No, but I am also aware of the following:
1. The word brother/brethren was used interchangeably with cousin.
2. NOBODY other than Jesus Christ is EVER referred to as a son or daughter of Mary. The Church believes that it is possible that Joseph had children from a prior marriage.
3. NOBODY ever identifies themselves as a brother of Jesus. James says he is a servant of Jesus Christ, Jude says he is a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James.
4. Tradition would have been for Mary's care to be entrusted to the next oldest son, our Lord's words on the Cross never address this possibility. The Gospel of John was written LONG AFTER the Resurrection and it says, "And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own." (John 19:27) Had James or Jude been her sons, why wouldn't she have returned to them after they became Christians?
But the Gospels clearly refer to the brothers and sisters of Christ. Only in ignorance or deceit can someone state unequivocally that the Gospels do not at least suggest Christ may have had siblings.
I've never claimed that this suggestion isn't there, all I am doing is pointing out the FACT that there is no suggestion that Mary had other children.
Yet there is ZERO Biblical basis for the belief that Mary DIDN’T have more children. Or that the brothers and sisters that Matthew clearly reference - calling James and Joses DIRECTLY the sons of Mary (in Mt 27:56) - are from a previous marriage of Joseph.
The belief that Mary was ever-virgin is simply based on tradition - not Scripture. That’s fine, if you want to believe it. But you simply cannot state - as you have - that there are NO suggestions that Mary had other children. To do so is to literally deny the Word of God. See the link in 143 - it’s quite detailed and very enlightening, and at least shows there is a VERY strong suggestion that Jesus had brothers and sisters.