If the perpetual virginity of Mary were false and Jesus had brothers and sisters, the Bible would likely have been written differently in several places to make this clear.
A fascinating line of reasoning involves the notion of a "thought experiment":
"If Jesus actually had brothers and sisters, then the Bible would likely have been written differently in several places to make this very clear."
This is true in a broad sense:
The New Testament nowhere indicates that the "brothers" (adelphoi) of Jesus are the children of Mary, the mother of Jesus, even when they are mentioned together (cf. Mark 3:31ff; 6:3ff; John 2:12; Acts 1:14).
In the New Testament, none of these "brothers" is ever called a child of Joseph either.
Another way to put it is to say that if Jesus had siblings (full brothers and sisters), we would not expect the two factors above, and others I will present later, to be the case. These are arguments of plausibility and probability.
If Jesus had siblings and he was the eldest, he certainly would have had brothers and sisters by the age of 12, when his parents took him to Jerusalem for Passover (Luke 2:41-50) – especially since Mary is estimated to have been about 16 at his birth, making her only about 28 at that time. Are we to believe it is logical that she had her first child at 16 and then had no others from 16 to 28, and then more than four after that? This is not plausible at all.
None of these supposed siblings are in view during this Passover (which the entire family would have been required to observe in Jerusalem). Luke states (2:46) that the search for Jesus lasted three days before he was found in the Temple. Mary says:
"Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you" (2:48).
If other children had been with them, they certainly would have searched too – in that case, Mary likely would have said:
"Your father and I, your brothers and your sisters, have been anxiously searching for you."
But she did not say that.
Mark and Matthew (who record the spoken words) describe Jesus and his brothers in relation to Mary in the following way:
Mark 6:3 – "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?" And they took offense at him.
Matthew 13:55 – "Is not this the son of the carpenter? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"
Note my use of italics, highlighting the singular use of the word "son" to describe Jesus.
This seems to suggest (at the very least, perhaps) "only son." This is in the context of mentioning four of his "brothers" and also his "sisters" in Mark. Now, if it is understood that they all are – and were in fact – his siblings, why is he called "the son of Mary" and "the son of the carpenter"? Also note that in both passages, he alone is called the "son" of Mary and also of Joseph (in Matthew). The others are not.
It seems to me, as an argument from implausibility, that this is not the language we would expect God to inspire the evangelists to use – remember we are speaking of a divinely inspired revelation – if, in fact, Jesus had siblings. It would have been easy to word these passages so clearly, so manifestly obvious, that there never would have been any dispute about the nature of Jesus' "brothers." A few word changes would have sufficed. I contend the passages would have read as follows, if Jesus had had siblings:
Mark 6:3 – "Is not this the carpenter, one of the sons of Mary, along with his brothers James and Joses, Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.
Matthew 13:55 – "Is not this one of the sons of the carpenter? Is not his mother and the mother of his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas called Mary?"
There are at least three other similar passages, from the two other Gospel authors (Luke wrote the book of Acts). I will add in brackets what should have been added if there were other siblings:
John 1:45 – "We have found him of whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, [one of the] sons of Joseph."
John 6:42 – "Is not this Jesus, [one of the] sons of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? …"
Acts 1:14 – "All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers [' … Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers']."
Also read | The Pope: Protect Life with Legal Measures
See how in this last one, a distinction is made between Mary as the mother of Jesus and "his brothers," who are not called the sons of Mary? She is also not called their mother.
These verses do not read in a "fraternal" way. I would like to ask those who deny the perpetual virginity of Mary: Why?
This article was originally published by the National Catholic Register (Article Link). It is republished and translated with the author's permission.