In Luke 2:41-51 is the story of Jesus at age 12 having been left in Jerusalem. We hear of his parents searching for him among their friends and relatives, of their travel back to Jerusalem and their search for him there as well as the finding in the temple etc. What we hear absolutely NOTHING of here is any siblings. Jesus is still an only child at the age of twelve. He has relatives, but no siblings.
- 41
- Each year his parents went to Jerusalem for the feast of Passover,
- 42
- and when he was twelve years old, they went up according to festival custom.
- 43
- After they had completed its days, as they were returning, the boy Jesus remained behind in Jerusalem, but his parents did not know it.
- 44
- Thinking that he was in the caravan, they journeyed for a day and looked for him among their relatives and acquaintances,
- 45
- but not finding him, they returned to Jerusalem to look for him.
- 46
- After three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions,
- 47
- and all who heard him were astounded at his understanding and his answers.
- 48
- When his parents saw him, they were astonished, and his mother said to him, “Son, why have you done this to us? Your father and I have been looking for you with great anxiety.”
- 49
- And he said to them, “Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?”
- 50
- But they did not understand what he said to them.
- 51
- He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them; and his mother kept all these things in her heart.
We do see a reference to brothers and sisters in Matthew 13:55-56…
- 55
- Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas?
- 56
- Are not his sisters all with us? Where did this man get all this?”
Again, in Matt 27:56 we hear another reference to Mary and the sons James and Joseph…
- 56
- Among them were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.
However, John 19:25 says…
- 25
- Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala.
This shows that what may at first appear to be the mother of Jesus, and by extension his siblings, in Matthew 13:55-56 and Matthew 27:56 is in fact Jesus mother’s sister, who is also named Mary and apparently a frequent companion to Mary Magdalene. This makes it abundantly clear that James, Joseph, Simon and Judas are not Jesus brothers in the sense that they are born to the same mother. On the contrary, they are his cousins. In Middle Eastern cultures, it is very common for male relatives to be called one’s brothers, and one’s female relatives to be called sisters. Even other familial appellations often are used in a more general sense in the Middle East than they are in most Western cultures.
Fr. William Saunders explains: The problem emerges in understanding the meaning of the word brother. In the original text of the gospel, we find the Greek word adelphos, meaning brother, used. However, adelphos does not just mean blood brothers born of the same parents. Rather, adelphos was used to describe brothers not born of the same parents, like a half-brother or step-brother. The word also described other relationships like cousins, nephews, etc. For example in Genesis 13:8 and 14:14-16, the word adelphos was used to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot; however, these two men did not share a brother relationship, but one of uncle and nephew. Another instance is that of Laban, who was an adelphos to Jacob, not as a brother, but as an uncle.
The same understanding is true for the word sister. For example, in the Gospel, Mary of Clophas is called “the sister” of Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Obviously, St. Ann and St. Joachim would not have named two daughters “Mary”; instead, the “sister” used here denotes a cousin relationship.
Actually this verbal confusion originates in Hebrew and Aramaic, the languages of most of the original Old Testament texts and of Christ. In these languages, no special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother, or step-brother; so they used the word brother or a circumlocution, such as in the case of a cousin, “the son of the brother of my father.” When the Old Testament was translated into Greek and the New Testament written in Greek, the word adelphos was used to capture all of these meanings. So in each instance, we must examine the context in which the title is used. In all, the confusion arises in English because of the lack of distinct terms for relatives in the Hebrew and Aramaic, and the usage of the Greek adelphos to signify all of these relations.*
In the light of this, while it is clear that Mary, the mother of James, Joseph, Simon and Judas is a near relative to Mary the mother of Jesus it is unlikely that she is actually the daughter of Mary’s parents, as it would be highly unusual to name two daughters the same name. In fact, she may be a sister-in-law, and not of the same mother, which would explain the apparent oddity of two sisters being given the same name. In light off this passage, and the cultural literacy, it is also easy to understand how in the Matthew 13 passage it would be easy for acquaintances to know Jesus relatives but misunderstand to which ‘Mary’ he belonged. Either way, it is abundantly clear from the John 19:25 passage that the Mary, mother of James, Joseph, Simon and Judas is NOT Mary the mother of Jesus. Therefore we still see no evidence of siblings born of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Also in this passage in John 19:25, we see Jesus mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala at the foot of the cross. In Middle Eastern culture, the males in the family are responsible for the women. Once the husband is dead, the responsibility of caring for mother and sisters falls on the eldest son and should the eldest son die, on down through the succession of sons. In this case, Joseph is long gone from the scene and Jesus has obviously taken responsibility from his mothers care. So here is Christ upon the cross, he is dying and he knows it and here before him is his mother for whose care he is directly responsible. Had he brothers younger than he, and he died, the care of his mother would pass on to the next son in line and there would’ve been no need to address the issue of her care. Yet here Jesus turns to the ‘disciple whom he loves’ and says to his mother, ‘Woman, behold your son’ and then to the disciple, ‘behold your mother’ and the passage says from that hour the disciple took her into his home. That means he took over the care and responsibility of Jesus mother… the responsibility that should’ve passed on to the next son… unless Jesus was the ONLY son of Mary, in which case he would’ve known she was going to be left without provision. We see in the case of Ruth and Boaz that such responsibilities were not overlooked lightly. If someone other than the nearest kin wants to take on a responsibility that by right belongs to someone else, that person must give up the right to the care of the dependant person before someone else may assume it. We hear nothing in this passage of such a thing happening. Jesus gives over her care and it is done. Instantly. Very strong evidence that Jesus was, in fact, the only son Mary had.
In John 7:3-5 we see ‘brothers’ giving Jesus advice as an elder would do…
- 3
- So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples also may see the works you are doing.
- 4
- No one works in secret if he wants to be known publicly. If you do these things, manifest yourself to the world.”
- 5
- For his brothers did not believe in him.
This is not the behavior of younger siblings. Neither is it the rebellious and angry urges of jealous younger siblings, but counsel such as elders in a family would give. Likewise, Jesus does not rebuke them as he would have the authority to do with younger siblings… but responds with respect even as he disagrees with them. Once again we are seeing a cultural use of familial language in a general sense… male relatives referred to as ‘brothers’.
We see yet more references to ‘brothers’ in Mark 3:21 but nothing that does not also fit within the cultural language, nothing to suggest that these ‘brothers’ are anything more specific than male relatives of Christ. In fact, if anything the authority they exhibit in trying to seize him supports the understanding of them as elder male members of the family.
Another scripture often used to argue for siblings, or at the very least against the perpetual virginity of Mary, is Mathew 1:24-25.
- 24
- When Joseph awoke, he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took his wife into his home.
- 25
- He had no relations with her until she bore a son, and he named him Jesus.
Yet this does not say that Joseph ‘knew’ her AFTER she bore her son. It clarifies that he had no relationship with her UP UNTIL she bore the son. In the conversation with my Dad that sent me to typing up the reasons for my belief, Dad asked how it might have made any siblings of Christ feel to know of the special nature of his conception etc, specifically the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit. I suggest that the same question should be asked of Joseph. Would a man not feel some reservation at BEST about engaging in marital relations with a woman whom he KNEW had born the son of the Living God? Might he not have seen her as set apart and refrained from such relations? Such a possibility must be considered, especially since this passage in no way indicates that Joseph had relations with Mary AFTER the birth, but instead is obviously making it crystal clear that no relations existed BEFORE the birth of Christ
*I realize that some would prefer a reference not ‘in league with the Catholic Church’ for this but it is late at night and I’m tired so I’m not going digging for the others, though I know they exist, and settling for one as this is hardly a hidden or obscure cultural practice.
