But the Scriptures do. "and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas"
In order to take that position, one must invalidate the Scripture above. And that is the problem - Overriding Scriptures rather than letting the Scriptures renew the mind.
Please post the Scripture that calls any of those gentlemen sons of Mary, or that calls Mary their mother.
You can't. It doesn't exist.
In fact, we know who the father of James and Joses are from Scripture; his name is Alphaeus (Matthew 10:3). We know also that James and Judas (not the Iscariot) were not really blood brothers, but father and son (Acts 1:13).
Those are facts we can actually establish from Scripture. The idea that James was the son of Mary the mother of Jesus, is not.
So Abraham and Lot were brohers in spite of Scripture to the contrary?
There was no word for cousin, nephew, and etc., so all of those related by blood were brothers not just those who had one or both parents in common as we use the word these days. You're doing the same thing as calling the 1890s in the US the "Queer Nineties" because a bunch of fags changed the meaning of the word "gay" you want to apply the modern definition. In fact, you're doing even worse, you're redefining words within the Holy Scriptures to suit your own preconceptions.
It is, in fact, anyone who would assert that their own misinterpretation of the Word they clearly do not understand is proof others should accept who would be invalidating Scriptures to justify their own preconception. Whether Mary had other children or not the quoted verse doesn't prove anything one way or the other. Anyone so unacquainted with His Word and the failings of the translations of His Word that they would claim this verse is proof of something is an embarrassment to those who do understand Scriptures no matter which side of the current issue they may be on.