It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Jesus have a brother?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   
In 2002, an ossuary(box of bones) was found with writing in Aramaic on it stating "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." If true, this brings a few questions to mind. Why was this brother not talked about in the bible or any other form of manuscript? This also changes the Catholics view of Mary being a virgin and the Joseph, Mary and Jesus family unit. I see a possible cover up by the Catholic church here to purify peoples beliefs about Mary and Jesus being of divine origin. After all, Christ comes from "christo" which means king. If Jesus is the older brother, he would obviously be the heir to the throne and could of after all just been a king who changed history to make him look divine. Thoughts?
LINK




posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:41 AM
link   
That's been proven to be a fake.

TIME Fake Ossuary

After a two-year investigation, police in December 2004 charged the antiquities collector and four others of forgery, alleging that the James ossuary was a clever fake and that Golan had masterminded an international ring of thieves that over the past 20 years had duped major museums and collectors out of millions. Put on trial, Golan denied the charges, and some experts and the pious rallied to his side. Nevertheless, one of the detectives insisted, "Oded Golan played with our beliefs, the beliefs of Jews and Christians. That is why it's the fraud of the century."

The extraordinary story of how Israeli detectives built a case against Golan and his alleged cohorts is the subject of Unholy Business: A True Tale of Faith, Greed and Forgery in the Holy Land by Nina Burleigh, a former TIME staffer who now writes for People. In fast, noir-ish prose — imagine Sam Spade in the Holy Land — Burleigh tracks her story through the twilight world of Arab grave robbers and smugglers to the glimmering salon of a billionaire collector in Mayfair whose mission, writes Burleigh, is "proving the Bible true."



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: kevinp2300
"Brothers of Jesus" ARE mentioned in the New Testament.
In Mark ch6 v3, they include "James and Joses and Judas and Simon".
Sometimes this gets explained in various ways- like "half-brother" or "cousin".
But the idea is hardly new.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:48 AM
link   
The bible says that Jesus had brothers and sisters.


Mark 6
3 Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.



Matthew 13
55 “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”


Whether they are maternal siblings or not is up for debate. IF Jesus actually lived I don't think it would be out of the question that he had brothers and/or sisters. But those who believe in his divinity "take offense" (Mark 6) of this notion. It would call into question why these siblings weren't elaborated about a little more and would call into question Mary's perpetual virginity.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
That's been proven to be a fake.


Nice link! Good read...

Little doubt the 'bones' are fake but the idea Jesus had a family that included siblings is very reasonable. Not sure why 'The Church' demands the Mother of Jesus be a Virgin.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky

It's metaphor for the "virgin" Earth bringing forth life. There was no sex involved when the first lifeforms popped up on Earth. They have to keep that secret narrative going.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: kevinp2300

If you read the new testament you will find Jesus had brothers and sisters . Kind of half brothers and sisters because He didn't have a human father but a step father of sorts .



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky

When you say "The Church" you have to consider that not all are of the Roman Catholic persuasion and have a different take on Mary .She did have other kids with Joseph so pop goes the weasel .



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

Interesting article. I would like to point out that he is under trial and no decision has been made about the alleged forgery. Also, the article I linked was this year by CNN, who is owned by TIME warner. Why would they print an article speculating about the authenticity of the ossuary if it was a proven fake?



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

I was under the impression that they were thought of as cousins



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
It's right in the new testament that Jesus had a brother... Not only is it in the NT that Jesus had a brother, his own brother doubted certain aspects of Jesus' ministry until he witnessed him fully resurrected. Paul also attests to meeting him in some of the earliest of his writings.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 01:43 PM
link   
If Mary and Joseph were husband and wife, then I see no reason why they wouldn't be husband and wife in full measure which means that Jesus would have had brothers and sisters in the fullness of time. It's not like God put some kind of seal on her.

Had she not been the kind of girl she was, He would not have used her for Christ's birth and to be His mother. If she and Joseph were not both worthy people, He would not have chosen them. Therefore, I expect they were in all ways properly married and fruitful as time went on.
edit on 12-3-2015 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: kevinp2300

Hello Kevin and all.

From the New Testament books it seems that Jesus did have brothers and sisters.

Other comments have demonstrated this. Paul mentioned "James" as "the Lord's brother" and if he had meant it at as congregational "brother" he would have used the term for both Peter and James.

I do agree that the Catholic Church has not been very keen in the past to reveal that Mary had more than one child and that she did not maintain her virginity.




edit on 12-3-2015 by lonesomerimbaud because: spelling.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Professor Robert Eisenman wrote a book about James the Brother of Jesus. It is a fascinating story. Eisenman uses the history records available and puts his life together. He believes that because there is so much information available about James, that a person can get to know who Jesus is by researching James. There are lectures available on youtube. www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: misskat1

Indeed, James was an iconic figure in the "new" movement that expressed the "Christ worship" that was becoming popularized by the Hellenized Jews of note, like Philo of Alexander. According to Josephus, it was the murder of James the Righteous, in 62AD, that instigated the riots and insurrections in Rome, that ultimately led to expulsion, 64AD, and finally the Jewish Wars 69AD.

It's my opinion that James the Righteous was actually the infamous "Chrestus" that seems to be source of confusion for/from Seutonius and Tacitus.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: kevinp2300

The point is that whether Yeshua had brother's (half since he was of God and Virgin conception) or not is not of any real importance as it should not detract from his purpose or a Christian's faith, yet for many it is an attack on there belief system, I am a Christian and see no problem with it, He is my king and My god incarnate Yeshua Ha Meshiach the anointed one of God and Emanuel God with us.

But if I was to say I leave my mind open to that then that would be true as indeed the gospel of John also points out how he was received in Galilee, how his brothers did not believe him.

We do know Mary his mother was alive as he was crucified and as he was dying he said of an apostle he loved to her "Behold your son" and that his apostle was not her born son but was through these word's her son, he was also the archetype Christian as he represented What Jesus Loved and he also said to that apostle Behold your mother, from that day that Apostle took Mary into his own home as his mother so how then did she have other son's for surely they would have come to take there mother home, unless Joseph may have remarried and though he was Jesus protector if the marriage was not consummated he may have taken another wife, it was rare but not against Jewish law for a man to have more than one wife.

Indeed the practice of being allowed to marry more than one wife only ended after the Roman expulsion, indeed it happened only after the Christian period so hundreds of years after the expulsion and it is believe the Ashkenazi community were the first to outlaw polygamous marriage followed much later by the Sephardic, though Solomon had 1000 wives by the time of Jesus it would probably have fallen to no more than between 2 to 4 for a wealthy Jewish man.

That said there is no mention of Joseph having married more than one woman and indeed he seems to have died some time before Jesus began his ministry.

Also even if the mother of Jesus bore Joseph son's and daughter's that only make's her more of a mother and does not in any way detract from her in my opinion as a Christian, still I do wonder why one of them would not have come to take there mother home after Jesus was crucified but then she had her own mind and with Joseph gone and Jesus his legal heir she was no man's wife after Joseph passed on.

As a Maryonite Christian I am a firm believer in her place in my faith and actually do believe she remained pure but to my overall faith as a Christian that matters not and she remains for me as she was the second Ark, the first was not a living ark but a wooden box glad in gold and bore the tablets and the Lore which brought death as no one was perfect and any transgression of the law was sin but the second was a living ark and that being Mary who was filled with the grace of God that manifested through her becoming incarnate, she was the vessel God Chose above all others and by which he brought his living word into the flesh and his grace by which Christians and all that believe in the name of the Yeshua ha Meshiach and he that sent him are saved as they then no longer live under the law (though they should still live by it as best then can) but they are now under grace of Yeshua and the Glory of the Father which takes the sting of Sin, i.e failing the law which is death away as he paid the price on our behalf and as it is written he washes away our sin's.

I may come across as a bit BB that but it is important as these distractions take away form the message which Christ himself preached and that is the important thing not getting distracted dissecting his mothers life and whether he had sibling's of not but also it is worth noting he would say of any that keep his word they are his brother's, sister's, father's, mother's, son's and daughter's, his fellow servant's before the lord as when he told John of Patmos to stand up and not kneel to him but only to God, he is God incarnate but by that he is a separate person and he serves the Father flawlessly, he is also our lord and saviour, the prince of peace and the king of king's and he is both here now and will as the angels said when he ascended with cloud's return the same way he ascended with cloud's, in the book of revelation it say's those BEHEADED for his name sake shall come with him and those that BEHEADED them shall know great terror at the sight.

Also he points out every eye shall see him even they who pierced him, this is because though the spirit may live on with the body dead as all flesh dies they shall not truly live unless they Have the living water he alone can grant in there heart's, so for those who do not the resurrection is to the second death or the outer darkness.

He will say who is his brother and who is not when all else is said and indeed he said so himself, he is our saviour sent by our father to redeem us and he is the best of us, he pointed out God is a spirit, God is the God of the living not the dead for all are alive to him and even in the resurrection he pointed out the new body shall be a spiritual body, a celestial body like the angel's, a new white robe - consider the lily - and not an earthly flesh pile of animated dust.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The bible says that Jesus had brothers and sisters.


Mark 6
3 Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.



Matthew 13
55 “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56 Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”


Whether they are maternal siblings or not is up for debate. IF Jesus actually lived I don't think it would be out of the question that he had brothers and/or sisters. But those who believe in his divinity "take offense" (Mark 6) of this notion. It would call into question why these siblings weren't elaborated about a little more and would call into question Mary's perpetual virginity.


That's... not particularly accurate.
Jesus having brothers has no impact whatsoever on His divinity - the Biblical story makes that distinction - in that Jesus was conceived 'by the Holy Spirit', and not by Joseph. Jesus' brothers and sisters would have been the offspring of Mary and Joseph, which would make them, technically, his half-brothers and sisters; though in ancient Israel, that distinction wouldn't have been made.

So... no, Jesus' divinity isn't compromised by that at all.
What *IS* compromised, as you rightly state, is the concept of Mary's "perpetual virginity", which is not something that the Bible states at all, and didn't appear in Christian Tradition until the late 2nd Century, and wasn't popularized until the mid 3rd Century.

There is absolutely no Biblical or doctrinal reason why Mary was, should be, or is a 'perpetual virgin'. The idea is pseudo-spiritual nonsense, really.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

My thought would be that if she followed Christ in his ministry, there would be two reasons for it: sibling rivalry and heresy. Not everyone followed Jesus, and it says elsewhere that He was surprised by how those closest to Him had the hardest time accepting Him. It could be that they rejected His teachings like so many other Jews. It's hard to see your brother as anything other than your brother.

And then, if your own mother seems to favor your brother so much that even she will turn her back on you to follow your older brother whom you don't view as anything other than your brother ... well, sibling rivalry gets in the way. Pride. It leads you to do things that from the outside, and observer would have a hard time understanding.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: kevinp2300

I think its very obvious that Jesus had at least one blood brother. Josephus makes reference to James, the brother of Christ. So does Paul whose conversion is placed at 3-6 years after the cross.

Josephus
" Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others,:"

In no way does this mean Mary couldn't have been a virgin when she had Jesus....The Bible doesn't say Jesus was born of a virgin, and his mother will remain celibate for life lol..



After all, Christ comes from "christo" which means king. If Jesus is the older brother, he would obviously be the heir to the throne and could of after all just been a king who changed history to make him look divine.



I think you need to study 1st century history a little more. No way Jesus was just a king that changed history lol. He was crucified during the reign of Tiberius Caesar under Pontius Pilate.

During the trial of Jesus, Pilate ask the crowd shall i crucify your king? Caiaphas answers there is no King but Caesar. Its quite apparent that Jesus lived in the territory of the Roman Empire and was not an earthly king.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

If Mary and Joseph were husband and wife, then I see no reason why they wouldn't be husband and wife in full measure which means that Jesus would have had brothers and sisters in the fullness of time. It's not like God put some kind of seal on her.


...but is there anything in scripture to indicate if Jesus was the eldest of the siblings?







 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join