Did Mary Have Other Children?

Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry ^ | Unknown | Matt Slick

[HarleyD]

One of the more controversial teachings of the Catholic church deals with the perpetual virginity of Mary. This doctrine maintains that Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus and that biblical references suggesting Jesus had siblings are really references to cousins (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 510).

As the veneration of Mary increased throughout the centuries, the vehicle of Sacred Tradition became the means of promoting new doctrines not explicitly taught in the Bible. The virginity of Mary is clearly taught in scripture when describing the birth of Jesus. But is the doctrine of her continued virginity supported by the Bible? Did Mary lose her virginity after Jesus was born? Does the Bible reveal that Mary had other children, that Jesus had brothers and sisters?

The Bible does not come out and declare that Mary remained a virgin and that she had no children. In fact, the Bible seems to state otherwise: (All quotes are from the NASB.)

• Matthew 1:24-25 - "And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took as his wife, and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."
• Matthew 12:46-47 - "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."
• Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"
• Mark 6:2-3 - "And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, "Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands? "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?"
• John 2:12 - "After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days."
• Acts 1:14 - "These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers."
• 1 Cor. 9:4-5 - "Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?"
• Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."

An initial reading of these biblical texts seems to clear up the issue: Jesus had brothers and sisters. But such obvious scriptures are not without their response from Catholic Theologians. The primary argument against these biblical texts is as follows:

In Greek, the word for brother is adelphos and sister is adelphe. This word is used in different contexts: of children of the same parents (Matt. 1:2; 14:3), descendants of parents (Acts 7:23, 26; Heb. 7:5), the Jews as a whole (Acts 3:17, 22), etc. Therefore, the term brother (and sister) can and does refer to the cousins of Jesus.

There is certainly merit in this argument, However, different contexts give different meanings to words. It is not legitimate to say that because a word has a wide scope of meaning, that you may then transfer any part of that range of meaning to any other text that uses the word. In other words, just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in context to see what it means.

Lets briefly analyze a couple of verses dealing with the brothers of Jesus.

• Matthew 12:46-47, "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."
• Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"

In both of these verses, if the brothers of Jesus are not brothers, but His cousins, then who is His mother and who is the carpenters father? In other words, mother here refers to Mary. The carpenter in Matt. 13:55, refers to Joseph. These are literal. Yet, the Catholic theologian will then stop there and say, "Though carpenters son refers to Joseph, and mother refers to Mary, brothers does not mean brothers, but "cousins." This does not seem to be a legitimate assertion. You cannot simply switch contextual meanings in the middle of a sentence unless it is obviously required. The context is clear. This verse is speaking of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus brothers. The whole context is of familial relationship: father, mother, and brothers.

Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm

There are many arguments pro and con concerning Jesus siblings. But the issue cannot be settled without examining Psalm 69, a Messianic Psalm. Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, "But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause."

He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise." His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Thy house will consume me."

Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.

To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9, "Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. 9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me."

This messianic Psalm clearly shows that Jesus has brothers. As Amos 3:7 says, "Surely the Lord God does nothing unless He reveals His secret counsel to His servants the prophets." Gods will has been revealed plainly in the New Testament and prophetically in the Old. Psalm 69 shows us that Jesus had brothers.

Did Mary have other children? The Bible seems to suggest yes. Catholic Tradition says no. Which will you trust?

Of course, the Catholic will simply state that even this phrase "my mother's sons" is in reference not to his siblings, but to cousins and other relatives. This is a necessary thing for the Catholic to say, otherwise, the perpetual virginity of Mary is threatened and since that contradicts Roman Catholic tradition, an interpretation that is consistent with that tradition must be adopted.

The question is, "Was Jesus estranged by His brothers?". Yes, He was. John 7:5 says "For not even His brothers were believing in Him." Furthermore, Psalm 69:8 says both "my brothers" and "my mother's sons." Are these both to be understood as not referring to His siblings? Hardly. The Catholics are fond of saying that "brothers" must mean "cousins." But, if that is the case, then when we read "an alien to my mother's sons" we can see that the writer is adding a further distinction and narrowing the scope of meaning. In other words, Jesus was alienated by his siblings, His very half-brothers begotten from Mary.

It is sad to see the Roman Catholic church go to such lengths to maintain Mary's virginity, something that is a violation of biblical law to be married and fill the earth.

[MarkBsnr]

Who was Arius from Alexandria? Why did the early Christians think of him ? He denied the Deity of Christ and the trinity and so did many of text/works coming from Alexandria were considered the worst kind of manuscripts . Oh but the include stuff like men are saved by works and scriptures should not be taken literally.

Hmmmmmmmmmm does not your Bible include the first 5 books ? (that’s Torah and that is what was translated for the Library of Alexandria - the first 5 books 300BC for Ptolemy)

We were speaking of the fruits of Egypt and your claim that it was pagan or heretic. I said that there was a lot of worth out of the region including Augustine, etc, and as a side note that the Septuagint was commissioned there. Where can a sane person get from that my Bible does not contain the Torah?

[MarkBsnr]

I agree that talking of Mary as the spouse of God certainly does render not only Scriptural problems but the opportunity for crassness that she does not deserve.

Then stop defending posters who believe that the non divine Jesus was the bastard child of slut Mary and/or the rapist Holy Spirit, and start looking to the Church of Jesus Christ, created by Him and commissioned by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

[Iscool]

A marriage is NOT a consummation of a couple. It is a declared state. Many marriages are not consummated. Once again, Iscool, you get it boneachingly wrong.

Not for a biblical marriage...All it is up to the point of consummation is an espousal...

1Co 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
1Co 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

Know ye not???

There's your marriage...And be careful you don't marry a harlot...

Ah, so you believe that God was a rapist or that Mary was a slut. Interesting.

The implication there is that Mary had intercourse with the Angel...Don't you realize how absurd that is...If they had intercourse, there was no virgin birth...

You guys come up with one absurdity after another...Don't you guys even think about what that religion tells you??? You just follow everything blindly???

[Iscool]

We consider it a spiritual marriage of consent to God. As opposed to a physical marriage to Joseph. That way nothing is compromised.

You consider it??? HaHaHaHaHaHa...

Do you ever consider what God says about it...My God man, read some scripture and learn what God says...

[Iscool]

You really should'nt mock the holy mother of Jesus as some sort of game, my friend. One day soon enough you will be face to face answering to Our Lord why you were insulting Him most holy, and His most BELOVED Mother. What you obviously don't know is that women and men in those times took a sacred vow of chastitiy, IT WAS ALWAYS FOR LIFE. Not just until they felt they were "in the mood" and would then walk away from their sacred vows. Same with the men, like St. Joseph, who had also chosen to take the vows of chastity. This is PROVEN when the angel informed Mary that she'd be giving birth to the very Son of God. Mary's reply was,"How can this be, (I am a woman with perpetual chastity vows and - my addition), I do not know man"?

One big load of unbiblical hogwash...

I do not know man"

That's not what Mary said...She said, Luk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Mary knew not a man, but her intention was to 'know' a man, and become his wife...And as the scriptures tell us, Mary eventually 'knew' Joseph...Believe God...

[Iscool]

My friend, iscool has declared that not only that he does not believe what he believes, he also does not believe that Jesus is God.

Let's see the post or admit you are lying...

[Iscool]

So talking of Mary as spouse of God is in one way obviously inadequate and the material of jokes. But in another way, is it really so very bad?

Yes it absolutely is...It's a perversion of scripture and creates a pagan type of deity for Mary not to mention skews the idea of a Trinitarian God...

Mary was not the Mother of God, nor the Spouse of God...We need to leave it at that...

[MarkBsnr]

My friend, iscool has declared that not only that he does not believe what he believes, he also does not believe that Jesus is God.

Let's see the post or admit you are lying...

We all know about where you stated that you do not believe what you believe. And did you not also state that Mary was a brother of Jesus? If Mary is a brother of Jesus, that makes you similar to the Mormons, who believe that Jesus is a lesser god, who was once a man and then grew up to become god.

[bkaycee]

The Protoevangelium is not Canon, yet it obviously seriously influenced the early Church.

Yes, it did. It was obviously the source of the mischief that crept into the church and was anathemed by Popes. It certainly did not originate with the Church.

It serves no purpose, other than giving glory to Mary which Christ went out of his way NOT to do.

Pope Gelasius I, bishop of Rome 492–496, lists it among "The remaining writings which have been compiled or been recognised by heretics or schismatics the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church does not in any way receive; of these we have thought it right to cite below a few which have been handed down and which are to be avoided by catholics:" - Gelasian Decree, Chapter 5

The Church’s belief about Mary started long before any NT Scripture was ever written.

That is simply an asertion without a basis. The church was totally silent about any Marian doctrine for centuries.

You could offer some proof for you assertion.

[Mad Dawg]

I know that YOU think "It's a perversion of scripture and creates a pagan type of deity for Mary not to mention skews the idea of a Trinitarian God..." But I don't see that you've made the case for anyone else to think so.

Hint:HaHaHaHaHaHa... does not constitute an argument. ;-)

[Judith Anne]

I am utterly mystified by the groups that say that Mary was just another Jewish girl, and nobody special, and that Christ her Son was disrepectful to her (in spite of the proven mistranslation). They seem to view any honor given to Mary as “worship” — which makes me worry about them. After all, if that’s true, what kind of lame worship do they have for Christ?

It looks like all of the women criticizing Mary think they are “just as good as her,” and that any of them could be the Mother of God just like Mary was. Mary is an offense to them, even while they denigrate her importance and position as human mother of the Only Begotten Son of God Almighty.

It was really shocking the first time I saw that propaganda posted here on FR, I hadn’t thought anyone could be so hateful. Now it’s just sad, and I am sure that Mary will pray for the redemption of those who, through despising his mother, tear down the Savior.

Because the fact that God preserved Mary from all stain of original sin says more about who Christ Jesus, His Son, is, than about Mary.

[Cronos]

Iscool: That would make Mary a brother of Jesus...

interesting....but anyone can make up anything with solo interpretura

They say that Paul was Jesus's successor (Paul succeeded no one but Jesus..) and other things

[bkaycee]

It was really shocking the first time I saw that propaganda posted here on FR, I hadn’t thought anyone could be so hateful. Now it’s just sad, and I am sure that Mary will pray for the redemption of those who, through despising his mother, tear down the Savior.

Because the fact that God preserved Mary from all stain of original sin says more about who Christ Jesus, His Son, is, than about Mary.

I think what your seeing are those who are zealous to follow the biblical prescription that ALL Glory belongs to God.

Exodus 20:4-5 says, “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God...” Notice that God is jealous when someone gives to another something that rightly belongs to Him.

In these verses, God is speaking of people making idols and bowing down and worshiping those idols instead of giving God the worship that belongs to Him alone. God is possessive of the worship and service that belong to Him. It is a sin (as God points out in this commandment) to worship or serve anything other than God. What He is jealous of belongs to Him; worship and service belong to Him alone, and are to be given to Him alone.

I am sure that NO ONE here hates Mary. We love Mary and respect her. She was the Virgin Chosen to bear the Christ, Our Savior. However, that is no reason to give her undue praise, for the scripture is silent in regards to the novel Marian dogma that crept into the church.

The first generations of Christians knew nothing about any of those things until gnostics and pagans began influencing the church. It is a matter of historical record.

Not sure how you can connect the honor given to Mary and the Love for the Savior. Refusing to believe false Myths about Mary is the responsibility of True believers. We Love the Savior because He first Loved us. The connection is illogical and unscriptural.

[OLD REGGIE]

The Consensus Patrum overrules individuals.

Really?

The Protoevangelium is not Canon, yet it obviously seriously influenced the early Church.

Many forgeries and works of fiction influenced the early Church, the middle Church, and the current Church.

Tell me who wrote 2 Peter ca. 150 AD and whether he was an eyewitness of Christ.

The Church’s belief about Mary started long before any NT Scripture was ever written.

Your "infallible" source for the writing of 2 Peter in 150 AD is????????????

When did the "Church's belief" about the Perpetual Virginity, the Immaculate Conception, and the Bodily Assumption first become known?

I have included a few "When Was The Bible Written" timelines for your review. I agree that neither agrees completely with the other and, in any event, both are "best guesses". However, they establish general timelines with which you can compare your "...Church’s belief about Mary started long before any NT Scripture was ever written."

Suffice to say I believe you are off, way off

When was the Bible written. 1.

When was the Bible written 2.

[Judith Anne]

I staated how I connected the honor due to Mary and my love for my Savior. If you have difficulty understanding me, that’s all right.

To me, Love is not a zero-sum game. Love is not “taken” from one and “given” to another — the love I have for my earthly father never reduced the love I had for my mother, or my siblings, or my husband. Love for my Savior never reduced the love I have for any of my earthly loved ones, either. The love I have for Christ Jesus, for my God, for the Spirit, none of that reduces the love I have for His mother, who is a wonderful example to me.

To restate that: Love is not finite: God IS Love, and His Love endures forever! There is no loss of my love for God if I love my children and grandchildren, love my brothers and sisters, love Christ’s mother. You may quote scripture to me and tell me I have to hate my father and mother, brothers and sisters, children and friends, and only love God, but I say that is a complete misreading.

Christ Jesus, my Lord and Savior, is paramount. I will die for my neighbor, I will die for my loved ones, I will die for my Lord Jesus. Remember, Christ also said, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15:13.

Understanding scripture is not something I do on a whim, I have read many translations of the Bible many times through and through in my life, prayed as I read, and I am still reading it. It does not get old, and there is a lot to learn each time, as any Christian knows.

[OLD REGGIE]

You really should'nt mock the holy mother of Jesus as some sort of game, my friend. One day soon enough you will be face to face answering to Our Lord why you were insulting Him most holy, and His most BELOVED Mother. What you obviously don't know is that women and men in those times took a sacred vow of chastitiy, IT WAS ALWAYS FOR LIFE. Not just until they felt they were "in the mood" and would then walk away from their sacred vows. Same with the men, like St. Joseph, who had also chosen to take the vows of chastity. This is PROVEN when the angel informed Mary that she'd be giving birth to the very Son of God. Mary's reply was,"How can this be, (I am a woman with perpetual chastity vows and - my addition), I do not know man"?

[OLD REGGIE]

I’m sure that there was an original Septuagint. It seems highly unlikely that there were parallel Septuagints created at the same time. But like the books of Scripture, they were copied with either inadvertant or deliberate changes over time.

More likely, however; that the "Legend of the 70" Septuagint is just that - - - a Legend!

For the fun of it I thought I'd provide a decidedly "anti" Septuagint link for your edification.

THE SEPTUAGINT

Then, for a fair and balanced presentation, an article from an approved Catholic source.

"lastly, the very language of the Septuagint Version betrays in places a rather imperfect knowledge both of Hebrew and of the topography of Palestine, and corresponds more closely with the vulgar idiom of Alexandria."

Catholic Encyclopedia - The Septuagint

[OLD REGGIE]

I agree that talking of Mary as the spouse of God certainly does render not only Scriptural problems but the opportunity for crassness that she does not deserve.

Then stop defending posters who believe that the non divine Jesus was the bastard child of slut Mary and/or the rapist Holy Spirit, and start looking to the Church of Jesus Christ, created by Him and commissioned by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

Calm down Mark. You're coming across as a

man.

[Iscool]

We all know about where you stated that you do not believe what you believe.

Like I said, prove it or admit you are lying...Too late...You haven't been able to prove it...

Pity you have to resort to telling untruths but then you have nothing else to defend your position...

[boatbums]

I think at this point we just hug and kiss each other and leave the hairy stuff to God.