Jesus siblings?

D

dingoling.

Well-known member
Scripture says, "Now every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the festival of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up as usual for the festival. When the festival was ended and they started to return, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but his parents did not know it. Assuming that he was in the group of travelers, they went a day’s journey. Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem to search for him. After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.

Why is there no mention of Jesus' siblings? Did Joseph and Mary leave them with the group of travelers while they went to looking for Jesus? Jesus was 12 years old so that would mean that Jesus siblings were younger. So would Joseph and Mary have really left these young siblings of Jesus for over three days?

It is highly unlikely if Jesus indeed had any siblings that Luke would not have mentioned them.
 
Last edited:
dingoling. said:
Scripture says, "Now every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the festival of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up as usual for the festival. When the festival was ended and they started to return, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but his parents did not know it. Assuming that he was in the group of travelers, they went a day’s journey. Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem to search for him. After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.

Why is there no mention of Jesus' siblings? Did Joseph and Mary leave them with the group of travelers while they went to looking for Jesus? Jesus was 12 years old so that would mean that Jesus siblings were younger. So would Joseph and Mary have really left these young siblings of Jesus for over three days?

It is highly unlikely if Jesus indeed had any siblings that Luke would not have mentioned them.
Click to expand...
We don't know when Jesus' siblings were born. We do know that they were born.

If I were Mary and Joseph and had to go back and find Jesus....and had other children....I would entrust them to a friend.

Why should Luke have mentioned them if Jesus had siblings at that time?
 
PeanutGallery said:
"It is highly unlikely" does not explain why you think Luke had to mention Jesus' siblings.
Click to expand...

The siblings would need to be accounted for. Parents don't leave there young children while searching for the firstborn. If they were indeed present Luke would have mentioned them.
 
CrowCross said:
We don't know when Jesus' siblings were born. We do know that they were born.
Click to expand...

Twelve years of being together and Joseph and Mary's only child was Jesus?

CrowCross said:
If I were Mary and Joseph and had to go back and find Jesus....and had other children....I would entrust them to a friend.

Why should Luke have mentioned them if Jesus had siblings at that time?
Click to expand...

Yes they would/could have entrusted them to their relatives and friends since Luke says, "Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends." But Luke would not have made Joseph and Mary appear to be irresponsible parents. And by not making mention of Jesus' siblings, if indeed Jesus has siblings, that would very much indeed make Joseph and Mary to appear to be irresponsible parents.
 
The Gospels tend to focus on certain aspects of Jesus' life and teachings, not giving us every single piece of background information that is available. Jesus, not His siblings, is the focus of Luke's account and that is what we should also focus on.

I am with the others that said that His siblings were most likely with friend, or other family member. They may very well have stayed behind in Nazareth, looked after by extended family members. We just don't know.

But the Gospels DO mention Jesus' brothers and sisters in several places, so we know from these passages that Jesus had half-siblings.
 
dingoling. said:
The siblings would need to be accounted for. Parents don't leave there young children while searching for the firstborn. If they were indeed present Luke would have mentioned them.
Click to expand...
Two possible explanations: the other siblings were back in Nazareth, looked after by extended family or friends; the other siblings were with the group that was traveling, which would have been made up of many people, which is what Luke says:

"44 Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends."

See? The other children could very well have been with these other relatives. People had large, extended families in those days.

The HS inspired the Gospel writers to include the details we need, not necessarily the details we want.
 
dingoling. said:
Twelve years of being together and Joseph and Mary's only child was Jesus?
Click to expand...

My father is 16 years older than his brother....
dingoling. said:
Yes they would/could have entrusted them to their relatives and friends since Luke says, "Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends." But Luke would not have made Joseph and Mary appear to be irresponsible parents. And by not making mention of Jesus' siblings, if indeed Jesus has siblings, that would very much indeed make Joseph and Mary to appear to be irresponsible parents.
Click to expand...
What point are you relying to make? Not only me but others here have given you some completely logical answer.
 
Bonnie said:
The Gospels tend to focus on certain aspects of Jesus' life and teachings, not giving us every single piece of background information that is available. Jesus, not His siblings, is the focus of Luke's account and that is what we should also focus on.

I am with the others that said that His siblings were most likely with friend, or other family member. They may very well have stayed behind in Nazareth, looked after by extended family members. We just don't know.

But the Gospels DO mention Jesus' brothers and sisters in several places, so we know from these passages that Jesus had half-siblings.
Click to expand...
Yes, this could have been. We know that Jesus was 12 at the time and scripture says that he had four brothers, James, Joseph, Simon and Judas. It also says that he had sisters. That means that it is very possible that the youngest of his siblings would have still been in "diapers", and still nursing.
 
dingoling. said:
Scripture says, "Now every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the festival of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up as usual for the festival. When the festival was ended and they started to return, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but his parents did not know it. Assuming that he was in the group of travelers, they went a day’s journey. Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem to search for him. After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.

Why is there no mention of Jesus' siblings? Did Joseph and Mary leave them with the group of travelers while they went to looking for Jesus? Jesus was 12 years old so that would mean that Jesus siblings were younger. So would Joseph and Mary have really left these young siblings of Jesus for over three days?

It is highly unlikely if Jesus indeed had any siblings that Luke would not have mentioned them
Click to expand...

In another thread you claim Luke was in error.

They often left younger children at home with relatives. They took Jesus because he had a ritual to go through.

From bible view:

At 12, like every Jewish boy, Jesus became a “son of the Law” or “servant (Greek – pais) of the Law”, old enough to start serving God. This was Jesus’ coming of age or Bar Mitzvah.

Between 12-13 years old a Jewish boy becomes a man.
 
Last edited:
dingoling. said:
The siblings would need to be accounted for. Parents don't leave there young children while searching for the firstborn. If they were indeed present Luke would have mentioned them.
Click to expand...
Yes they did. I mean we were left with our grandmother, when mum and dad went away together. Again you are using flawed logic.
 
dingoling. said:
Twelve years of being together and Joseph and Mary's only child was Jesus?



Yes they would/could have entrusted them to their relatives and friends since Luke says, "Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends." But Luke would not have made Joseph and Mary appear to be irresponsible parents. And by not making mention of Jesus' siblings, if indeed Jesus has siblings, that would very much indeed make Joseph and Mary to appear to be irresponsible parents.
Click to expand...
Not what the poster said at all. You are misrepresenting again.
 
dingoling. said:
Twelve years of being together and Joseph and Mary's only child was Jesus?



Yes they would/could have entrusted them to their relatives and friends since Luke says, "Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends." But Luke would not have made Joseph and Mary appear to be irresponsible parents. And by not making mention of Jesus' siblings, if indeed Jesus has siblings, that would very much indeed make Joseph and Mary to appear to be irresponsible parents.
Click to expand...
Only you read that into Luke that Joseph and Mary were irresponsible parents because their other children are not mentioned. I would see the fact that they did not know where Jesus was as irresponsible. But hey that is me as a mother speaking.
 
dingoling. said:
Yes, this could have been. We know that Jesus was 12 at the time and scripture says that he had four brothers, James, Joseph, Simon and Judas. It also says that he had sisters. That means that it is very possible that the youngest of his siblings would have still been in "diapers", and still nursing.
Click to expand...
Good to know that you do not agree with the RCC that they weren't blood siblings.
 
dingoling. said:
Twelve years of being together and Joseph and Mary's only child was Jesus?



Yes they would/could have entrusted them to their relatives and friends since Luke says, "Then they started to look for him among their relatives and friends." But Luke would not have made Joseph and Mary appear to be irresponsible parents. And by not making mention of Jesus' siblings, if indeed Jesus has siblings, that would very much indeed make Joseph and Mary to appear to be irresponsible parents.
Click to expand...
Why would Luke need to mention their other children?
 
dingoling. said:
Yes, this could have been. We know that Jesus was 12 at the time and scripture says that he had four brothers, James, Joseph, Simon and Judas. It also says that he had sisters. That means that it is very possible that the youngest of his siblings would have still been in "diapers", and still nursing.
Click to expand...
Because the bible doesn't mention a nursing Mary didn't bring a baby to go find Jesus in the temple....it means Jesus had no siblings????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top