h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

There's nothing about the relative ages of Mary and Joseph in the Bible. Some traditions make Joseph a young man: there's no need for him to be old. Jesus was the only child; the 'brethren' were cousins, as can be deduced not only because the the same word was used in Aramaic for both, but also from the New Testament: the mothers are named of these other 'brethren'.

Hi Andrew,
I seem to recall that Jesus was in somebody's house when someone said to him: "Your mother and your brothers want to see you outside".

Jesus was conceived before Mary and Joseph were married, so he should have been the oldest, yes.

TRiG.

Where in the NT are the mothers of these brothers names, Andrew? I don't recall it.

TRiG.

Hi Guys
Maybe im going a bit off subject...or perhaps back on to the actual topic.

i am not religious but i do have a strong sense of morals and an understanding of what is right and what is wrong.
This is one of the main reasons that i sruggle to comprehend the purpose of religion in our society and the role God plays in our present lives.

i was not there when god apparently created the universe, arguably neither was i there when the first ape apparantly walked upright so i cant pinpoint exactly where humanity derived from.We do not have significant proof supporting that either is correct.

but lets not deny what we can prove:
Our thoughts, dreams, beliefs, theories and feelings are ALL just chemical reactions within our brains.FACT
When we die these chemicals (and "micro-signals") sieze to react with one another and there is no more thought or feeling...

What leads us to believe that there is a soul within us?
and if there is no soul doesnt that mean that there is no god then?

the simple truth is that we are just alive to reproduce and die in a similar way that bacteria does.


Religion is just a way for us humans to justify our own existance and to provide some assurance that when youre dead you still have a role to play somewhere.

"Religion is the opium of the people"

try not to get addicted...


these are my own personal views and hope that nobody is offended by what i have written.

Why would God have need of a virgin anyway? Wouldn't any old woman do - since there is supposedly no human genetic input into the creation of the unearthly being Jesus. Or if, half of the being Jesus's genetic material is earthly (i.e. from his mother's side) then it still doesn't explain why his mother had to be a virgin. Surely a tried and tested 'decent' mother would fit the bill admirably. A child virgin seems a little risky to me.

Nferno, welcome! "what leads us to believe ...soul" -
I think it's to do with our consciousness and our evolving sense of right and wrong. It's must all be leading somewhere. There must be a purpose to all this, unless you want to believe that the universe is just one persona's mega-egotrip.

Ok, Lucky, Trig, here is the evidence.

Firstly, these brethren or brothers are named in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 as James, Joseph, Simon and Jude. It is reasonable to assume that these are the brethren Lucky is referring to, and indeed Lucky mentions that Jesus is one of five, i.e. that there are four of these other brethren.

The New Testament tells us directly about the mother of James and Joseph, and indirectly about their father. In Matthew 27:56, we read about the bystanders at Jesus' crucifixion: "among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".

And in Mark 15:40, again, "there were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome".

Finally, in John 19:25 it says "next to the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene". So Mary the mother of James and Joseph/Joses can be identified as Mary the wife of Clopas. She is also a sister of Jesus' mother, confirming that James and Joseph are cousins, i.e. "brethren", of Jesus.

There are some other references, e.g. in in Mark 15:47 we read of "Mary the mother of Joses", and in Mark 16:1 and Luke 24:10 she is called "Mary the mother of James".

The other two "brethren", Jude and Simon, will have to wait for the next post, in order to keep this manageable.

Having sorted out James and Joseph, the next step is to take a closer look at who their father Clopas is, and the link is James the less who is also one of the apostles. In both Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18 he is in the list and is called "James son of Alphaeus". This looks odd, but in fact it is indirect corroboration that this is the same James, because the Hebrew name Clopas can be rendered in Greek by Alphaeus as well (you don't have to take my word for this: you can read about it elsewhere).

Then at the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles there is another list of apostles, which ends "James son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Jude the brother of James", see Acts 1:13. Jude is actually called "Jude of James", which normally denotes "son of", but can also mean "brother of" someone better known.

In his letter, Jude himself calls himself the brother of James, see Jude 1:1 (he also calls himself "bondservant" of Jesus in this letter, but not "brother"). Whether Jude is, like James, son of Clopas/Alphaeus and the other Mary is not clear, and I don't think he is ever called "son of Alphaeus"; but he is clearly a close relative of James and thus related to Jesus. He is given an alternative name in two of the lists of the apostles, Thaddeus.

So Joseph/Joses, James the Less and Jude/Thaddeus are confirmed as cousins of Jesus, or "brethren".

About the fourth of the "brethren", Simon, little else is known, but it is enough to show that he was identified with Cana and not with Nazareth. He is called "the zealot" in Acts 1:13 and Luke 6:15, but more relevantly, in the same context he is called "the Cananean" i.e. "from Cana", in Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18. In the lists of the apostles he always appears in the same trio, after James and Jude/Thaddeus or sandwiched between them. That would make sense if there were a connection between the three of them, for instance if they were cousins.

Andrew, we are indebted once again! I'll now accept that the 'brothers' are in fact 'cousins'. The evidence of actual 'brothers' is slight. The confusion clearly arises
in the translation.
I can now see why there are problems in sorting out whose
remains are actually in those boxes discovered in the 1980s
and recently filmed when there are so few names in common use.
If I'm reading the text correctly it seems that at least 3 of
the mothers are called Mary for example, not to mention all
the Josephs and Johns and James etc.
However I still have my suspicions about the role of the holy man
Gabriel in all this. It seems that 2 women, one young and one
middle-aged, fell pregnant almost at the same time after a night- time visit from this holy Casanova and one of them was the girl
Mary, the wife of Joseph.
LL

>>i was not there when god apparently created the universe, arguably neither was i there when the first ape apparantly walked upright so i cant pinpoint exactly where humanity derived from.We do not have significant proof supporting that either is correct.

<<

both are correct.

>.i am not religious but i do have a strong sense of morals and an understanding of what is right and what is wrong.
<<

there is a christian evangelist who states that to understand morals and have a sense of right and wrong you have to believe in God, without that standard what can we mesure everything by to determine right and wrong other than what we have been brought up to believe.
for example if i had been brought up to believe rape is right, how can you convince me that your belief that it is wrong is the right one?

So you are basically saying that religion is the fundemental building blocks of Morals and rationalism...

Lets say that there was no religion in the first place (just an example)
And then lets say that science governs our society instead...

Imagine we had spent as much time, money and energy on improving science as we have in improving our religious beliefs in 2000 odd years...

Surely through trial and error we would have achieved an equal or better sense of understanding of what is right and what is wrong through science?

you are correct though...How would we tell if rape is wrong if we were brought up believing it is right.

that question had me thinking for a few hours and this is the best i could come up with:

Through science comes knowledge, knowledge is the foundation of intelligence, and through intelligence we can achieve peace...
Greed and lust are human emotions, RAW animal instincts which have been with us from the beggining of humanity and have remained unchanged...
An "intelligent" individual would know not to rely on instinct as it often does not lead to rational descisions...

It is this ability to control our primal urges that would seperate us from all other animals...

But then again, arnt we just animals too?

Religion "the fundemental building blocks of Morals"? Somebody pull my other leg - it's got bells on!

Why did the Dominicans try to wipe out the Fransiscans? Was that a building block? Religion is not just some kind of Lego. It's a dangerous tool in the wrong hands. Maybe even in any hands.

No! really? did I say that? Check again buddy...

I never said that you said it Nferno. I merely implied what you implied: that somebody had said or implied it.

"Imagine we had spent as much time, money and energy on improving science as we have in improving our religious beliefs in 2000 odd years..."


really?? in what way have our religious beliefs 'improved' ????

anyway, i've spent quite a while reading this thread, following it as it wildly veers sideways and down many dead-end alleyways....

back to the point a bit.... God as in superior being (dictionary definition).....fact.
mathematically speaking (or at least so i'm told.... not done the calculations myself...) i do believe there's a good chance there are some sorta beings out there who are superior to us bunch of planet killing viruses......

God as in a creator of humans, the earth and everything else.....

well, thats got nothing to do with religion has it?
religion has been corrupted (never improved, unless you mean from the viewpoint of, say, any of the nutters who've ever been in aposition to command huge armies and raise taxes from the rest of us sheep..) over several thousand years, and is no longer a way of explaining the bigger picture and answering the huge questions, but is simply a way for power-mad people to contol and manipulate the ordinary man-in-the-street.

this is only my opinion, and not in any way intended to upset anyone, or provoke anything other than healthy discourse.

God is a German. Well, he seems to be according to the Austrian right-wing politician H C Strache who is now pushing forward the idea that religious sermons held in Austria must be articulated in the German tongue.

Gott mit uns... arbeit macht frei

Why can I hear the words of Pastor Niemoller?

Good question Math! That's one pastor with his head screwed on. Many of the bretheren sitting in higher places are historically, and not only historically, conspicuous for their blind eye, deaf ear, speak no evil, attitude.

What if there was a God (one or more) but no religion...
is what has popped into my head at 2:40 AM in my own time right now.
Not sure. Very puzzling.

What if religion itself was a false precept?

I... my head kind of hurts and there is still much work to do.
I suppose the alternates of either of those might be equally viable or possibilities but really am not sure.

It's probably for each to decide on his/her own.
Maybe we still won't know then.

I'm so tired it's not even funny.

Hello Lucky! Well, Gabriel actually visited Zachary, not Elizabeth, and it was in the Holy Place in the Temple in Jerusalem. True, he visited Mary too. But you know, instead of taking the Gospel narrative as true and then interpreting it in such a way, it's much simpler for the sceptic just to take it as a load of tripe from the start. That's presumably why this old story - ancient sceptics claimed the visitor was a Roman solder called Pantheros - didn't get very far.