Jump to content

Talk:Brothers of Jesus: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Brothers of Jesus/Archive 1) (bot
Line 19: Line 19:
}}
}}
{{Archives|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=60|auto=long|[[/Sources]] - citations from primary sources}}
{{Archives|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=60|auto=long|[[/Sources]] - citations from primary sources}}

== 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, [https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/jesus/tree.html but it does]. We need a better source.[[User:Achar Sva|Achar Sva]] ([[User talk:Achar Sva|talk]]) 08:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)


{{tree chart/start|style=font-size:100%;line-height:100%;}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | |,|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|.| |}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | Mar |y| Jos | | | | | | | Clo |y| aMa |Mar=[[Mary (mother of Jesus)|Mary]]|Jos=[[Saint Joseph|Joseph]]|Clo=[[Clopas]]|aMa=[[Mary of Clopas|another Mary]]}}
{{tree chart|border=0| |,|-|-|v|-|-|v|-|-|+|-|-|v|-|-|v|-|-|.| | | |!| |}}
{{tree chart|border=0|Jes | Jas | Jos | Sim | sis | sis | Jud | | Sie |Jes=[[Jesus]]|boxstyle_Jes=background-color: #afa;|Jas=[[James, brother of Jesus|James]]<br /><small>d. 62</small>|Jos=[[Joses#Joses, brother of Jesus|Joses]]|Sim=[[Simon, brother of Jesus|Simon]]|sis=sister|Jud=[[Jude, brother of Jesus|Jude]]|Sie=[[Simeon of Jerusalem|Simeon<br />successor to James as head of the Jerusalem Church<br />]]<br /><small>d. 106</small>}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |!| | | | | |}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ? | | | |?=?}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |!| | | |}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ? | | | |?=?}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |!| | | | |}}
{{tree chart|border=0| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | BJK | | | |BJK=Bishop [[Judah Kyriakos]]<br/><small>fl. c. 148–49</small>}}
{{tree chart/end}}

:You seem to be taking it as self-evident that this is an error, rather than a conscious choice. [[User:Agricolae|Agricolae]] ([[User talk:Agricolae|talk]]) 16:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
The charge that Frontline is wrong is meaningless without historical (not Biblical) evidence that someone besides Joseph was Jesus' father. [[User:Sundayclose|Sundayclose]] ([[User talk:Sundayclose|talk]]) 18:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
::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. [[User:Rafaelosornio|Rafaelosornio]] ([[User talk:Rafaelosornio|talk]]) 19:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
::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. [[User:Rafaelosornio|Rafaelosornio]] ([[User talk:Rafaelosornio|talk]]) 20:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
:::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. [[User:Agricolae|Agricolae]] ([[User talk:Agricolae|talk]]) 20:58, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

== 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. [[User:OrangeCounty|OrangeCounty]] ([[User talk:OrangeCounty|talk]]) 12:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
:[[Siblings of Jesus]] already redirects here, so finding the article isn't really an issue that this proposed name change would help. [[User:Agricolae|Agricolae]] ([[User talk:Agricolae|talk]]) 13:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

::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. [[User:OrangeCounty|OrangeCounty]] ([[User talk:OrangeCounty|talk]]) 16:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)


== Hong Xiuquan ==
== Hong Xiuquan ==

Revision as of 01:07, 8 June 2023

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]


Relative to Jesus' brothers, which some say were his "blood" brothers; in the New Testament, Joseph is called "Jesus' father" even though he wasn't which could mean they weren't his "blood brothers. 2605:BA00:3208:924:6CF5:9C85:F216:7D88 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do Mark, John, and Paul reject the incarnation and divinity of Jesus?

According to John Painter this would be the position of Mark, John and Paul. I believe that for these types of statements attribution is necessary. I also do not understand why the user Achar Sva is very attached to the fact that this statement must be in the article, which has no relationship with the topic of "brothers of Jesus" Rafaelosornio. (talk) 15:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The failure of Mark, John and Paul to mention the virgin birth is an objective fact, not an opinion (read the Bible); and the very flimsy foundation for the virgin birth makes it most likely that the brethren of Jesus are exactly that. Now please stop reverting or I'll have to report you. Achar Sva (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have not answered my question, we are talking about the incarnation and divinity of Jesus. Focus well on the subject please. The text says:
"Ebionites, who rejected the incarnation and divinity of Jesus; it is arguably presupposed the position also of Mark, John, and Paul"
We are focusing on the the incarnation and divinity of Jesus. Tell me what is the relationship with the fact that Mark, John and Paul do not believe in the incarnation and divinity of Jesus with the "brothers of Jesus"?
And a piece of advice, stop removing referenced text related to the topic and place texts not related to the topic like these that Mark, John and Paul did not believe in the divinity of Jesus or in his incarnation. Rafaelosornio (talk) 16:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please Rafael, learn to read. Achar Sva (talk) 05:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That happens because you don't put the full text. I will put the full text in the article --Rafaelosornio (talk) 05:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC).[reply]
The Gospels of Mark and John do not even mention the Nativity of Jesus. They also only briefly mention Jesus' unnamed mother, who is mostly irrelevant to their narratives.: "The Gospel of Mark names her once (Mark 6:3) and mentions Jesus' mother without naming her in Mark 3:31–32" ... "The Gospel of John refers to the mother of Jesus twice, but never mentions her name. She is first seen at the wedding at Cana (John 2:1–12). The second reference has her standing near the cross of Jesus together with Mary Magdalene, Mary of Clopas (or Cleophas), and her own sister (possibly the same as Mary of Clopas; the wording is semantically ambiguous), along with the "disciple whom Jesus loved" (John 19:25–26)." Neither gospels depicts the early life or ancestry of Jesus as significant. Dimadick (talk) 09:29, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Dimadick. This is the point: Mark, Paul and John have no mention of a supernatural aspect to the birth of Jesus, and this implies that they believed his birth was non-supernatural and his brothers accordingly full brothers. John did believe that Jesus was God incarnate, Mark did not (his Jesus is an extraordinary human, not a divine being), and Paul's position is unclear. Achar Sva (talk) 03:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What about John 1:1 & John 1:14 Rafaelosornio (talk) 04:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" - as I said above, John believed that Jesus was the Word incarnate. The Word, in turn is the divine Wisdom through which God created the world, as described in Genesis 1. That's not what Matthew and Luke and Mark believed. But our article is about the brethren of Jesus, not competing Christologies in the New Testament.Achar Sva (talk) 05:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"No Biblical Evidence"

The page states more than once that there is "no Biblical evidence" for Joseph being an older man and the Adelphoi being step siblings and/or cousins, but the most common scriptural evidence given by Catholics seems to be twofold. Firstly, Joseph died before the crucifixion, and secondly Jesus has to give Mary away to be taken care of by John, an Apostle who was not a blood relative. These two pieces are the most common given by Catholics, so in the interest of fairness the page should reflect this instead of the biased statement of "there is no Biblical evidence" Ptinkle99 (talk) 03:37, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brothers_of_Jesus&oldid=1159066382"