Question to Christians about Jesus's family
Restless Soul
Posts: 805
Does it make any difference to you if Jesus had a family? As in brothers and sisters? Or children and a wife (such as mary magdalene)? What about if the church was found to be involved in a big cover-up of any evidence that these people existed?
I'm just curious how christians and catholics would feel about this because they showed a programme here on Christmas day about the fact that the church had covered up information on Jesus's family. According to the programme, which kind of followed along the da vinci code line, there is apparently evidence in bible which indicates Jesus had brothers and sisters with their names, which contradicted with the image of the Virgin mary so was covered up. I can't remember the passages now but the church has said these names were actually joseph's kids or they were jesus's friends or cousins or whatever. Apparently whatever the truth is, the cover-up continues.
So my point is if the church is so interested in covering-up any so-called evidence, what difference will it make to you, as a follower of Christianity, if Jesus did have a family, or the virgin mary hadn't been a virgin, or that Jesus had had a wife and kids?
Will it really make a difference to your faith, or your understanding of your faith? Just curious really!
I'm just curious how christians and catholics would feel about this because they showed a programme here on Christmas day about the fact that the church had covered up information on Jesus's family. According to the programme, which kind of followed along the da vinci code line, there is apparently evidence in bible which indicates Jesus had brothers and sisters with their names, which contradicted with the image of the Virgin mary so was covered up. I can't remember the passages now but the church has said these names were actually joseph's kids or they were jesus's friends or cousins or whatever. Apparently whatever the truth is, the cover-up continues.
So my point is if the church is so interested in covering-up any so-called evidence, what difference will it make to you, as a follower of Christianity, if Jesus did have a family, or the virgin mary hadn't been a virgin, or that Jesus had had a wife and kids?
Will it really make a difference to your faith, or your understanding of your faith? Just curious really!
"We have to change the concept of patriotism to one of “matriotism” — love of humanity that transcends war. A matriarch would never send her own children off to wars that kill other people’s children." Cindy Sheehan
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 06 June 2017
London, O2, 18 June 2018
London, O2, 17 July 2018
Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 09 June 2019
Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 10 June 2019
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Jesus did have a brother (at least shared the same mother), who was younger. It doesn't matter to me if he has brothers and sisters; as long as they were younger than he. The bible says that he was born to a virgin, not that Mary remained one for the rest of her life. I take much more of a stance against him having a wife. Granted the Bible isn't to tell us everything about Jesus...there's some 30 years where nothing is mentioned, but I work under the assumption that if he was married something would have been written about it. The question then becomes could he have been messianic and married and produced offspring, again, those are all fairly big life occurrences that I assume the Bible would address HAD they occurred.
If he wasn't born of a virgin he would not have been the fullfillment of the prophecy that the messiah would have been born of a virgin; rendering him only human. So yes, that would have a drastic change on my faith. However, I am not aware of any evidence that points to that, aside from some revisionist history.
If the story is correct, Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus. To marry Joseph and stay a virgin for the rest of her life is hard for me to believe. After giving birth to Jesus, she could have had other children by Joseph and that doesn't change the fact that she conceived Jesus because of a miracle. And yes, in the Bible, I believe one of his brothers was named James and the evidence points to him being Joseph and Mary's child, not brother in the sense of "brother in the church."
I don't have a problem if Jesus had a wife. His marriage to a woman should not be an issue. Most people bring up the sinless aspect of his life, but being married and faithful to a spouse is not a sin. Having children, implying he had sex, is not a sin if you are married either. All in all, I see both of those things as non-issues for my faith.
My understanding is that Jesus is the son of God. Mary was his earth mom but in a DNA type way Jesus was not related to Mary at all. Mary was the vessel chosen to carry God's child, a surrogate mother in a way.
Given this, I don't think Jesus had any blood brothers. He may have had step brothers, birthed by Mary and fathered by Joseph. This would not alter my faith in any way. If this indeed happened and was covered up it would not alter my faith. However it would be another instance where I think the people involved in the cover up made poor choices.
Any cover up that may have (or may not have) occured is immaterial to Jesus and God.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
messianic can also mean of or related to the messiah. I used it meaning having the characteristics of the messiah. I'm sure there's a better phrase to use, but that's the one that came out.
I wasn't sure what you were trying to say with that, because the definition that I gave is the only way I've ever heard messianic used.
well if that were all true then it would prove christianity to be false. I mean since it's based on a virgin birth and such.
Shouldn't this question be applied to non-Christians as well? I mean the Koran also states that Jesus was born of a Virgin - the difference is that he is a high prophet and not the son of God, but devout Muslims also believe that Jesus was born of a virgin.
And the passage you are looking for in the Bible mentioning Jesus' brothers and sisters is the Gospel of Mark Chapter 6 Verse 3.
- 8/28/98
- 9/2/00
- 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
- 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
- 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
- 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
- 8/2/07, 8/5/07
- 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
- 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
- 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
- 9/11/11, 9/12/11
- 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
Let me guess. You just got the "DaVinci Code" DVD for Christmas. Right?
the original post didn't deny a virgin birth, it asked what if mary had kids after jesus, [it still would have been a virgin birth for jesus] or if jesus had kids.
to me it would make no difference, he still is who he is and did what he did.
i thought thomas was his brother...
12 people may make the one decision but that doesn't make it right.
Free Rob Farquharson, wrongfully imprisoned!!
www.factbeforetheory.net
naděje umírá poslední
Too bad that shit don't work today, huh ladies?
Mohammed was a pedophile.
Hey, while we are making off-the-wall speculative remarks. You are a pedophile.
I bet you have a special place in Jesus' heart.
naděje umírá poslední
an angel appeared to joseph and told him that mary conceived through the holy ghost. he was also told that this child would save his people from their sins. so it's not as if mary had to make up some wild story to cover her arse, so to speak.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Sounds like a serious case of denial
you mean evidence like the evidence that scientifically virgins don't have babies... that you've got to get laid to have kids? i suppose what you mean is you're not aware of any bible stories contradicting that. as far as revisionist history, the new testament is the greatest example of revisionist history ever written. and the great part is its devotees are willfully ignorant about it.
scientifically these days virgins CAN become pregnant.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I knew someone would bring both of those up, and they are fair points. Which is why I said IF he wasn't born of a virgin he wouldn't be the messiah. And I'm not getting into another NT discussion about why certain things were included and were not excluded.
What's that got to do with this subject?
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
No, there was a programme on tv about it.
(I've already seen that film when it came out!)
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
It's a very imporatant part is what I should've said, my bad.
What prophecy? Sorry, I'm not a christian so please excuse my ignorance.
But what if the brothers and sisters (sounded like they were a lot of them) weren't all younger than he? It didn't say that he was the eldest. Also, at the moment when he die the turn water into wine trick, it was actually done at a family wedding with his siblings there which showed that there were more of them.
Also, if he was married, then that was also largely covered up but there was evidence here and there to the relationship he had with magdalene. I think the bible or other documents did refer to it but that was destroyed or hidden by the church. Apparently St Peter didn't like Mary Magdalene and she was denounced as a whore by the church, so who knows what's true.
But what I don't understand is, why should it make a difference if he had siblings or if he got married or his birth wasn't of a virgin? (If that is the case). Should it make a difference to the overall christian messages to the followers? Did the church really believe that the only way people would want to believe in Christ was if he was this amazing otherworldly guy who wasn't born like other men, or had sex, or had children?
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
Prophecy (7th and 8th century BC)
"Therefore the LORD Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14)
Fruition
Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee, called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.... And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus." (Luke 1:26-27, 30-31)
The reason he would have to be the oldest is b/c of the prophecy above. If there were older siblings mary would not have been a virgin; therefore, he wouldn't be the fullfillment of prophecy.
Re: the marriage hypothesis. I'm not as sure intellectually, on the source of that idea. There are also Gnostic texts that were written after his life that were not included in the NT, prob b/c they did not agree with the rest of the Bible. There are lots of books out there that address how the Bible was "assembled".
But to answer your last point, yes it matters immensley if he wasnt born to a virgin. It wouldn't affect some Christian philosophy, love your neighbor etc.. (the goodwill stuff) but it would have a HUGE implication on salvation and redemption. I agree with markymark from above if Jesus was married and had offspring he did not commit sin; which would mean he was still perfect and didn't sin so he could still be the messiah. I just have a hard time accepting that as a valid theory b/c the Bible doesn't mention it...What does the church gain by intentionally leaving that part out, if it's true? I can't come up with anything...granted I'm shooting off the cuff for some of this.
On a side note. I would encourage you to not only read the secular take on Christ and Christianity but if you really want to learn about it there are many good Christian-scholarly authors who deal with a lot of this subject matter and I would encourage you to read from both sides of the issue.
i dont think they had artificial insemination perfected in jesus' time. perhaps im wrong though.
it sets precedent for a church where priests cannot marry and power within the church is restricted to men and men alone. it ensures that sex is carefully controlled and less pure than not having sex like jesus (apparently) didnt. it subtly preserves the idea that women are impure and that resisting their seductive and sinful charms is admirable (adam's apple and jesus refusing to stick it in one).