Brothers of Jesus

I decided to bring this issue, which remains obscure in religious and historical texts, to the agenda. If you read the works of the apostles, you will see that the apostles describe their own deeds, but summarize about others. This is an important issue that requires us to investigate about Jacob and his other brothers, who led the congregation for 32 years. Due to other reasons related to Yakup, this issue is also an issue that needs to be examined from my point of view. Because "we have continued your line from your brother". hehehe.

In the Bible, Jesus' brothers are mentioned in several verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus' mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but their names and numbers are not reported (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10 it is written that Jesus' brothers went to celebrate the holiday, while Jesus stayed behind. At Acts 1:14, Jesus' brothers and mother are described as praying with other disciples. Galatians 1:19 declares that James was Jesus' brother. The most natural conclusion to be drawn from these verses is the interpretation that Jesus really had siblings from one mother and one father from another.

Some Roman Catholics claim that these "brothers" were actually cousins ​​of Jesus. However, in each case, the specific Greek word meaning "brother" was used. While this phrase may refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is physical sibling. There is a word for "cousin" in Greek, but this word is not used in these verses.

A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus' brothers and sisters were brothers from Joseph's previous marriage. The fact that Joseph was much older than Mary, had been married before, had many children, and was widowed before marrying Mary are fabrications with no Biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even imply that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before marrying Mary, Joseph and Mary on their journey to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7), Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15), or Nazareth Why were these children not mentioned on their return journey (Matthew 2:20-23)?

There is no biblical reason to believe that these brothers were other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who object to the fact that Jesus had one mother and one father do not do so by reading the Bible, but because of their prejudices about the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is a completely unbiblical concept: “But until she gave birth to her son, Joseph told her (Mary). ) did not touch. Jesus named the child born” (Matthew 1:25).

Jesus had one mother and one father, and they were the children of Joseph and Mary. This is the clear teaching of the Word of God on this subject.

I decided to bring this issue, which remains obscure in religious and historical texts, to the agenda. If you read the works of the apostles, you will see that the apostles describe their own deeds, but summarize about others. This is an important issue that requires us to investigate about Jacob and his other brothers, who led the congregation for 32 years. Due to other reasons related to Yakup, this issue is also an issue that needs to be examined from my point of view. Because "we have continued your line from your brother". hehehe.

In the Bible, Jesus' brothers are mentioned in several verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus' mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but their names and numbers are not reported (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10 it is written that Jesus' brothers went to celebrate the holiday, while Jesus stayed behind. At Acts 1:14, Jesus' brothers and mother are described as praying with other disciples. Galatians 1:19 declares that James was Jesus' brother. The most natural conclusion to be drawn from these verses is the interpretation that Jesus really had siblings from one mother and one father from another.

Some Roman Catholics claim that these "brothers" were actually cousins ​​of Jesus. However, in each case, the specific Greek word meaning "brother" was used. While this phrase may refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is physical sibling. There is a word for "cousin" in Greek, but this word is not used in these verses.

A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus' brothers and sisters were brothers from Joseph's previous marriage. The fact that Joseph was much older than Mary, had been married before, had many children, and was widowed before marrying Mary are fabrications with no Biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even imply that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before marrying Mary, Joseph and Mary on their journey to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7), Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15), or Nazareth Why were these children not mentioned on their return journey (Matthew 2:20-23)?

There is no biblical reason to believe that these brothers were other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who object to the fact that Jesus had one mother and one father do not do so by reading the Bible, but because of their prejudices about the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is a completely unbiblical concept: “But until she gave birth to her son, Joseph told her (Mary). ) did not touch. Jesus named the child born” (Matthew 1:25).

Jesus had one mother and one father, and they were the children of Joseph and Mary. This is the clear teaching of the Word of God on this subject.

The Roman Catholics are lying. I've said it before, Catholics aren't Christians. This is usually when someone accuses me of hate or intolerance.

But I'm just stating a fact. In the same way as saying the Jews aren't Christians. Would anyone accuse me of hate if I made that statement? Not unless I said this makes them less than Christians, or that it's a bad thing.

The fact is, Roman Catholicism was an attempt by Roman leaders to subvert the actual teachings of Christ. They managed by introducing several heresies:
1. Acceptance of the clearly false book of Revelation
2. Veneration of the saints (the Bible actually says all the dead are saints, at all who are in Christ; it says nothing of standards of sainthood, they are just regular people and not to be worshipped). Their images and statues are in these temples as idols.
3. Belief that Mary is a perpetual virgin, Mother of God, Queen ofHeaven (a title shared by Ishtar, revealing its pagan roots), and can be prayed to.

Quote from: wise on June 13, 2023, 03:51:59 AM

I decided to bring this issue, which remains obscure in religious and historical texts, to the agenda. If you read the works of the apostles, you will see that the apostles describe their own deeds, but summarize about others. This is an important issue that requires us to investigate about Jacob and his other brothers, who led the congregation for 32 years. Due to other reasons related to Yakup, this issue is also an issue that needs to be examined from my point of view. Because "we have continued your line from your brother". hehehe.

In the Bible, Jesus' brothers are mentioned in several verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus' mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but their names and numbers are not reported (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10 it is written that Jesus' brothers went to celebrate the holiday, while Jesus stayed behind. At Acts 1:14, Jesus' brothers and mother are described as praying with other disciples. Galatians 1:19 declares that James was Jesus' brother. The most natural conclusion to be drawn from these verses is the interpretation that Jesus really had siblings from one mother and one father from another.

Some Roman Catholics claim that these "brothers" were actually cousins ​​of Jesus. However, in each case, the specific Greek word meaning "brother" was used. While this phrase may refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is physical sibling. There is a word for "cousin" in Greek, but this word is not used in these verses.

A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus' brothers and sisters were brothers from Joseph's previous marriage. The fact that Joseph was much older than Mary, had been married before, had many children, and was widowed before marrying Mary are fabrications with no Biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even imply that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before marrying Mary, Joseph and Mary on their journey to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7), Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15), or Nazareth Why were these children not mentioned on their return journey (Matthew 2:20-23)?

There is no biblical reason to believe that these brothers were other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who object to the fact that Jesus had one mother and one father do not do so by reading the Bible, but because of their prejudices about the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is a completely unbiblical concept: “But until she gave birth to her son, Joseph told her (Mary). ) did not touch. Jesus named the child born” (Matthew 1:25).

Jesus had one mother and one father, and they were the children of Joseph and Mary. This is the clear teaching of the Word of God on this subject.

The Roman Catholics are lying. I've said it before, Catholics aren't Christians. This is usually when someone accuses me of hate or intolerance.

But I'm just stating a fact. In the same way as saying the Jews aren't Christians. Would anyone accuse me of hate if I made that statement? Not unless I said this makes them less than Christians, or that it's a bad thing.

The fact is, Roman Catholicism was an attempt by Roman leaders to subvert the actual teachings of Christ. They managed by introducing several heresies:
1. Acceptance of the clearly false book of Revelation
2. Veneration of the saints (the Bible actually says all the dead are saints, at all who are in Christ; it says nothing of standards of sainthood, they are just regular people and not to be worshipped). Their images and statues are in these temples as idols.
3. Belief that Mary is a perpetual virgin, Mother of God, Queen ofHeaven (a title shared by Ishtar, revealing its pagan roots), and can be prayed to.

But I like Irish, Spanish, and Mexican Pussy! So that kinda override everything you said really. At least they worship what they can see!

Those middle eastern sand people worship a fucking invisible sky god, and a flippin book!! Only crazy people do that! Im looking at you Protestants!

Could be because of the unbearale heat of that area that made them crazy. Crazy people worship stuff! Thats why they also worship money! And what da fak are they doing in Europe anyway? Europe is like a garden, these jungle people dont belong in the garden!

As far as Im concerned you should never worship anything! Not even the Truth (God of the Bible). The Garden of Eden was in Central Europe!

:rolls_eyes:

There is nothing wrong with worshiping something invisible or intangible.

There is plenty with worshiping something only physical.

Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules: 21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? 22 These rules, which have to do with things that are all destined to perish with use, are based on merely human commands and teachings.

Ahem. Suppose I were to worship blackberries. After all, I can see them, I can taste them, I can touch them. Real right? Why not worship something real? Well because either I eat them and now they are gone... or they rot.

As for the Muslims, yes, they fixate on a book.

So spiritual. Not at all materialistic.

Things like justice, truth, or love are not able to be touched. But you certainly know the difference between a lack of love and the presence of love, right? But you can only touch a person who loves you, not the love itself.

I don't realy give a shit about this guy BUT sometimes he just nails it! And this is one of those times.




God of the Bible is The Father, we are created by God, and God loves creation. God is Love (Thruth)! Hence we are not supposed to worship Truth!

The ancients had much more grasp of what was needed by our gods than the Abrahamic reductionists, that while trying to simplify the pantheon, (presumably driven by the burgeoning number of names as the Romans tried to incorporate local deities), went the whole hog and ended up at one.

This was ridiculous, if you pile everything on to one poor construct, then the dichotomy of good and evil screams for an adversary, so then it’s “o yeah, Satan!”, but what about all the matriarchal cults that are popping up? Well okay, there’s Mary, can’t have Eve, too submissive, maybe the whore he saw a lot of, no, probably not.

What about heralds and messengers? Can’t have the supreme being running around just saying “Oi, that’s not on,” it’s demeaning. All right, the angels can just stop singing hoshana’s and do something. That’s fine but when we want a re-write to get away from the whole psychopathic desert tribe vibe, we will need someone with a bit more authority than a member of the winged choir. Yeah, we’ll give him a son, but he doesn’t have a wife. Bloody hell, forget that we’ll have a holy ghost and more immaculate conception and a clause about working in ways we can’t comprehend. Great, but we are back with a pantheon.

Shush, there is only one loving god. Oookay. 

I could not understand how the subject evolved into monotheism discuss. possibly language barrier.

Jesus was not God, he was a prophet. But at the biblical council, statements suggesting that Jesus was God were brought to the fore, and the biblical copies of Jesus as a human being were destroyed.

On the one hand, you say that the peoples of the Middle East are obsessed with being created by a single, abstract God, while on the other hand you seem to forget that Jesus and the other prophets were Middle Easterners. Even the Council of Iznik, where the current bibles were written, is a city on the Middle East side of Turkey. And on the one hand, you have accepted the many Gods that the one God-obsessed people of the Middle East has imposed on you.

The truth is, we taught you the monotheistic belief, the people of the Middle East, and the polytheistic belief. And while some of you believe in the first and others in the second, you continue to insult the ancient culture of the Middle East, which taught you both faiths, instead of thanking you.

Today, it is said that Jesus was crucified in Istanbul. Even the place where he lived in Istanbul and where he was crucified is known. Jesus and the apostles lived in the Middle East. Today's Christians, while firmly committed to their religion and love of Jesus, still harbor a hatred of the societies that produced him. and they do it out of ignorance. because the satanic global mindset that holds the power does not want people to act right together, they want them to hate and fight each other.

Jews are bad for Muslims. Muslims are bad for Christians. Both Muslims and Christians are bad for Jews. what about the Chinese, the Japanese, and the Indians, who have a problem with religion and god itself? nothing. Because they are allies of the globalists in terms of religious belief.

We need to look at the issue from this perspective, away from the discriminatory perspective and look at it from an integrative perspective.

Jesus taught us to love. To love unconditionally, to love your enemy too. Modern philosophy has evolved that this love is true. Because everyone understood this: good and bad are relative concepts. You can fight evil, but you cannot destroy it. because there is an evil in you that prevents you from destroying it. and there is a good in evil that prevents it from destroying you.

Last week, an audience member asked the theology professor the following question on live television: "Why does God allow evil to rule the world? Does he want evil to rule?". I was wondering what his answer would be. He replied, "There is no good or bad for God, these concepts are made up for the life of the world, because people describe things more easily." surprisingly answered correctly from my point of view. this is actually the very starting point of the idea of ​​love that Jesus taught. Evil is not absolute evil. He is good in his bad, and we are the bad ones. If we think like this, destroying us will mean destroying the good. who would want this?

Hey wise guy, don't you realize that you are parroting the fake history that the globalist demons taught you? Don't you see how different people of Europe are to people of the Middle East? In everyway! Were people of Europe so out of touch with their own people, cultures, civilisation, etc, that they would start worshiping some alien peoples cultures and god? I mean we are talking about bad ass Romans here!  I mean..... how does that make sense.... whatever fak it.

When I speak I always speak my mind and use common sense and logic! Don't take it personally. But I think deep down you know I'm making sense here. You seem very western, which means you know where you would rather be when the shit hits the fan!

By the way, az konush oz konush! You type too much.

No. What you said didn't make much sense to me. First, you say that I am repeating globalist history like a parrot. On top of that, if you, who want to tell the real history, had talked about tartaria instead of talking about fake gods, you could claim that it was based on a more concrete justification from your point of view. or you could talk about the Romans imposing their beliefs on Europe and the French Revolution was actually a revolt against the Romanin templars. Or that the Vatican's fake papal system is actually a bad copy of the ecumenical structure in Istanbul.

These are topics that can be talked about for you, but I am not that interested in European history. European history is a complete lie and Europeans have accepted it. As an outsider, I accept in principle the way they describe themselves, and object to matters that concern me. but when it comes to my own history, the history of Turkey, I directly object to misinformation, because it is directly related to me.

For example, I know that the main reason for the Bolshevik revolution is the high number of deaths in the wars in Turkey, and therefore the lack of workers to work in the fields in Moscow, and I tell this everywhere. but the history books do not mention them, for political reasons and partly because of the censorship laws in effect at the time.

Of course, here you can defend your fanciful ideas as you wish and based on them you can say that I made a mistake. I'm used to it. It's okay as long as you don't insult.

Hey wise guy, don't you realize that you are parroting the fake history that the globalist demons taught you? Don't you see how different people of Europe are to people of the Middle East? In everyway! Were people of Europe so out of touch with their own people, cultures, civilisation, etc, that they would start worshiping some alien peoples cultures and god? I mean we are talking about bad ass Romans here!  I mean..... how does that make sense.... whatever fak it.

Umm…. You do realize that the Romans ruled the areas where Jesus was born, raised and preached, don’t you?   Roman occupied territory is hardly an alien people’s culture. 

Uhhhh, that's the very definition of an alien culture. If China or Saudi Arabia occupied America, we'd go from apple pie eating to starting our day with rice, hard boiled eggs, and pickled vegetables. Or praying five times a day to some foreign god. Europe left behind its pagan culture in order to follow Christ, but unlike the war occupation of Rome (complete with taxation), Christianity mostly spread through peace. It was not an alien culture, each region adopted a personal concept of Jesus. Which is why Japanese and Chinese and English and Americans all have a different mindset when it comes to worship. Japanese culture very much is syncretic, and shuns the idea of exclusivity. Which is what leads to the phenomenon of having Buddhist burials, but Christian weddings, and visiting Shinto shrines before exams. China has secret Christians, and they are basically at war with the communist state. English style of Christianity is very different even in Anglican tradition than American style. A religion accepted willingly becomes personalized. A foreign culture imposed on people, on the other hand, is alien.