Why do people question Jesus' familial relationships mentioned in Matthew 13:55? Matthew 13:55 “Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas?” Why Questions Arise Skeptics, theologians, and devotional readers raise questions because (1) the verse appears to conflict with traditions of Mary’s perpetual virginity, (2) the Greek word ἀδελφοί (adelphoi) can denote several kinds of kin, (3) the New Testament lists Jesus’ relatives in different contexts, and (4) extra-biblical testimony and archaeology have provoked both confirmation and controversy. Historical–Cultural Context First-century Galilean villages preserved clan identity. Extended households often shared trades and domiciles, so townspeople naturally identified Jesus by His immediate and wider family. When Nazarenes refer to “the carpenter’s son,” they rely on customary Jewish practice of naming the father, mother, and male siblings to establish social credentials (cf. 1 Samuel 17:55). Thus Matthew’s report reflects authentic village speech. Major Interpretive Views 1. Biological-Sibling View: After Jesus’ virgin birth, Mary and Joseph had at least four sons and an unspecified number of sisters (Mark 6:3). This is the plain-sense reading and coheres with Matthew 1:25, which states Joseph “did not know her until she had given birth to a Son.” 2. Cousin (Collateral-Kin) View: Advocated to safeguard perpetual virginity, it appeals to the adelphoi semantic range and to Jerome’s claim that these are children of another Mary (cf. Matthew 27:56). The view lacks explicit textual support in Matthew and requires harmonizing multiple Marys. 3. Step-Sibling (Joseph’s Earlier Marriage) View: An early Eastern tradition (Protoevangelium of James 9:2) suggests Joseph, a widower, brought older sons to the family. While possible, Scripture nowhere alludes to such a marriage. 4. Spiritual-Kin View: Some liberal critics assert the names are figurative for followers. The specificity of four proper names and the villagers’ astonishment at familial ordinariness renders this improbable. Patristic Attestation • Hegesippus (c. AD 170) identifies “James the brother of the Lord” as leader of the Jerusalem church (Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiastes 2.23.4). • Josephus, Ant. 20.200, refers to “James, the brother of Jesus who is called Christ.” • Helvidius (4th cent.) defended the biological-sibling view; Jerome answered with the cousin view. The very debate presupposes the fixed textual wording. Archaeological Corroboration The ossuary inscribed “James son of Joseph brother of Jesus” surfaced in 2002. While authenticity debates continue, multiple specialists (e.g., epigrapher André Lemaire) judge the inscription genuinely first-century. If so, it dovetails with Matthew 13:55, naming the same three principals. Genealogical Consistency Matthew traces legal descent through Joseph (Matthew 1). Luke traces physical lineage through Mary (Luke 3). Recognizing levirate-style adoption resolves alleged discrepancies. Neither genealogy contradicts Jesus having later-born siblings but instead secures His messianic credentials. Theological Safeguards The virginal conception of Jesus (Matthew 1:18–25; Luke 1:34–35) remains intact whether Mary bore other children later. Scripture nowhere calls perpetual virginity salvific; Christ’s sinlessness and deity rest on His incarnation, not on Mary’s subsequent marital life. Harmonization with Other Passages • Mark 6:3 repeats the same sibling list, independent attestation. • John 7:5 notes “even His own brothers did not believe in Him,” implying biological familiarity yet spiritual distance. • Acts 1:14 depicts these brothers as later believers, consistent with 1 Corinthians 15:7, where the risen Christ appears to James. Implications for Christ’s Resurrection The conversion of skeptical siblings—especially James, who becomes martyred leader of Jerusalem—forms one of the “minimal facts” supporting the resurrection. Naturalistic explanations struggle to account for this radical shift. Common Objections Answered 1. “Mary entrusted Jesus to John (John 19:27); thus He had no brothers.” – The context is Passover; His half-brothers were unbelievers at the cross. Jewish law allowed a dying man to appoint care outside family if relatives were absent or unqualified. 2. “‘Firstborn’ (Luke 2:7) merely denotes legal status.” – While firstborn has legal resonance, in every LXX occurrence the term implies subsequent children (e.g., Exodus 13:2). 3. “Early Church uniformly taught perpetual virginity.” – Tertullian, Helvidius, and Hegesippus did not. Monastic asceticism later elevated the doctrine but never altered Scripture. Conclusion Questions about Jesus’ familial relationships stem mainly from linguistic flexibility, later ecclesial traditions, and modern skepticism. The consistent manuscript record, corroborating archaeology, internal coherence of the Gospels, and early historical testimony all converge on the straightforward reading: Mary and Joseph raised additional sons and daughters after the virgin birth of Jesus. This reading harmonizes with sound doctrine, upholds biblical authority, and reinforces the reliability of the Gospel witness that culminates in Christ’s bodily resurrection—our sure foundation and living hope. |
    |