Did Jesus have Brothers & Sisters?

In the Gospel of St. Mark Chapter 6 vs 3, we read about the crowd asking, "Isn't this the carpenter, the son of Mary, a brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon? Aren't His sisters our neighbours here?". 

There are other verses in the bible that also refer to Jesus having brothers and sisters. So did he have blood siblings? Did Joseph and Mary have more children after Jesus? Was Joseph married previously and have children that became Jesus' step brother and sisters?

If we follow Catholic doctrine on the perpetual virginity of Mary, it would be impossible for Jesus to have and siblings by blood. 

There are many protestants who would argue against this doctrine and cite even more bible versus in protest. So let us entertain human reasoning and logic to contemplate the issue.

If we believe that an angel came to Mary to announce to her that she would be giving birth to the Lord, that it would be a virgin birth and she would conceive by the power of God and she in fact went through the birth of God made man, it would be impossible for Mary not to believe that Jesus is from God and of God. She would be full of grace. If this is indeed the case, it would seem inconceivable that being Mother of God (Jesus), Mary would contemplate the need to have children with Joseph and to start a family of her own.

The problem of the confusion in the bible emerges in understanding the meaning of the word brother from the Greek translation. In the original text of the Gospel, we find the Greek word adelphos meaning brother,being used. However, it does not just mean blood brothers born of the same parents. Rather, adelphos was used to describe brothers not born of the same parents, like a half-brother or stepbrother. The word also described other relationships, like cousins, nephews, etc.

For example, in Genesis 13:8 and 14:1416, the word adelphos was used to describe the relationship between Abraham and Lot. However, these two men did not share a brother relationship, but one of uncle and nephew. Another instance is that of Laban, who was an adelphos to Jacob, not as a brother, but as an uncle. 

In the New American Bible translation, "kinsman" or "relative" is used to translate the word adelphos in these Old Testament cases. It is not known why this is not true in the English translation of the Gospel. 

The same is true for the word sister.

Going back further, the confusion originates in Hebrew and Aramaic, the languages of most of the original Old Testament texts and of Christ. In these languages, no special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother, or step-brother; so they used the word brother or a circumlocution, such as in the case of a cousin, "the son of the brother of my father." When the Old Testament was translated into Greek and the New Testament written in Greek, the word adelphos was used to capture all of these meanings. 

So in each instance, we must examine the context in which the title is used. The confusion arises in English because of the lack of distinct terms for relatives in the Hebrew and Aramaic, and the usage of the Greek adelphos to signify all of these relations.

Nevertheless, other Gospel passages clarify these relationships. James and Joseph were the sons of Mary of Clophas (Mk 15:40). Judas was the son of James (not either of the Apostles) (Lk 6:16). James the Lesser was the son of Alphaeus (Lk 6:15). James the Greater and John were the sons of Zebedee with a mother other than our Blessed Mother Mary (Mt 20:20).

The Gospels are also very clear that Mary was a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit (cf. Mt 1:18-25, Lk 1:26-38). Remember when the Archangel Gabriel announced to Mary God's plan, she responded, "How can this be, since I do not know man?"

After the birth of our Lord, although the Gospels do not give us many details of His childhood, no mention is made of Mary and Joseph ever having other children. Never does it refer to the "sons of Mary" or "a son of Mary," but only the son of Mary.

This point is again corroborated at the crucifixion scene: Before He dies, our Lord says to Mary, "Woman, there is your son," and then to St. John, who is definitely not a blood brother, "There is your mother."

According to Jewish law, the oldest son had the responsibility of caring for the widowed mother, and that responsibility would pass to the next oldest if anything happened to the first-born son. By this time, St. Joseph has died. Since Jesus, the first born, had no "blood brother," He entrusted Mary to the care of St. John, the Beloved Disciple. 

Interestingly, the Orthodox Churches solve this problem over brothers and sisters by speculating that St. Joseph was a widower who had other children before he married Mary. These brothers and sisters would really then be half-brothers and half-sisters. Perhaps this notion is why St. Joseph sometimes appears elderly in paintings. 

This whole confusion about Jesus having siblings is not new. About 380 AD, Helvidius suggested that the "brethren" were the children born of Mary and Joseph after Jesus. St. Jerome declared this as a "novel, wicked, and daring affront to the faith of the whole world." 

As Catholics, based on Sacred Scripture and Tradition, we do not believe that Mary and Joseph had other children and consequently that Jesus had blood brothers and sisters.

As logical thinkers, it is also hard to believe that Mary being Mother of Jesus (God) would have any desire to have other children given the grace and therefore wisdom of the kingdom of heaven she received.