“However, there is no indication that the children are her’s.”
The step-brother hypothesis (from “The Protoevangelium of James”) seemed a good idea to me to reconcile the plain text of scripture that says “brothers” with the Roman tradition of perpetual virginity.
It may yet be.
The problem I see with that theory is that Jesus was Messiah, that is, heir to the throne of David, which was passed paternally, and, by right, would go to the eldest son.
Ergo, an elder step-brother would be the proper king.
That said, God skipped the eldest son (or the son skipped voluntarily) on a number of notable occassions — perhaps such a “skip” occurred here, too.
If so, it makes James an even more remarkable man.
It may yet be.
The problem I see with that theory is that Jesus was Messiah, that is, heir to the throne of David, which was passed paternally, and, by right, would go to the eldest son.
Ergo, an elder step-brother would be the proper king.
That said, God skipped the eldest son (or the son skipped voluntarily) on a number of notable occassions — perhaps such a “skip” occurred here, too.
If so, it makes James an even more remarkable man.
However, our Lord's Kingship DID NOT pass through Saint Joseph.