Jump to content

Talk:Brothers of Jesus: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 76: Line 76:


:We have no way of telling whether it's true or not. [[User:tgeorgescu|tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:tgeorgescu|talk]]) 10:30, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
:We have no way of telling whether it's true or not. [[User:tgeorgescu|tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:tgeorgescu|talk]]) 10:30, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

== Jesus' brothers. Jose.was NOT the father of Jesus, but yet he is mentioned as his father, meaning that they didn't have to be his "flesh" brothers.. ==

Jesus' brothers. Joseph was not Jesus' father, but he is mentioned as such, meaning his "brothers" didn't have to be his "flesh" brothers. [[Special:Contributions/2605:BA00:3208:924:6CF5:9C85:F216:7D88|2605:BA00:3208:924:6CF5:9C85:F216:7D88]] ([[User talk:2605:BA00:3208:924:6CF5:9C85:F216:7D88|talk]]) 01:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:09, 7 January 2023

Was the Epistle of James written by someone else in his name?

In fact, the Epistle of James is traditionally attributed to James the brother of Jesus and not was written by someone else in his name; and about the Epistle of Jude is traditionally attributed to Jude the apostle, and not an unknown author borrowing the name of the brother of Jesus. I think this paragraph requires additional references or check if the writing agrees with the sources given:

Most scholars believe that James was written by someone else in his name (it first appears in a citation by [[Origen c.227),[41] and there is widespread, although not unanimous, support for the view that Jude was composed in the early part of the 2nd century by an unknown author borrowing the name of the brother of Jesus.[42] --Rafaelosornio (talk) 04:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't pretend to know anything about this subject. I think it's worth mentioning the two epistles, as they do at the least bear the names of two of the brethren, but it needs to be kept brief - this article isn't the place to enter into discussions of authenticity. What I'd like to do is have some subsections on each of the named brethren (and maybe the sisters), and this para could be split and placed in those. So, put it in the to-do basket for now. Achar Sva (talk) 06:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With the brothers, it is relatively easy. Jesus' sisters are not named in the Gospels. Dimadick (talk) 08:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the sisters I want to do a subsection saying exactly that and then surveying the later traditions (within reason of course). Achar Sva (talk) 10:26, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Testament references

I rewrote this section because I felt it needed to focus more on the brothers themselves, and less on the passages of scripture where they're mentioned. I haven't introduced any new material or sources, but I've shortened a little to make the section more readable - we need to remember that we're catering to an audience which probably knows little or nothing and wants no more than a broad introduction. Comments welcome. Achar Sva (talk) 08:36, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This family tree from Frontline is wrong - it says Joseph was Jesus' father

I'm sure it doesn't mean to say Joseph was Jesus's father, but it does. We need a better source.Achar Sva (talk) 08:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


MaryJosephClopasanother Mary
JesusJames
d. 62
JosesSimonsistersisterJudeSimeon
successor to James as head of the Jerusalem Church

d. 106
?
?
Bishop Judah Kyriakos
fl. c. 148–49
You seem to be taking it as self-evident that this is an error, rather than a conscious choice. Agricolae (talk) 16:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The charge that Frontline is wrong is meaningless without historical (not Biblical) evidence that someone besides Joseph was Jesus' father. Sundayclose (talk) 18:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If we talk about historical evidence there you have Eusebius of Caesarea or many others, it would be important to see what the other historians say. You already take for granted that there is no historical evidence that Joseph was not the father of Jesus, that is just your personal opinion. If we follow your personal opinion, there is also no historical evidence that Joseph was the father of Jesus. As far as I know, just we have biblical evidence but not historical evidence. Rafaelosornio (talk) 19:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you see the table in the link, clauses a,b,c,d are the sources they use to say that Joseph was the father of Jesus. These clauses correspond to Mark 6:3, Matthew 13:55, Galatians 1:19, Mark 15:40. The only thing they used to say that Jesus was the son of Joseph was pure biblical evidence. (Although in reality Joseph was the putative father of Jesus) Perhaps the table is wrong. Rafaelosornio (talk) 20:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the table doesn't reflect the authors' beliefs, perhaps it does. It is not uncommon for published genealogical charts to have errors, and it is also not uncommon for genealogical charts to intentionally contain controversial material that is not well documented in the chart (or even in the accompanying text). I don't think we can presume what their intent was based on what we see on the Frontline site - yes, it only cites biblical verses, but you can't exactly cite 'human reproductive biology' (if that is their reasoning). I can't see the original work online to tell whether they even discuss the question, or perhaps attribute their charted reconstruction from another source. Obviously, if it clearly is an error - if the text directly contradicts the chart - then we don't want to propagate that error, but if it is just a question of the reconstruction disagreeing with certain dogma, that is not sufficient reason to reject it when it is presented as an example of how 'some' view it rather than as a consensus, and it might better represent the full diversity of opinion to include such a non-parthenogenesis viewpoint among those shown. Agricolae (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Siblings would be more accurate

I had read somewhere that JoN had siblings, both brothers and sisters, so wanted to find out more. Found this article's title imprecise in that regard with the sisters getting lumped in as brothers in the copy. An effect of cultural practices combined with lack of historical data, I get it. Still feel the subject positioning is a bit lopsided. Title: Siblings of Jesus (Greek word) This would help the writers structure the article and would help readers not steeped in Christianity (many ethnic Christians included in this category) to find the article. OrangeCounty (talk) 12:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Siblings of Jesus already redirects here, so finding the article isn't really an issue that this proposed name change would help. Agricolae (talk) 13:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, agreed. And I realized that reason wasn't super well supported after posting as I had found the article without too much trouble. Face-palm. I'll stick to a simpler issue and that is the article conveys information about what is known about sibling relations generally to include both sexes. So Brothers as the focus causes the writer to struggle and to this reader seems an unnecessary distinction. OrangeCounty (talk) 16:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Xiuquan

Maybe mention the guy somewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.212.127.195 (talk) 01:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The brothers and sisters of the Jesus is in another mother

Is it true so tell me some evidence 116.90.116.58 (talk) 10:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have no way of telling whether it's true or not. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:30, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus' brothers. Jose.was NOT the father of Jesus, but yet he is mentioned as his father, meaning that they didn't have to be his "flesh" brothers..

Jesus' brothers. Joseph was not Jesus' father, but he is mentioned as such, meaning his "brothers" didn't have to be his "flesh" brothers. 2605:BA00:3208:924:6CF5:9C85:F216:7D88 (talk) 01:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]