Questions Answered: "Brothers and Sisters of Jesus"

In the comments section of an article on Catholic365 a Protestant poster said that Mary could not be a perpetual virgin because Jesus had brothers and sisters. The reasoning behind this is a word study the poster did on the Greek word adelphos and said that the primary way to translate adelphos is as a biological brother. A commentary he cited even admits that adelphos can be used figuratively as the primary way to translate the word. Many other commentaries say virtually the same thing.

Now some traditions hold that Joseph was a widower and had other children. I am not eliminating this possibility even though I find it unlikely, and as explained from below it cannot be found in the Bible, but each of the verses could be answered simply by saying that yes they are his brothers from Joseph’s seed.

Does the Bible ever say that anyone other than Jesus was Mary’s son or daughter?

No. The Bible only says that Jesus was the son of Mary, never once does it say that Mary had other children. Nor does it say that Joseph had other children. Genealogy played a huge role in the East in the first century and even does so today. One would think that with the importance placed in heritage that Mary and Joseph would be announced as someone’s parent other than Jesus, if they truly were.

What about in Matthew 1:25 where word “till” is used. Doesn’t this connote the end of Mary’s virginity?

Even today we use the word “til” or “until” to show a continuance of an action. For instance, I have said many times that I will pray for someone until (or ‘til) their conversion to the Catholic Faith. Does this mean I will stop praying for them once they find the Truth and come to the Catholic Faith? Absolutely not! This shows a continuance of action. In James Strong’s A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (a non-Catholic reference) Mr. Strong says “ωςheos, heh´-oce; of uncert. affin.; a conj., prep. and adv. of continuance, until (of time and place):—even (until, unto), (as) far (as), how long, (un-) til (-l), (hither-, un-, up) to, while (-s).^” Heos simply means up to that point, it does not connote that it did not end but it also does not connote that it continued. We would need more to infer that Mary and Joseph had relations and there is nothing following this verse that does.

Again in Matthew 1:25 the term “Firstborn” seems to connote that there would be more siblings born thereafter, is this true?

No, and we have precedent from the Bible to show. Exodus 13:1-2, “The Lord said to Moses, “Consecrate to me all the first-born; whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine.”” It is simply a title given for being the first born child of the mother. There is no Biblical precedence that shows a necessity that there be a second child for this title to be given.

Does the Bible ever say that Jesus had brothers or sisters?

Yes but it is important to note that the term brother can mean more than a uterine brother as the charge of Mary having additional children supposes. Again I will use James Strong’s book as my reference tool here. Mr. Strong explains that the word (δελφ?ς/adelphos) can be literal or figurative as the first definition “from 1 (as a connective particle) and δελφ?ς delphus (the womb); a brother (lit. or fig.) near or remote [much like 1]:—brother.” δελφ adelphe, sister, carries a similar connotation and because of this we will concentrate on the brothers as the same meaning of sisters can be inferred from brothers.

But doesn’t the Greek demand that we use adelphos to mean uterine brothers?

Quite possibly in other circumstances but there seems to be many extenuating circumstances in the Bible that show us that that rendering would not do justice to Scripture. For instance, Genesis 14:14, in the Septuagint, uses adelphos to describe Abram’s relationship to Lot. As we see in Genesis 11:27, Lot is actually Abram’s nephew since Haran was Abram’s youngest brother.

The Septuagint was the primary Scripture used by the apostles and Jesus. It is important then to show the continuity between the Septuagint and the New Testament which gives us much more reliability than using the multiple different languages of the Old Testament (Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic). Not to mention that since most of the writers of the New Testament were primarily Hebrew speakers, there is nothing to suggest that they used proper syntax when writing under the inspiration of The Holy Spirit, in fact, just the opposite occurred.

The best explanation, which is usually the correct one, is that we have to be open to more than just the primary usage of the word adelphos since we know it to be used differently in Scripture than it may be in the contemporary language as well as a second language of the writers. We can do all the research we want on a word but if we are not taking it in context we will lose the meaning of the same word due to preconceived notions.

What about Jesus’ brother James the apostle that Paul says “I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother” in Galatians 1:18-19?

It would make sense that Jesus would elevate his family members to positions of authority and He did but not a brother of His. When we search the lists of the apostles we find two James’. Mark 3:16-3:19 tells us who their fathers were:

Simon whom he surnamed Peter; James the son of Zeb′edee and John the brother of James, whom he surnamed Bo-aner′ges, that is, sons of thunder; Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

As we see here, neither father of James was named Joseph. In order to call either one of these James’ the uterine brother of Jesus would be to say that Mary had an affair. Is anyone willing to take up that argument? “[A]ll generations will call me blessed” (Luke 1:48). Adelphos is shown to mean cousin, or one of the same faith here.

What about the four brothers that are specifically named in Mark 6:3?

James and Joseph and Judas and Simon are the four specifically mentioned in that verse. We see in Matthew 27:55-56 James and Joseph’s mother was named Mary but instead of being at the cross, she was looking from afar. Wasn’t Jesus’ mother at the cross at His death? John 19:26-27 tells us that she was indeed at the cross at His death so this must be another Mary. Indeed it is, she is called the other Mary multiple times through the Gospels (Matt 27:55-Matt 27:61, Mark 15:40, Mark 15:47, Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, Luke 23:49-Luke 23:56). These must be cousins of Jesus not brothers. Also, there is the problem in the order of placement. The more important you are the earlier you are placed in lists in Jewish tradition. We see that each time the apostles are listed with Peter always listed first and Judas always listed last, we also see this with Abraham (Abram) in Genesis 11:27 and many other lists of that time. A brother would be above a cousin in a list. Since the first two are cousins in this list this is an indication that the other two are cousins as well at best. In other words, adelphos means cousins or people of the same faith here yet again.

Well in Acts 1:14 the author says that the apostles were with Mary and the brothers of Jesus.

Yes it does if we use the NIV. The word used here, again, is adelphos, other translations use “brethren” here since it makes a lot more sense in context. Even the KJV translates adelphos as brethren. One would need to be very selective in which translation they use to believe these were uterine brothers of Jesus. In v.15, we read “the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty.” Even if we remove all of the apostles and all of the women, we still have somewhere around 80 “brothers” here. If this is really the case, then surely Mary was in perpetual labor not a perpetual virgin. Again, adelphos is shown to not mean uterine brothers but instead as cousins or most likely people of the same faith.

What about where the Bible says “brothers” or “brothers and sisters” of Jesus wouldn’t that be a case for Jesus having siblings?

If brothers and sisters demanded the use of uterine brothers or sisters in reference to Jesus it surely would but, as seen above, that is clearly not the case. I have shown that in the Bible it is quite common that brother is used in reference to a fellow believer or someone of the same clan and not just uterine brothers. For instance, in Luke 8:19-21 the author uses the same word (?δελφο?) three times. When Jesus says, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it” it is quite clear He is not talking about a uterine brother but a fellow believer or clansman (figurative use). This directly after being told that “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you.” It is quite evident that using uterine brother in all three instances would not do justice to what the writer meant but only serve a purpose for those who reject the virginity of Mary. Since Jesus is speaking figuratively here, there is no compelling reason for us to believe the author is using literal language rather than figurative. This same explanation applies to the same conversation in the other Gospels (Matthew 12:46-49, Mark 3:31-35).

To cap it all off, Jesus, while on the cross, gives his mother, Mary, to John saying in John 19:26-27, ““Woman, behold, your son!” Then [Jesus] said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.” There is only one way for this not to be an insult to Jesus’ own family. Joseph must have been dead at this time and that Jesus had no other siblings. Jesus would have had to break the 6^th commandment in order for this to take place if Joseph was alive or He had siblings that were also the children of Mary, He would have insulted either parent, dependent on the situation, therefore sinning, by violating the Jewish tradition. Is anyone willing to take up the argument that Jesus sinned? “[B]ut this man has done nothing wrong” (Luke 23:41).

The argument that Jesus gave His mother to John instead of His uterine brothers because John was a “Christian” and they were not, is just that, an argument created in order to deny the obvious. If we admit this argument then we have to admit, again, that Jesus sinned by insulting and denying His mother her privileges in not allowing His brothers to go to heaven. If Jesus’ brothers did eventually go to heaven then, as before, it is another admission that Jesus sinned by insulting His mother and brothers.

Early Church Fathers attesting to the Perpetual Virginity of our Mother:

Athanasius of Alexandria

“Therefore let those who deny that the Son is from the Father by nature and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh of Mary Ever-Virgin
[Four Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 (c. A.D. 360)].

Jerome:

“But as regards Victorinus, I assert what has already been proven from the gospel—that he [Victorinus] spoke of the brethren of the Lord not as being sons of Mary but brethren in the sense I have explained, that is to say, brethren in point of kinship, not by nature. [By discussing such things we] are . . . following the tiny streams of opinion. Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man"
(Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383])

The Orthodox and Byzantine Rite of the Catholic Church have yet to cease speaking Greek and both believe in the Perpetual Virginity of Our Mother, are we supposed to submit ourselves to those who grow up in contexts of speaking Greek as a second language? If we are to use an authority, surely it makes more sense to look to those who are the most authoritative, as those mentioned above, than elsewhere.

If we are to go by the “Bible Alone” no one can say, without hesitation, that Mary or Joseph had any other children. There is simply no Scriptural backing to it. In addition, none of the Early Church Fathers contradict the fact that Jesus had no siblings but some do uphold it as seen above.

Again, as seen above, Jerome was obviously in possession of some type of knowledge, be it oral or written, about “Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men” that tells us these very Early Church Fathers, some of which knew, learned and were ordained by the apostles, believed in Mary’s Perpetual Virginity. Look at the book that Jerome wrote it is called The Perpetual Virginity of Mary. This is not a new subject invented by the Catholic Church but one that has been carried down through the centuries with Jerome providing us the evidence that Ignatius and Polycarp, both of whom were taught by John the apostle, believed. Most likely because they were taught this directly from John the apostle! Where is the evidence that Jesus had uterine siblings? There simply is none, at least none when taken in context.