Did Mary have other children apart from Christ?

First off, the term “brother" had several meanings in the bible, as such it did not exclusively refer to the strict conventional use of the term, it also meant “Cousins" (1 Chr. 23:21–22), Kinsmen (Deut. 23:7; Neh. 5:7; Jer. 34:9, 2 Kgs. 10:13–14), even “Nephew" and “Uncle" had the word “Brother" used in their place (Gen. 14:14, Gen. 29:15)
There was no word for “Cousin" in Hebrew and Aramaic as we have in English and other Germanic languages today. For this reason people who spoke and wrote in these languages often employed the easy general word “brother" to substitute for the more clumsy circumlocutions like “Son of my father’s brother".
Even though the Greek language in which the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) was translated had a separate word for “cousin" the translator still stick with “brother" since it would be risky to begin deciphering each context of the Hebrew usage of the word to assign their proper word.


When the Angel of God told her “You will conceive and bear a Son" she replied “How can this be since I know not any man"? (Luke 1:34)

By the time Mary was giving this reply, she was already betrothed to Joseph. Normally, if she had the intention of having conjugal union with him, she’d have quickly accepted the Angel’s message, yet she didn’t. This goes on to prove the traditional belief that Mary had vowed perpetual virginity while she was serving in the temple as this was not uncommon at the time. If this were not the case, then her question to the Angel would make absolutely no sense.
Again, at the foot of the cross, remember Jesus entrusted Mary to the care of St John (John 19:26-27). It would be impossible for Christ to make such a statement if Mary indeed had other biological children. It rather makes more sense to hold, with the ancient Fathers, that those “brethren" mentioned (James, Joseph, Simon and Jude) were just his relatives.

Some people had believed that those were Joseph’s children from an earlier marriage, that he was a widower when he married Mary. But more recently, we now understand that these were actually Christ’s cousins. James in particular was the Son of another Mary wife of Clopas (who according to the second-century historian Hegesippus was the brother of Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus)

It may be hard to understand the exact relationship of Christ with all those named above, but one thing the Bible makes clear from what we have seen is that, no matter who these were, they were not biological children of Mary.

“His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained” (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]).

By GabrielMary Alimba



  1. Suzy Reply

    The whole point of this exchange seems to suggest that the Lord Jesus is differentiating between blood brothers and ‘brothers in Christ’ as we might call them today:

    Luke 8:19 “Then his mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not reach him because of the crowd. 20 And he was told, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you." 21 But he answered them, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it."

    And a separate issue, after the birth of Jesus, when Joseph was still alive, why wouldn’t they not have had normal marital relations? After all, that’s something that God encourages! (1 Cor 7:7 “5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.”

    1. Maria Gloria Gomez Reply

      Suzy, your point is well made. Jesus brothers are mentioned (Mt 12:46, Luke 8:9, Mk 3:31). James, Josie (Joseph), Simon, and Judas ( Mt 13:55). Jesus’ sister are not mentioned by name, but there is an inference to sisters (Mt 13:56). His brother go to a festival without Jesus ( Jn 7:1-10). In Acts 1:14 His brother are praying with the disciples. Gal. 1:19 mentions James was Jesus brother. The church claims that these brothers were cousins, but the Greek word for brother is mentioned in every circumstance. The Greeks have a word for cousin, and it was not used.
      Another argument that the church uses is that Joseph was a widow with 6 children, again this has no biblical base. Why were they not mentioned in the In the Egypt narrative ( Mt12:13-15)?Why are they missing in trip to Nazareth? (Mt 12: 20-23)? Why are they not mentioned when Mary, And Joseph went to the Temple with Jesus ((Lk 2:4-7)? And finally, the icing on the cake is this: “But he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name of Jesus ( Mt1: 25).

      1. Anthony Reply

        Her point is well made? St. Paul, in Galatians 1:19 identifies James as an “apostle” and a “brother” of the Lord. there are only two James’ that fit both these criteria in scripture. One was a son of Zebedee (Acts 12:1-2), the other a son of Alphaeus (Luke 6:15-16); neither had a father named Joseph.

        We see James and Joseph (also called Joses), who are called Jesus’ “brothers”, named in (Mark 6:3). However, the mother of James and Joseph (Joses) is referred to as the “other Mary” in scripture.

        Matthew 27:56
        “Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.”

        Mark 15:40
        “Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph, and Salome.”

        Now play close attention, This mother of James and Joseph is referred to as the “other Mary”,

        Matthew 28:1
        “After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.”

        Matthew 27:61
        “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were sitting there opposite the tomb”

        Mark 15:47
        Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph saw where he was laid.

        We know this “other Mary” is not the mother of Jesus, For in John’s Gospel we read:

        John 19:25
        “Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene”.

        Here we can see that there’s THREE Mary’s, FIRST the mother of Jesus, second, her “SISTER” (relation) who is also named Mary, who is the wife of Clopas, .THIS is the “OTHER MARY” referenced in (Matthew 27:61 & Matthew 28:1) who is the mother of James and Joseph – who are the “brothers” of Jesus.

        No ones denies that they were related to Jesus by blood but they were not His uterine brothers.

        1. Silvano Reply

          Anthony, you nailed it. I made a family tree exactly with all these names and relations. Jesus had 12 apostles, 6 of them were family….but none of them his blood brothers, since the Bible tells us the names of their mothers and fathers….. and none of them have the Virgin Mary as their mother. I wonder why people like Suzi and Maria Gomez did not see this….don’t they read the Gospels? Mah!

          1. Barbara

            the problem is that many do not read the Bible but take man-made Catholic teachings for the truth..

          2. Rob

            Why did Jesus look at John and tell him to take care of Mary from that point on? Would that not have been Joseph’s job as her husband? And that is the very question that brings it all together. When the father died, the eldest son became the head of the family – why would Mary and Jesus brethren, who all would have been his younger 1/2 brothers be seeking for him in the first place? Why dont we hear or see Joseph anywhere else in the New Testament after Jesus stays in Jerusalem to teach the scribes? Why isnt he at the cross? Logically, Joseph has died. Another logical conclusion is that Mary was married a second time after Joseph died to a man named Alpheus if indeed it is not another name for Joseph, for James the son of Alpheus, was also the Lord’s brother through Mary.

        2. Bill Balisteri Reply

          Your point is only valid if there are specifically only two apostles named James, before Pentecost the 11 were named and Judas was replaced. These are a special 12 that Will judge the 12 tribes of Israel, but clearly there were more than 12 apostles. Paul for one was one of the “some are appointed as apostles” so at least 13 which breaks the 12 only idea. But as many as 25 are mentioned most by name: http://bmarkanderson.com/how-many-apostles-in-the-new-testament-12-or-25/ so just as there are 3 Mary’s there are three James’s
          Also, the new testament was almost all written in Greek not Hebrew. The only time “Lord’s brother” is mentioned by Paul is in respect to James. Paul mentions so many people by name in greetings calling them HIS brother or sister in Christ. It also says that Joseph kept her a virgin until after the child was born, the only requirement to fulfill the prophecy sign that a virgin will give birth to a child. Why wouldn’t it say just Joseph kept her a virgin period? The post also mentions Luke 1:34 this often translated “how can this be since I am a virgin?” She was betrothed or engaged and should be a virgin. betrothals could be 9 months to years while the bridegroom prepared a place for his bride. Perhaps this is the source of her question. Perhaps she knew it was going to be immediate. These reasons are just as speculative about her mind in asking the question as the original post. Perhaps it is just as it is asked I am a virgin how will this happen?

          1. Silvano

            Hey Bill, it is funny, that I have held a presentation on this very subject, talking about the answer that the Virgin Mary gave to the Archangel Gabriel only two weeks ago, and here we have you talking about the same thing, but with a different view. When we talk about historical things, meaning things of the remote past, we must consider all the facts of that time, and taking them into consideration when coming to a conclusion.
            Let me explain my conclusion: Mary was consecrated to the Lord by her parents, who presented her to the temple’s High Priest at the very young age of 3. Mary was going to serve at the temple, and become a virgin. This was a very serious matter, and taken ultra-seriously by the High Priest and the society at large. That means that Mary was going to be a virgin, not until she gets married, but for ever. We find virgins also in the Greek and Roman societies of Mary’s time. A virgin was a highly respected woman, and she would be put to death, if she will lose her virginity; she had to remain Virgin till her death. The Romans later on, allowed a virgin to lose her virginity after she became 35 years old, without being put to death. In the contrary, all the other girls were requested to remain virgins till they got married, and this custom was honoured and highly respected not only by the Jewish society but everywhere in the western civilized world till the 1950’s, then especially in the angle Saxon world, it became fashion to lose the virginity as soon as possible, long before getting married, as we all know.
            Mary must have been a very special virgin, and so devoted to serve God and His temple, too much even for the religious society of her time, that they decided to give her away as a spouse. Who knows how hard must have been for the people working at the temple, to be constantly reminded how truly one must serve the Lord. We see it even in our corporate world of today, how good, hard working people are sent away, out of jealousy of the not so hard working others.
            And so it came that Mary, at the age of 16, was given as a spouse to a man, called Joseph, who will take her as a fiancée for a year at first, and then marry her, all in accordance to the Jewish customs and laws. One other virtue of Mary, beside purity was obedience. Mary learned to obey, no matter what, so she left the temple with no questions asked.
            But for Mary there was only one thing that mattered: she has given herself to God, and she was a Virgin, not because she did not have sex yet, but it was her Status: she was a Virgin, full stop, and that for the rest of her life. And she really meant it. In her pure heart, she knew that God will take care of her. Here we find in her a third virtue: Trusting in God.
            When the Archangel Gabriel came to her, she was officially the fiancée of Joseph. It was expected from her to get married and have a family, and until then, she would not have sex with anyone, of course. If someone would tell such a girl, that she was going to have a baby boy, the most logical answer would have been: “Oh, how nice for you to tell me that, I am so glad that my first born will be a boy. I will tell Joseph this, and I am sure he would be very happy to hear it." But no, her answer was: “ How can this be, I am a virgin (or in some other translations: I do not know any man). What kind of an answer is that?!? The Archangel Gabriel did not say: “Look, Mary, I came here to tell you that you are pregnant", there and then her famous answer would have made sense, true? Her answer points to the fact that she was a Virgin, that special class of women, who would never sleep with a man, no matter what. Her answer: “How can this be; I am a Virgin" makes perfect sense.
            Joseph, who was a righteous man, wanted to leave her, as soon as he found out, that she was pregnant. But it was an angel that came to him and told him the truth. Since he was a righteous man, he understood the plan of Lord, and accepted her the way she was, including that Mary had consecrated herself to the Lord, and she had to remain virgin till her death. He honoured that, never touched her, never had any children with her (all the other men mentioned in the Gospels as brothers of Jesus, have all, no exception, a mother and a father named by name. And none of them have our Mary as mother. Yes, double check all the Gospels, they all say that!), and he is well known and respected as a Saint because of it.
            Mary’s determination to remain a Virgin was so strong, and her big YES was so sincere, because the world known to her, was the world of God, serving God 24/7 since the tender age of 3. God had prepared her spirit for His plan, as we all know.
            The Holy Spirit, who fathered Jesus through Mary, wants us to understand that Jesus was her first born male, not because there were others, no. But it was the Jewish custom to consecrate the first born male to God at the Temple, and that is what she did. And Jesus fulfilled the Law and was consecrated. The same goes with the word “until" when describing the relationship between Joseph and Mary. Not because Joseph had sex with her after Jesus was born, but to announce to the world, that he was not the father of Jesus. That is how the Holy Spirit works, my friend. Surely different from ours. Hey, don’t blame me. Who has ears, listens, and who has eyes, sees. God bless you.

      2. cyprian Reply

        from Greek world cousin mean ahi.

      3. Believer Reply

        Totally agree with you Maria. I believe everyone who believes in Jesus Christ should read the Bible and pray before doing it. Find your own truth do not let NO man deceive you, for many will be deceived in the last days so says the Bible.. Dont follow traditions or religion, follow Christ The ONLY mediator between God And Man, and the ONLY one who can save us.. Thanks for sharing, Maria..n

      4. Karl Jacques Reply

        Well say Maria Gloria Gomez. Mat:25 “But he had no UNION with her UNTIL she gave birth to a son”. Hope that this will clarify the situation to Suzy and all those questioning about the virginity of Mary. God bless you all.

      5. Leon Reply

        Maria, Great comment. However, lets look at that one word in Matthew 1:25 “UNTIL” But he had no union with her as her husband “until” she had borne her firstborn Son. “her firstborn Son

      6. Doona Goding Reply

        I agree. Joseph did not have Union until she gave birth to Jesus. It would be unrealistic to think that from that time on Mary said no sex Joseph for the rest of their married life!! I am sure God would not have minded if two married people had sex eventually. Joseph respected what God was doing

      7. J.P. Reply

        Well stated, Maria. I found this article interesting.

        Question: “Did Jesus have brothers and sisters (siblings)?”

        Answer: Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible 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 they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. Galatians 1:19 mentions that James was Jesus’ brother. The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.

        Some Roman Catholics claim that these “brothers" were actually Jesus’ cousins. However, in each instance, the specific Greek word for “brother" is used. While the word can refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin," and it was not used. Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-brothers.

        A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus’ brothers and sisters were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage. An entire theory of Joseph’s being significantly older than Mary, having been previously married, having multiple children, and then being widowed before marrying Mary is invented without any biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even hint that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before he married Mary, why are they not mentioned in Joseph and Mary’s trip to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7) or their trip to Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15) or their trip back to Nazareth (Matthew 2:20-23)?

        There is no biblical reason to believe that these siblings are anything other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical: “But he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus" (Matthew 1:25). Jesus had half-siblings, half-brothers and half-sisters, who were the children of Joseph and Mary. That is the clear and unambiguous teaching of God’s Word.

    2. Anthony Reply

      Matthew 25:40 “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren (ADELPHON), even these least, ye did it unto me.”

      According to you, “ADELPHOS” MEANS UTERINE BROTHERS. Are these all Jesus’ uterine brothers?

      Romans 8:29 “For whom he foreknew, he also predestinated to be made conformable to the image of his Son; that he might be the firstborn amongst many brethren (ADELPHOIS)”.



      Christ also calls the Apostles “brothers” in Matthew 28:10 and John 20:17: and the word in both verses is the plural form of “Adelphos”.

      Would you claim that since the term “Adelphos” is used, that the apostles were the “uterine brothers” of Jesus?

      Here’s a little tutorial on the word “Adelphos”

      Hebrews 2:11 “Both the one who makes people holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them his brothers” (Adelphous).

      Here’s “ADLEPHOS” in the plural referring to all those in God’s family as Jesus’ “brothers”.

      Matthew 25:40 “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren (adelphōn), even these least, ye did it unto me”

      Hebrews 3:1 “Wherefore, holy brethren (ADELPHOI), partakers of the heavenly vocation, consider the apostle and high priest of our confession, Jesus”

      if we examine closely Matthew 13:55 where St. James and other men are called “brothers” of the Lord, we would see St. James as a cousin or a relative of Christ rather than a biological brother. For example, Galatians 1:18-19 tells us: “Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.” (New International Version)

      Take note that this James who Paul speaks of is both called a “brother of the Lord” and an “apostle.” If we read the list of the 12 Apostles we read that there are two James. The first James is called a “son of Zebedee.” He would not be the James mentioned in Acts 12:1-2 for he was martyred early on. Even if it was him, his father was Zebedee, not Joseph.

      St. Paul must have referred to the second James, who was an apostle (Luke 6:15-16). This James has a father named Alphaeus, not Joseph. Thus, James the apostle and Jesus were not uterine brothers. Easy enough.

    3. Elroy Reply

      If all those mentions of brothers are actually cousins then John and James are cousins as well. Peter and andrew are cousins as well. My point is that why is the interpretation of brothers concerning Jesus being disputed and not all the other times the Bible mentions brothers. I contend that it is to cover the “Virgin Mary” image portrayed by the church. The Bible does not that indicate that Mary remained a virgin all her life. The Bible actually indicates that Joseph had relations with her after the birth of Jesus.

      1. hilary Reply

        Pls I want to know where the Bible indicated Joseph and mary had a “relationship”

        1. Believer Reply

          Hilary is in Mathew 1:25 God bless…

      2. Karl Jacques Reply

        Mary was chosen among all by God to conceive his son Jesus. At the annunciation by angel Gabriel, Mary accepted the request even that she was betrothed to Joseph and knew that she may be subject of stoning.After the annunciation Mary go to her cousin Elizabeth and said “all the generation will praise me hereafter”.She followed Jesus on the way to Golgota. At the cross Mary was there in compassion with Jesus.Mary was present on the coming of the Holy Spirit. If you think that Mary believed in GOD & JESUS & THE HOLY SPIRIT – If you proclaim that Jesus is the Lord – if you believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the death ; I think that Mary too believe in that and I believe that she remain faithful to GOD and this without reserve. God bless you….

      3. Believer Reply

        Mathew 1:25 and Joseph knew Mary after she gave birth to Jesus, she was NO virgin after that. Also people once a woman gives birth the hymen is brocken thus after that happens the woman is NOT a virgin NO more. We all respect and love Mary for being the mother of our SAVIOUR but not Reilly on her to save us or should we worship her in any way for the Lord in His commandments and throughout the Bible warns us about not being idolors.. Another thing is that in the wedding Jesus was they turned to Mary for that the wine had ended and SHE said go to my son and do how HE TELLS U,. if she had any kind of power she could’ve easely turned that water into wine.. People do.not let ypurselves be fooled, read the Bible and pray before and after so God can reveal himself to u… God bless u all…

        1. Thirumavalan Reply

          Jesus obeyed his mothers words. Mother Mary is not worshiped SHE is honored. there is a lot of difference in worshiping and honored. It is very important to believe the word of God. Jesus called John and showed Mother Mary said This is your Mother, and said mother mary “lady” this your son.

    4. Natalia Ballestero Reply

      Jesus let Mary with John, right? Why He would do that if She had more children? No sence right?

    5. Paul Cacciattolo Reply

      If God just plotted his son on earth instead of having Mary begetting him, all these speculations won’t be there however that would have created further speculations.

    6. stephen Reply

      Bible Ten Commandments Catholic Ten Commandments
      I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
      I am the LORD thy God. Thou shalt have no strange gods before Me.

      Exodus 20:4-6 You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my Commandments.

      Deleted. See also idolatry in the Catholic Church

      (There is idolatry in the Papal system so the second Commandment has been deleted or sometimes it has been absorbed into the first. All remaining Commandments are therefore shifted along one count.)

      Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God In vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
      Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.

      Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD your God: in it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger that is within your gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
      Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.

      (The Sabbath is the fourth Commandment by normal count. The day to be kept is no longer mentioned since they changed the Sabbath to Sunday.)

      (Note that God had more to say about the fourth Commandment than all others and with good reason. It is very important.)

      Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
      Honour thy father and thy mother.

      Thou shalt not kill.
      Thou shalt not kill.

      Thou shalt not commit adultery.
      Thou shalt not commit adultery.

      Thou shalt not steal.
      Thou shalt not steal.

      Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
      Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

      Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.
      Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.

      (The Tenth Commandment is split into two to get back to Ten Commandments.)

      Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods.

    7. thomas thomas Reply


      1. Maria Virginia Arellano Cardenas Reply

        Who are you giving lessons? If you’re right about your words that Catholicism is against the word of God then you are wrong too because the Holy Spirit gave the Word of God To Catholics who in turn out of their traditions after the Holy Spirit filled them out and the mother of Jesus was there, Mary and all the apostles except the traitor received the Holy Spirit and all became brace enough to go out and preached the Crucified Lord even to the point of death. The same Word of God that Catholics, not you, but Catholics who as they were being persecuted and killed passed their beliefs orally until their testimony was put in writing and it wasn’t you who did it, but Catholics. You and all other Protestants are thieves pretending to know what Catholics did and wrote with their blood and it was not until late in the third century that the Bible came to be by the Catholics and if you believe in the Bible you believe in the Catholics or you are one of those thieves that is coming from behind the door that our Lord Jesus made with keys given to Peter not to you period.

  2. Samuel Reply

    Don’t see why it would be important if she was a virgin or not.

    1. Vinny Licitra Reply

      Take your time with this. It is not such an easy point to comprehend.

    2. Gallibus Reply

      In Genesis, the Lord says He will put enmity between the ‘seed of the Woman’ and satan. This is the only time the ‘seed of a woman’ is mentioned; usually, it is the seed of man. This hints at the virgin birth. Have you ever wondered how Jesus can be called the ‘Son of God’?
      Because He is! If He were born of the seed of a woman as well as being conceived by the seed of a man, then He would not be the Son of God but the son of some unnamed man! Jesus was divinely conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and is truly Son of God. Further, the virgin birth was prophesied by Isaiah who said the virgin shall conceive and bear a son. Some people mis-translate this a ‘a maiden’ but as a converted Jewish minister said, ‘If this is the best sign that the Almighty God can give of the coming Messiah, then it is no sign at all! Thousands of maidens give birth to sons every day!’ Think about it.

      Mary was conceived, by special Divine design, without the stain of Original Sin – this was so that the Son of God, to be conceived in her womb, would not have passed onto Him the evil fallen nature of humanity; Both Mary and Jesus would be born free of the Original Sin, like Adam and Eve were before the fall. It has nothing to do with the puritanical notion that sex is evil.

      The only time sex is evil is when it is distorted and defiled by not being practiced according to the divine design.

    3. Barbara Reply

      I think the importtance is seeing that the Catholic church wants to view Mary as ever-virgin– a man-made Catholic thing….what kind of wife was she if she remained a virgin–there was no point & not Biblical

      1. Paul Reply

        The emphasis here is that Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit when Mary was a virgin and not what was her married life was after the birth of our Lord.

    4. Jennifer Reply

      Truthfully I don’t either. The nativity of Mary is even mentioned in the Koran. So if Mary was born without Original Sin and when the Angel of the Lord came to her and she believed and trusted the Lord then she had already outdone Adam as Eve’s sin which was to not trust and obey God.
      We have to be careful not to think we know the mind of Mary. She is a sacred individual separate and her own. She made good decisions based on Love and trust in God. Even if she had conceived other children she would have as a wife. There’s no sin here.

  3. Bdyfxr Reply

    Best explanation EVER!!

  4. adauctus Reply

    Suzy, as the article says, tradition holds that Mary was a consecrated virgin before she was betrothed to Joseph. From there tradition holds that Joseph was a widower, and Mary was to act as mother to his children, while remaining faithful to her vow of virginity. Plus, practically speaking, if I were Joseph, and Mary was the vessel the Lord chose to carry his son into the world, that would make her beyond extraordinary in my eyes, and I don’t think I would have any thought of “normal marital relations”.

    1. Suzy Andrews Reply

      But if those disciples who lived so closely to Jesus during his last 3+ years on earth didn’t get who He was exactly, how could Joseph so early in His life? Perhaps we are simply coming to this from our own standpoints?

      1. Vinny Licitra Reply

        Her glorified nature was revealed to Joseph by an angelic dream. That is enough to set anyone straight. Plus Joseph is not hear to speak throughout the Bible. Precisely because he knows his place and is so strong in carrying out his priestly mission.

    2. Theresa Reply

      Matthew 1:25 tells us that Joseph new not Mary until after Jesus was born. “Knew her not” means he didn’t have sex with her until after Jesus’ birth. Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus but did not remain so after His birth.

      1. Vinny Licitra Reply

        “Knew her not” is in regards to the baby Jesus, whom, upon gazing on the Christ, along with the three wise men, does Joseph finally and more fully understand both his dream and all that has and still will occur. To infer what you do is opposite to what someone in such circumstances as Joseph and Mary would be inclined towards.

        1. zane Reply

          to “know” most often means sexual relations throughout the Bible so no it’s not in regards to Jesus….mary is no longer a virgin and the catholic church is clearly the great whore of Revelation

          1. Christopher Aponte

            Funny how easy it is to say such things about the church who holds her practitioners to the absolute highest moral standards in all of Christianity without excuses and new man made rules. God’s laws don’t modernize and change with society and neither should his church. Luke 11:18. How could the church be evil if she is the only one still teaching us to obey God in all that we do regardless of what society is telling us to do. How could the devil stand against himself?? Wake up

          2. jim

            Zane your inzane! Lol

      2. Lubajo Reply

        This is exactly true. That means they might have had children then after! It’s not entirely logical to rule out that fact.

        1. Peter Jude Reply

          If they did as you say we should not rule out where were they?
          Mary, Joseph and Jesus went to Jerusalem when Christ was just 12 years, no mention of their other children was made,
          Mary went with Christ to the Feast of Canaan, no mention of them was made.
          In fact, the Good Book makes mention of the fact that, long after Joseph was no more, (when the children of Mary and Joseph if they ever existed would have only their mother) Mary, her cousins, the ‘cousins’ of Christ and other women faithfully followed Christ; wouldn’t it be funny that all these people are mentioned but the biological children of Mary and Joseph, the brothers and sisters of Christ from the same womb will not be mentioned?…..

      3. McArthur Okoh Reply

        You are very correct.
        In fact the bible says Jesus was her firstborn son:
        Matthew 1:25
        And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son:and he called his name Jesus.
        If there was a firstborn son, there must be a second son. Otherwise the bible would have said she brought for her son.

        But the truth is that the question of her perpetual virginity does not make any difference in Christianity. Whether or not she remained a virgin is of no spiritual consequence.

        1. Peter Jude Reply

          YES you are soo right
          If Christ (from Romans 8:29) is the first born of many (for those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of his son in order that he may be the FIRST BORN of a large family) of which i am part, and Mary is the mother of Christ
          (Luke 1:41-43; ‘ When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the child leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT and exclaimed with a loud cry “Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And why has this happened to me that the MOTHER OF MY LORD comes to me” ‘)
          What then is Mary to me with the fact of Christ being my brother? YES SHE is my mother too.

          1. Tracy

            You miss the point! The mother part is not important…the LORD part is! JESUS is the important part of that equation, not Mary. The fetus John the Baptist felt the presence of Jesus via the Holy Spirit. This is a preview of events between these two individuals yet to come.

            Mary was a blessed woman in her time, and she was chosen by God…no one can deny that. The Bible (at least the KJV,ESV,NKJV, NASB, NIV,ASV and others) is clear that Mary went on to have other children with her husband Joseph. James (writer of the book bearing the same name, identifies himself as the Lord’s brother) Jude (Judas) is also a brother. There were 2 other brother’s named Joses (Joseph) and Simeon. Mary is NOT a deity, just another servant of Jehovah whom found favor like all the OT prophets and allowed their lives to glorify God.

  5. david Reply

    the bible mentioned he had sisters too

  6. david Reply

    Matt. 13:53-56, JB: “When Jesus had finished these parables he left the district; and, coming to his home town, he taught the people in their synagogue in such a way that they were astonished and said, ‘Where did the man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers? This is the carpenter’s son, surely? Is not his mother the woman called Mary, and his brothers [Greek, a·del·phoi′] James and Joseph and Simon and Jude? His sisters [Greek, a·del·phai′], too, are they not all here with us?’" (On the basis of this text, would you conclude that Jesus was Mary’s only child or that she had other sons as well as daughters?)
    The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. IX, p. 337) admits regarding the Greek words a·del·phoi′ and a·del·phai′, used at Matthew 13:55, 56, that these “have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the Greek-speaking world of the Evangelist’s time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense. Toward the end of the 4th century (c. 380) Helvidius in a work now lost pressed this fact in order to attribute to Mary other children besides Jesus so as to make her a model for mothers of larger families. St. Jerome, motivated by the Church’s traditional faith in Mary’s perpetual virginity, wrote a tract against Helvidius (A.D. 383) in which he developed an explanation . . . that is still in vogue among Catholic scholars."

  7. david Reply

    Mark 3:31-35, JB: “His mother and brothers now arrived and, standing outside, sent in a message asking for him. A crowd was sitting round him at the time the message was passed to him, ‘Your mother and brothers and sisters are outside asking for you’. He replied, ‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’ And looking round at those sitting in a circle about him, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers. Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother.’" (Here a clear distinction is drawn between Jesus’ natural brothers and his spiritual brothers, his disciples. No one claims that the reference to Jesus’ mother means anything different from what it says. Is it consistent, then, to reason that his natural brothers were not that but were perhaps cousins? When what is meant is not brothers but relatives, a different Greek word [syg·ge·non′] is used, as at Luke 21:16.)

    1. Peter Jude Reply

      Can you follow the Entire discussion, then all these points that have already been explained into details will not be brought up again.
      Can’t you see no one is really responding to your post?

      1. Mark Reply

        He makes a perfectly valid point. The logic is solid. If I anything but agreement with him should be found, what should a reply be necessitated by?

  8. aochocki1104 Reply

    As taught to me, by the nuns and discussed with several priests who are friends of mine, over the years…the question of whether Mary had other children or ‘normal conjugal’ relations with Joseph is more a derision of her sanctity, then ‘normal’ curiosity. It is truly valid and worth while to have a greater discernment of terms used in the Bible in order to have a greater appreciation and deeper understanding to apply to our own lives. But to the discussion, a question of logic appears. At Lourdes, how could Mary declare to St. Bernadette that…”..I AM THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION..”. This theological statement is as it is stated, ” I AM”. No different in linguistic intent than God, the Father declaring to Moses..” I AM WHAT I AM.” Mary could have utilized any linguistic context or syntax, even an allegorical alliteration to express the point. But by declaring that she is the Immaculate Conception. Her Everlasting Virginity, before, during and through out Her life, becomes fact. How can those who declare the sanctity of Joseph, think him such a dullard that He would NOT BE Aware of his ‘special’ place and role in the caring and rearing of his ‘step-son’ entrusted; who is in fact the Son of God. People, please be aware that though this question was raised, in the early church not so much as a method to ‘bring-the-glory-of-Mary-down, but one of clarity. The Reformation was the water-shed Era when the ‘fire-brand’ Protestant theological fountain-heads went at and after the image and honorarium of Mary with both figuratively and literally with an ax. Smashing away with little regard to the truth. God, the Father brought into this world Absolute Truth and God-Head via the path of a purified and pure vessel, called Mary, the Ever Virgin.

    1. Suzy Reply

      I think you are elevating Mary to a position the Bible doesn’t give her. Where, for example, in the New Testament there any discussion of her status? You are giving her a divine status, making her equal to God – but look at how Jesus related to her compared with how He related to His heavenly Father. In Matthew 12: “46 While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him 48 But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49 And stretching out his hand towards his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."…….that, incidentally, also serves to show how Jesus differentiated between “brothers” doesn’t it?

      And look how our Lord Jesus, the perfect sacrifice for our sins, perceived His own status: “5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, *** did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,*** 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.” (Philippians 2). If Jesus doesn’t ‘equate’ Himself with His Father, far be it from us to elevate Mary above Him!

      You may have discussed with many friends, nuns and priests over the years, but read the glorious words for yourself, asking the great high Heavenly Priest (see Hebrews 3) by the power of His Spirit for your answers…..well, it’s just a suggestion from someone who would love you to enjoy an intimate relationship with the Name above all names – and isn’t that simply amazing? That we lumps of clay can chat to our Father any and every time we desire?

      1. Alcide Bouchard Reply

        Yes, and so then we are being elevated, aren’t we? Do we not honour our mothers? It’s certainly right to do so. Mary is not a threat to us. We honour her because the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit honour her, and because she is honorable. If someone were lying about my mother, I would have a huge problem with that. Mary is one with God, deal with it.

        1. Suzy Reply

          “Mary is one with God” shows we are worshipping different entities, Alcide. In the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit I wish you every blessing.

        2. bobby Reply

          Honour, great! Worship, no! I honour my mother but I do not pray to or through her!
          We already have access to the Father so y bring her into the equation?

        3. Tracy Reply

          Mary is NOT one with God. The conception was immaculate, not Mary. She was born into sin just like every other human on this earth. I think she would be horrified to know that people worship her as if she were part of the Trinity.

      2. Vinny Licitra Reply

        I believe the angel who comes to Mary informs her, and us, “Hail Mary, full of grace.” What more need be said but that we elevate and honor her, yet not above Christ Jesus.

        1. MIchael O'Connor Reply

          Certainly Mary was favored by God to bear his Son. No doubt. However, the phrase “Hail, Mary, full of grace” does not elevate Mary to the same level as Jesus, who is the source of our grace. Similar phrases were used in reference to others: 1. in the Old Testament: “Most blessed of women be Jael”, (Judges 5) 2. In the New Testament: “And Stephen, full of grace and power…” (Acts 7) The Catholic Church is stubbornly not in step with Scripture on its elevation of Mary, who, incidentally, is more like the rest of us sinners than she is like God, who alone is sinless. Acknowledging her need for grace, herself, and salvation, she addresses Jesus as “my Savior”. References to Mary in the New Testament are significantly rare: we are to put our attention on her Son. She would have it no other way. Is she not embarrassed and even grieved at all of the idolatrous accolades that are given in her honor, which, in reality dishonor God as well as her?

        2. bobby Reply

          Honour her if u must, but u cannot make her a deity. I see people praying to her statue and giving her reverence due to the almighty. Now dts disgusting

    2. Trish White Reply

      The Blessed Virgin, as she is called, among other gracious names, when she said to St. Bernardette, “I Am The Immaculate Conception, She was saying, She was born without original sin. In every way, she was pure, and had to be, to carry the Son of God, and giving birth to Him Again, it says, she vowed perpetual virginity as she served in the Temple. And, she couldn’t lie, because she was about to bear the Son of God, through the Holy Spirit. Oh, and she would never lie, as the Son of God knows not untruths.

      1. Suzy Reply

        Dear Trish. We are comparing apples with pears. The Holy Scripture, breathed out / Inspired by God (2 Tim 3) vs traditions of man. I agree, the Son of God knows not untruths. Where, in the Bible, our only authoritative source, does God ever say one of His creatures was without sin, except of course Adam and Eve in Gen 1&2?

        1. dbell Reply

          Suzy, yes, the Bible is our only “WRITTEN” source of authority, however, the Apostles were given to us to be our Authority of Tradition and verbal interpretation of the Lord lived by them, and then their successors. Keep in mind that the Bible was not sourced together and readily avaiable in all it’s books until the 300s AD, and until then is was through a letter or book here and there and mostly by word of mouth and tradition that the Word was spread. Even come the 300’s it was mainly word of mouth and tradition that spread the Word until the majority of Mankind began to read and be able to afford books. Br. Don – Diocesan Hermit

          1. Tina

            Not that I need to add anything because you stated everything so beautifully. The bible tells us that the pillar of truth is the church, it doesn’t say scripture, it says the church is the pillar of truth. Also, in Luke 1:48 Mary says all nations will call me blessed.

        2. Jay Burgherr Reply

          Suzy, you need to keep asking yourself: Which came first, the Church or the Bible. Which created the other? Jesus Christ created the church and named Peter as its earthly vicar. The apostles and disciples lived and shared the Gospel for many years before there ever was a written “Bible”. This Holy Verbal Tradition of the Church was finally written down and became the Holy Bible many decades after Christ’s crucifixion.

          John 21:25 says “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”

          Suzy, does the Bible ever say that ‘it’ is the ONLY source of truth concerning Jesus Christ? In fact what does the Bible refer to as the “Pillar and source of truth”? Paul says the Church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15) .

          1. Tracy

            Jay, a point in which we part is the Bible is 2 Timothy 3:16 (NIV)

            16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

            God breathed is HOLY SPIRIT who directed the writers of the Bible. (Read the first few verses of Jude to understand this more) As one commissioned to write, this means far more than an oral tradition passed from one generation to the next. The Lord knew this would have to stand the test of time, generations, languages and interpretations. It is truly a miracle. Please do not try to make it less by thinking the Catholic church is responsible for it.

            That said the answer to your question is yes, Revelation 22:18-19 18

            18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

      2. ellen shanks Reply

        Trish, this is inspired, it is truth and it is beautifully expressed. Thank you.

      3. bobby Reply

        Dt logic will indicate her mother deserves reverence too and so on and so on. Let us stop the charade. Jesus has provided a way to the Father. It can be through none other

    3. PrinceDonald Reply

      @aochcki, you are wise. Keep it up. I tell you, this shows you are close to heaven. Remember “… for You have hidden this these things from the wise and prudent and has reveal it to mere children (babes).” Matt 11:25,26; Lk 10:21
      “… I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter (reveal) what has been hidden since the foundation of the world.” Matt 13:35