(Luke 6:13) would have used the number 12? I think not!

Matthew was a tax collector, would he make such a glaring error in his count of the apostles? In my opinion

[Wondergirl]

There were twelve disciples and more than twelve apostles. Paul was one of the apostles.

From the online Merriam-Webster dictionary --

Main Entry: apos·tle
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈpä-səl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Old English; Anglo-French apostle & Old English apostol, both from Late Latin apostolus, from Greek apostolos, from apostellein to send away, from apo- + stellein to send
Date: before 12th century

1 : one sent on a mission: as a : one of an authoritative New Testament group sent out to preach the gospel and made up especially of Christ's 12 original disciples and Paul b : the first prominent Christian missionary to a region or group

[classyT]

There were twelve disciples and more than twelve apostles. Paul was one of the apostles.

from the online Merriam-Webster dictionary --

Main Entry: apos·tle
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈpä-səl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Old English; Anglo-French apostle & Old English apostol, both from Late Latin apostolus, from Greek apostolos, from apostellein to send away, from apo- + stellein to send
Date: before 12th century

1 : one sent on a mission: as a : one of an authoritative New Testament group sent out to preach the gospel and made up especially of Christ's 12 original disciples and Paul b : the first prominent Christian missionary to a region or group

Wondergirl,

:) excellent. Paul gets the shaft every time... and now apparently James the Lord's bro does too!

[JoeT777]

Funny Brothers

1. St. Peter, ST. Andrew, St. Simon (called ‘Zelotes’) and St. Philip (4 Apostles):

St. Peter (a.k.a. Simon, or Cephas) and Andrew were siblings, sons of Jona (Johannes). Philip on the other hand came from the same town but not related by his parents; there may have been some distant family relationship. We know that these are not siblings of Jesus.

2. St. James & St. John Zebedee(2 Apostles):

St. James the Greater and St. John — sons of Zebedee and Salome, Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1 St. John knows the high-priest (John 18:16) and is given the care of Mother of Jesus John 19:27.

St. James the Greater was at the Transfiguration Mark 9:1; Matthew 17:1; Luke 9:28, and the Agony in Gethsemani , Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:33. Martyred around 44 A.D. Acts 12:1-2.

Their mother was Salome the daughter of the high priest and the pious women who ministered to and ministered Christ (cf. Matthew 27:55, sq.; Mark 15:40; 16:1; Luke 8:2 sq.; 23:55-24:1). It’s Salome that wanted her sons to sit on the right hand of Christ’s throne. (Matthew 20:21).
None of these can be siblings of Jesus. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. James the Greater

3. Matthew , Jude and James The Less (3 Apostles):

Matthew and James, the sons of Alpheus — Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13. James the Less is the one referred to as ‘brother of the Lord’ and Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem. This can be shown in Gal 1:19 where Paul goes to Jerusalem to see Peter. Peter is not available, he only saw the Bishop of Jerusalem, James the ‘Brother of the Lord’. This James can’t be both the sibling of Jesus and the son of Alpheus now can he?

Matthew, the son of Alpheus; Mark 2:14; Matthew 9:9 a Galilean who collected taxes at Capharnaum for Herod Antipas. These two are not siblings of Jesus.

Jude (a.k.a. Thaddeus ) — Jude 1:1. "Brother of James" called so because his brother James was better known than himself in the primitive Church. Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13. Being the brother of James Jude can’t be the sibling of Jesus.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Matthew CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. James the Less

4. James and Joseph (or Joses):

James, Joseph (or Joses) sons of Cleopas — Mark 15:40; Matthew 27:56 the sons of Cleophas or Clopas (John 19:25). "Maria Cleophæ" is generally translated "Mary the wife of Cleophas." Consequently we can conclude that these two were not siblings of Jesus. SJ Prat, in his book Jesus Christ, suggests that this Mary is the second wife of Cleophas CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Brethren of the Lord

5. ST. Bartholomew, St. Thomas (2 Apostles):

St. Bartholomew many think he can be identified as Nathaniel the friend of Philip, John 1:43-51; Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14. St. Thomas we know very little outside the Scriptures. We do know that he is the ‘show me’ Saint. These two Apostles are unrelated to Jesus. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Bartholomew CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Nathanael

6. Judas Iscariot (1 Apostle):

Finally, we have Judas, the Apostle that betrayed our Lord. He was the only Apostle that wasn’t from Galilee. Being from the town of ‘Kerioth’ Judas can’t be a sibling of Jesus. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Judas Iscariot

So, we have 14 men all of whom are called ‘brothers of the Lord’ i.e. the special way that the twelve were referred to, but none of them are siblings of Jesus. More than a few times the term ‘brethren of the Lord’ was used to describe the Twelve Apostles.

With all these, somewhat complicated, family connections the absence of somebody being called the “son(s) of Mary of Joseph” is now very conspicuous. It takes a long stretch of the imagination to create siblings of Christ – or an ulterior motive.

“For after all there is no getting away from a fact, and if Jesus had brothers and sisters whose names were known at Nazareth, on what grounds does the Church pay homage to Mary as a virgin?... It will readily be admitted that if anybody in the primitive Church had any chance of passing as the brother of Jesus it was James, called expressly by St. Paul 'the brother of the Lord.' [Galatians i.19.] Now a James heads the list at Nazareth; it is therefore the same James. He is the brother of Joses, and the evangelists know very well who is their mother - a Mary who is certainly not Mary the Mother of Jesus. [Mark xv.40; Matthew xxvii.56.] She was known as 'the mother of James and Joses.' [Joses (Jose) or Joseph, according as it was pronounced.](sic)… If these two are not the children of Mary the Mother of Jesus, then by what right can we ascribe to her Jude and Simon who follow in the list of the brethren of Jesus? Moreover, a very ancient tradition with which we may here supplement the gospels regards Simon, under the form Simeon, as a cousin of Our Lord. [Given by Hegesippus, a historian of the second century, quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., IV, xxii, 4.] … The whole group simply designates relations [i Corinthians ix.5.], and it is ridiculous to imagine that there were brothers or sisters who remain unknown, if those whom the people of Nazareth mention as the best known were merely cousins.” The Gospel of Jesus Christ. P M-J Lagrange OP. Chapter 3: The Ministry in Galilee. Part VI: Miracles. Encounters with troublesome dispositions. Père M.-J. Lagrange, O.P, The Gospel of Jesus Christ, First published by Burns Oates & Washbourne Ltd 1938

So, by some accounts on this forum we would have at least James the less, James the little, Joses , Jude and Simon, and Jesus as male siblings along with unnamed sisters; “brothers and sisters all together make too large a number.” (Ibid). The Blessed Mary simply couldn’t have born 14+ children.

Oh yeah, based on this same literal reading of the Epistles, we’d need to add St. Paul as 'the brother of the Lord' along with others referred to in Scripture as ‘brother’ of Jesus. St. Paul must be the poor brother that "always gets the shaft everytime."

JoeT

[450donn]

In light of my continuing desire to further my walk with Jesus I picked up a book the other day titled “the Search for The twelve Apostles” by William Mcbirnie. While rather deep and clearly written by and for academics I did find it quite interesting in light of the recent discussions about Mary. On page 141 and I quote “The early heresy of Docetism attempted to convince Christians that all sexual intercourse was evil. The later elevation of Mary to the status of demigoddess forced some of those who took this view to invent out of whole cloth the notion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were perhaps the children of Joseph by a previous marriage. Thus James the Lord becomes James the half brother. However at this point a further contradiction inserts itself. How could James the less be the son of Joseph and also the son of Alphaeus? The answer which apparently has satisfied most of the scholars of the oldest branches of Christianity is to make James the less, a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This reduces James the less to a cousin of Jesus rather than a half brother. One cannot but sympathize with the defense of this point of view under the pressure they were under to preserve the doctrine of perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus. But their solution is simply impossible. The purpose of names is to distinguish between children. With the great number of names available to the ancients it would be unlikely that there were tow Marys in the same family. We may be safe, therefore in assuming that James the brother of Jesus was indeed that.”

[paraclete]

In light of my continuing desire to further my walk with Jesus I picked up a book the other day titled “the Search for The twelve Apostles” by William Mcbirnie. While rather deep and clearly written by and for academics I did find it quite interesting in light of the recent discussions about Mary. On page 141 and I quote “The early heresy of Docetism attempted to convince Christians that all sexual intercourse was evil. The later elevation of Mary to the status of demigoddess forced some of those who took this view to invent out of whole cloth the notion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were perhaps the children of Joseph by a previous marriage. Thus James the Lord becomes James the half brother. However at this point a further contradiction inserts itself. How could James the less be the son of Joseph and also the son of Alphaeus? The answer which apparently has satisfied most of the scholars of the oldest branches of Christianity is to make James the less, a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This reduces James the less to a cousin of Jesus rather than a half brother. One cannot but sympathize with the defense of this point of view under the pressure they were under to preserve the doctrine of perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus. But their solution is simply impossible. The purpose of names is to distinguish between children. With the great number of names available to the ancients it would be unlikely that there were tow Marys in the same family. We may be safe, therefore in assuming that James the brother of Jesus was indeed that.”

Don great research but you know you are wasting your time, those tied into the dogma of Mary are not going to believe she had a normal married life with Joseph and bore other children

[JoeT777]

In light of my continuing desire to further my walk with Jesus I picked up a book the other day titled “The Search for The twelve Apostles” by William Mcbirnie

I don’t usually contradict an author, especially when I can’t locate any copy to see under what context the quote is made. However, in this case, since the quote is sufficiently long to infer the context, I can direct my comments at the specific points made within the body quoted.

On page 141 and I quote “The early heresy of Docetism attempted to convince Christians that all sexual intercourse was evil.

Docetae (Greek Doketai) is a heretical sect that started around the same time as the Apostles were teaching by word given witness through there teachings (you might think of this as laying the foundation of Holy Tradition). In the proper sense of the word “heresy”, Docetism isn’t quite Christian heresy. It seems that the doctrines came from outside the Church and is the forerunner of Gnosticism. In this form of heresy ‘salvation’ is transcending the flesh and becoming pure spirit, as pure as the ‘supreme spirit’. This isn’t God, but a supper or 1st among all spirits. In conforming to Christian parlance they ran into difficulty with “the Word was made flesh”. Therefore Christ is made by Æon (the supreme spirit) and made a second called Æons. Tertullian describes this sect better than I ever could:

To all these, however, there opposed himself an Æon who name is Ialdabaoth. He had been conceived by the permixture of a second Æon with inferior Æons; and afterwards, when he had been desirous of forcing his way into the higher regions, had been disabled by the permixture of the gravity of matter with himself to arrive at the higher regions; had been left in the midst, and had extended himself to his full dimensions, and thus had made the sky. Ialdabaoth, however, had descended lower, and had made him seven sons, and had shut from their view the upper regions by self-distension, in order that, since (these) angels could not know what was above, they might think him the sole God. These inferior Virtues and angels, therefore, had made man; and, because he had been originated by weaker and mediocre powers, he lay crawling, worm-like. That Æon, however, out of which Ialdaboath had proceeded, moved to the heart with envy, had injected into man as he lay a certain spark; excited whereby, he was through prudence to grow wise, and be able to understand the things above. Tertullian, Against All Heresies, 2 CHURCH FATHERS: Against All Heresies (Tertullian)

All of which is to say that Docetism was not a part of the early orthodoxy of the Catholic Church. Starting with Pope Hyginus (137 A.D.) the Church moved against this heresy, as well as the heresies Docetism fostered. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Docetae

The later elevation of Mary to the status of demigoddess forced some of those who took this view to invent out of whole cloth the notion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were perhaps the children of Joseph by a previous marriage. Thus James the Lord becomes James the half brother. However at this point a further contradiction inserts itself. How could James the less be the son of Joseph and also the son of Alphaeus?

While I do agree we have very little to suggest that at least one of the James’s was a step child of Mary. There does exist however pseudographic works that might suggest that Joseph had children by a former wife, but we cannot put any reliance on them. As you’re fond of saying, ‘bible-only’ has the answers. And conspicuously absent from Scripture is the any mention of a previous marriage of any women with Joseph. Further, we do not read anywhere in Scripture the James the son of ‘some woman’ of Joseph. Furthermore, it is more likely, as I’ve discussed in earlier posts, that Joseph lived an ascetic life style prior to the betrothal of Mary to Joseph.

The real point however, is that Mr. William McBirnie is attributing the perverted beliefs of heretics to the orthodoxy of the Church. The Church has always held that Mary was ever Virgin and the Mother of God. The Church has never held the Blessed Virgin Mary as a ‘demigoddess’ or any other type of goddess.

The answer which apparently has satisfied most of the scholars of the oldest branches of Christianity is to make James the less, a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This reduces James the less to a cousin of Jesus rather than a half brother. One cannot but sympathize with the defense of this point of view under the pressure they were under to preserve the doctrine of perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus. But their solution is simply impossible. The purpose of names is to distinguish between children. With the great number of names available to the ancients it would be unlikely that there were tow Marys in the same family. We may be safe, therefore in assuming that James the brother of Jesus was indeed that.”

The James of Mark 15:40 is called James the little (where he is called ò mikros "the little", not the "less). There is no half brothers or sisters of Jesus. And if there were, there would need to be a gaggle of them, which would mean that Joseph was indeed very prolific and probably Mary would have been the fourth or fifth wife (Joseph would have had to go through wives as fast as a jack rabbit. It's funny how far afield you’re fanciful imagination can carry you so that you can deny God's miracles in the immaculate Mary. That seems a bit too farfetched for any rational mind. Furthermore, McBirnie merely pronounces his biased assumption without bringing forth any evidence to that effect. It would be very dangerous to accept James as the ‘brother of Jesus as Mr. William McBirnie would suggest. I would suggest that he start writing Tim LaHay type end of the world fiction, his books might be a bit more factual.


JoeT

[450donn]

Joe, you might want to reread the quote. He clearly states what you took a long time to say. He also says that this "The later elevation of Mary to the status of demigoddess forced some of those who took this view to invent out of whole cloth the notion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were perhaps the children of Joseph by a previous marriage."
So he is indicating that later religionsthe RCC in an attempt to prove this false teaching are the ones that have twisted the truth into what he says near the end of the quote.Thus James the Lord becomes James the half brother
But there is no point arguing with you as your church does not allow you to accept the truth as found in the bible does it?

[JoeT777]

Joe, you might want to reread the quote. He clearly states what you took a long time to say. He also says that this "The later elevation of Mary to the status of demigoddess forced some of those who took this view to invent out of whole cloth the notion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were perhaps the children of Joseph by a previous marriage."
So he is indicating that later religionsthe RCC in an attempt to prove this false teaching are the ones that have twisted the truth into what he says near the end of the quote.Thus James the Lord becomes James the half brother
But there is no point arguing with you as your church does not allow you to accept the truth as found in the bible does it?

There are very few of the early Catholic Fathers that took James's as a half brother. In fact if you take the time to read my earlier post, you'll see that all the James's can be accounted for with none of them left to play the role of 'James the half brother'.

JoeT

[Maggie 3]

The way I see it James the son of Joseph and Mary and half brother
Of Jesus. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirt and James and his
Brothers and sisters were of Joseph seed. As we read James, not only
Was he related to the Living Word, but he was a man greatly given to the written Word. James simply considers himself a servant and known
As a man of tremendous humility.

Blessings, Maggie 3

[classyT]

In light of my continuing desire to further my walk with Jesus I picked up a book the other day titled “the Search for The twelve Apostles” by William Mcbirnie. While rather deep and clearly written by and for academics I did find it quite interesting in light of the recent discussions about Mary. On page 141 and I quote “The early heresy of Docetism attempted to convince Christians that all sexual intercourse was evil. The later elevation of Mary to the status of demigoddess forced some of those who took this view to invent out of whole cloth the notion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were perhaps the children of Joseph by a previous marriage. Thus James the Lord becomes James the half brother. However at this point a further contradiction inserts itself. How could James the less be the son of Joseph and also the son of Alphaeus? The answer which apparently has satisfied most of the scholars of the oldest branches of Christianity is to make James the less, a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This reduces James the less to a cousin of Jesus rather than a half brother. One cannot but sympathize with the defense of this point of view under the pressure they were under to preserve the doctrine of perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus. But their solution is simply impossible. The purpose of names is to distinguish between children. With the great number of names available to the ancients it would be unlikely that there were tow Marys in the same family. We may be safe, therefore in assuming that James the brother of Jesus was indeed that.”

I never thought otherwise. I think the bible is crystal clear but I guess we humans read what we want to... there are those that twist stuff if it doesn't fit their theology. Personally I don't have a stake in this. If the Lord Jesus was Mary's only child... then so be it. I don't care one way or the other. But that isn't what the Bible records.

[galveston]

All of this about Mary never having other children is unrelated to the OP.

Has the subject been changed because the dogma of the Immaculate Conception cannot be supported by any rational or scriptural process?

[JoeCanada76]

All of this about Mary never having other children is unrelated to the OP.

Has the subject been changed because the dogma of the Immaculate Conception cannot be supported by any rational or scriptural process?

Actually it does have everything to do with the op. The subject did not change. It was about Mary being sinless or not. All of it has to do with the op and the questions about Mary.

[galveston]

Actually it does have everything to do with the op. The subject did not change. It was about Mary being sinless or not. All of it has to do with the op and the questions about Mary.

Does that mean you consider marital sex as sinful?

[JoeCanada76]

Does that mean you consider marital sex as sinful?

Never said that.

[galveston]

So, then, if Mary did have children by Joseph, that does not diminish her position or respect in the least.

[galveston]

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the writing of the Bible?

Matt 1:25
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. (KJV)

Do you think the Holy Spirit knows how to express Himself? Why then, did He not stop after the word "NOT"?

Instead we find the Holy Spirit continuing on with "till she had brought forth her firstborn son:"

The meaning of this should be clear to anyone who reads it with an open mind.

[Fr_Chuck]

Closed, way off track and at least one poster is starting to post untrue catholic info in their catholic hate rants