Did Mary and Joseph have children after Jesus?

Answer 1

7

Answer 2

== == Definitely two, but it can be more. Pls see the plural "ARE" on 12:48..

Matthew 12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who "ARE" my brethren?

12:49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! Four Brothers and at least two sisters Matthew 13:55

"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Mark 6:3

Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James,

Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?"

Answer 3

They had at least 6 other children as the Scripture lists 4 brothers and sisters - plural. New International Version (NIV)

55 "Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56 Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"

Answer 4

There are a lot of women named Mary in the New Testament, so it's an assumption that the question refers to Mary the mother of Jesus.

If so, scripture mentions at least seven children attributed to Mary and Joseph:

Jesus, the "firstborn," presumably (and by Jewish standards of the day, legally) the son of Joseph (Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:7)

Four half-brothers named James, Joses, Simon and Juda(s) (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3)

And at least two half-sisters whose names are not given (Matt. 13:56; Mark 6:3).

Answer 5

The Bible lists other brothers and sisters of Jesus. There is one problem, however. When Jesus was on the cross, he nodded at a disciple and said, "Woman behold your son; son behold your mother." He had a disciple who was not related to Mary assume responsibility for her. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the brothers and sisters mentioned in the Bible were by an earlier wife of Joseph. An early church author had seen two Roman census records separated by time that had mentioned Joseph and Jesus. Since the early church had such respect for Mary, we assume he would have mentioned Mary if she had been listed. We must assume that the Romans did not count women. Probably if Joseph and Mary had other children, they were girls otherwise they would have also have been listed in the second census. Still, the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. In spite of evidence to the contrary, James may have been the son of Mary and not an earlier wife.

My view.

Actually I see no problem with Jesus having John take care of His (Jesus' ) mother. John was a true believer and I might add a cousin. Whereas Jesus' brothers had not yet believed on Him. They were still thinking of Him as a mad-man, and they lived in Capernaum, approximately 100 miles north of Jerusalem. Word of the crucifixion of Christ probably wouldn't reach there for a few days

Answer 6

There has been some controversy over this issue, but here is the Roman Catholic answer.

No.

Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus, and remained a virgin for the rest of her life.

According to some people, Bible phrases, like: "the Lord's brother", prove that Mary had other children besides Jesus. Even though the Bible indicates that Mary remained a virgin with the birth of Christ (Matt. 1:23, Luke 1:27, 23:53).

There is also confusion because the name Mary is used by a number of different women, who were close to Jesus.

For example, according to Matthew: "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And are not all his sisters with us?" [Matt. 13:55-56; RSV]. A similar list of names can be found in Mark's Gospel: "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon and are not his sisters here with us?" [Mark 6:3; RSV] These lists agree with each other apart from the minor difference between "Joseph" in Matthew and "Joses" in Mark. Later in both Gospels, the names of those, who followed Jesus to His crucifixion, are recorded. These lists contain family information on two "brothers." According to Matthew, the women, who followed Jesus, were "Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee." [Matt. 27:56; RSV] Mark's list includes: "Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome,... and also many other women." [Mark 15:40; RSV] The same name variation is observed in both lists: Matthew refers to "Joseph"; whereas, Mark refers to "Joses". This variation supports their connection to the names of Jesus' brothers. According to both texts, James and Joseph (or Joses) are the sons of Mary. But this Mary is not referred to as the mother of Jesus. This would be an odd omission, if she were also the mother of Jesus. John's Gospel has a similar list of women: "...standing by the Cross of Jesus were His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene." [John 19:25; RSV] According to John, Mary the mother of Jesus was present at the Cross, but John also records another Mary other than Mary Magdalene. Comparing lists, it appears that James the younger and Joseph (or Joses) were the sons of the other Mary. Elsewhere, Matthew actually calls her "the other Mary." [Matt. 28:1] This other Mary is said to be the "sister" of Jesus' mother. Therefore, James and Joseph (or Joses) are Jesus' cousins and not His siblings. Now since both Marys share the same name, it is unlikely that they were siblings. Instead they were most likely members of the same clan. It would be confusing for parents to name their children with the same name. This is an example of "sister" being used in the wider sense as cousin. One small problem still remains: In Acts 1:13 and Matt 10:3, the younger James, an Apostle, is also said to be the son of Alphaeus. Perhaps the other Mary was married twice, or Alphaeus was also called Clopas (not uncommon in the Bible, e.g. Israel vs. Jacob, Simon vs. Peter, Paul vs. Saul...), or Clopas was not the name of her husband but her father, birthplace or whatever. The last explanation is supported by the Douay-Rheims translation: "Mary of Cleophas" [John 19:25].

The Bible text shows that Mary, mother of James, and Mary, mother of Jesus, are different women. The case of two Marys can cause confusion today as perhaps with the crowds of Jesus' day.

Thanks go to "Away Right Now" who provided this answer at Answers dot Yahoo dot Com (see reference for original cite)

Answer 7

A:

In order to preserve the traditional perpetual virginity of Mary, some teach that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were actually children of Joseph from a previous marriage, although the gospels portrayal of them suggests a closer relationship to Mary.

It seems clear from the nativity accounts that the authors of Matthew and Luke did not believe that Joseph had any children born before Jesus. In Matthew's account, Joseph would scarcely have fled to Egypt without his other young children. In Luke's account, Joseph would hardly have taken the heavily pregnant Mary all the way from Nazareth to Bethlehem, leaving his other young children to fend for themselves. Yet both stories say that Joseph and Mary had no other children with them. Luke 2:42-44 also portrays Jesus as still an only child at the age of twelve.

Jesus' brothers and sisters must have been younger than he, and if the account in Luke 2:42-44, much younger. Joseph did not have older children.

Answer 8

There is nothing in the New Testament that would have indicated that "Mary and Joseph" have children after Jesus was born.

Answer 9

Six