it's age Lula.  BT is correct.   I have the KJV which says "world" but going to the Greek, the word is "aion" which is best translated age. Look in a dictionary. In other parts of scripture like Matt 13 it talks about the end of the harvest which is the same idea.  

My dictionary says,, "aion" means "an age, a period of time and is sometimes translated "world."  the RV marg always has "age" The phrase "the end of the world" should be rendered "the end of the age." in most places

Aion is always to be distinguished from "kosmos"

Remember the Greek has different words for our one English word.  We have just "world" but in the Greek that can be "kosmos" "aion" or oikoumene" which means "the inhabited earth."

Look what I said carefully.  I said the Messiah would come again.  He's still the Messiah.  Don't get huffy.  You're playing word games.  

I agree he's coming back as Judge..but that wasn't my point in my comment.  

he never said we couldn't know the approximate time.  That's why he gave us the signs.  He only said we wouldn't know the exact day or hour.  But he gave us very specific signs to watch for.  There are three parts of the end according to Matt 24.  

1.  Birth pangs- which can last for quite a long time.  I believe we most likely are in this stage.  

2.  The Great Tribulation- which is when the AC will wreak havoc on the world persecuting the Christians and Jews like no other time.  

3.  The Day of the Lord-this is the time when God will unleash his cup of wrath or trembling as it reaches to overfilling.  This will come immediately AFTER the cosmic disturbance which in effect means the lights are going out.  Almost every OT prophet addressed this as well as Jesus and John in the NT.  I know you don't believe in the rapture but I believe, from studying scripture that the rapture will occur right around the time of the cosmic disturbance.  It's going to happen very quickly.  

Hey Leauki.nice to see you again.  I wanted to tell you that I did go to Israel and spent time in Jerusalem.  I've been pictured for the last 3-4 months in the magazine Zion's Fire which comes out of Marv's organization because we participated in a Servant's Heart program in the heart of Jerusalem.  I even went to the Gaza Strip to deliver pallets of food to the town of Sederot because they are the ones being bombed almost daily by the Palestinians.   We couldn't believe what we saw there.  I should blog on this.  

Anyhow yes, the stage is being set as we speak.  The time has got to be drawing close.  Everything is lining up.  One big thing to look for is all the nations going up against Israel and that is not far fetched these days.  

Excellent! I would love to read about your experiences near the Gaza Strip, in Sderoth. I have never been there!

I watched a video of Marv talking. He was quite amazing, starting his speech with something along the lines of "the king is coming, and I can warn you, he will be a Jewish king!". It was a great reminder to Christians of what it actually is Christians believe and a big shock to those who'd rather deny that fact.

I have been quiet for a while, not only because I posted more on Facebook (which I shouldn't do so much) but also because I moved to Zurich (although at the very moment I am back in Dublin for the weekend). I will be back in full force soon, I am sure. But the last two months have been very stressful. I work for a bank now.

Glad to be back.

I am not fond of attempts to convert Jews. And in Israel attempts to convert people are not taken lightly.

Those black people in Tel Aviv, however, were likely refugees from Sudan. They are Muslims, Christians of various tupes, and pagans and bringing Christianity to them can in fact help.

Anyway, here is something for both of you, a scene from The Little World of Don Camillo, a story written by an Italian satirist in the 1950s about the fight between a local priest (Don Camillo) and the local communist mayor (Peppone) in a town in northern Italy.

The Don Camillo stories are famous on the continent and especially among anti-communists.

Don Camillo stories are usually about a specific event where Don Camillo and Peppone fight out among each other. And while Don Camillo usually wins, the satirist also criticises the Church and religion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwA3u941trA

Ha, it happens!

................................................

I agree. I've read various accounts of Josephus' life and parts of his writings about the Jewish Wars up to and including 70AD. His works are of great historical value that's for sure.  I know you aren't going to like this but Josephus supports what the Apostles said that didn't make it into Scripture...Tradition. Excatly like Josephus writings, Apostolic Tradition is also outside verifiable sources to go on and confirmed by the writings of the Church Fathers and Doctors.

Flavius Josephus lived from 37 to 101 during the time of the Apostles had been sent out to preach and teach all nations. Like them he spoke and wrote in Aramaic and Greek.

The word used in Scripture is not brother but rather "brethren". The Scriptural passages that speak of "the brethren" of Jesus are St.Matt. 12:46-50; 13:55, St.Mark 3:31-35; St.Luke 8:19-21; St.John 7:3-10; Acts 1:14 and 1Cor. 9:5.

St.Matt. 13:55-56, ""Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are  not his brethren James and Joseph, and Simon and Judas?"

Bear in mind that Jesus had 2 different kinds of relatives, in 2 groups...some on His mother's side and some on St.Joseph's side.

St. Matt. 13:55-56 mentions as living in Nazareth, James, Joseph, Simon and Judas ("His brethren"). But in St.Matt. 27:56, were told that James and Joseph were sons of a Mary distinct from the Blessed Virgin Mary, and that Simon and Judas were ot brothers of James and Joseph, but seemingly children of a brother of St.Joseph.

As for "brethren", it turns out ancient Hebrew, (we know this from the Septuagint translation of the OT), Aramaic and other languages had no special word for brothers, cousins, etc. such as we have in modern language. Back then, in general, all those who belonged to the same family, clan and even tribe were kinsmen, "brethren".

It's clear the term "brother" has a wide meaning in the Bible. In Genesis 14:14, Lot is called Abraham's brother even though being the son of Haran, Abraham's brother, Lot was actually Abraham's nephew.

Genesis 29:15, is similiar in that Jacob is called the brother of his uncle Laban. Kish and Leeazar were the sons of Mahli, Kish had sons of his own, but Eleasar had no sons, only daughters, who married their "brethren", the sons of Kish. These brethren were really their cousins. 1Chr. 23:21-22.

And the term for 'brother", "brothers" and even "sister" didn't refer only to relatives. Sometimes they meant kinsmen Deut. 23:7; Neh. 5:7; Jer. 34:9 as in the reference to the 42 "brethren" of king Azariah 2Kgs. 10:13-14.

So, it's clear the word "brother" in itslef proves nothing for it had a very wide meaning among the Jews. Becasue neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and His disciples and Josephus too), had a special word meaning "cousin", speakers of those languages couud either use the word for brother or "the son of my uncle", but we see they used the word for "brother".

Now reading the Scriptures keeping in mind context.

Jesus grew up in Nazareth and the people of Nazareth referred to Him as "the son of Mary". St.Mark 6:3, not as "a" son of Mary. In fact, others in the Gospels are never referred to as Mary's sons, not even when they are called Jesus' "Brethren".

Also, in doing some research on this, I learned that the attitude taken by "the brethren of the Lord" implies that they are Jesus' elders..that is they are older than He is. During that time in Palestine, older sons give advice to younger, but younger seldom give advice to older for then it was considered disrespectful to do so.

But we find Jesus' "brethren" saying to Him that Galilee was no place for Him and that He should go to Judea so He could make a name for Himself. ST.John 7:3-4.

Another time they sought to restrain Him  for His own benefit: "And when his family heard it, they went out to seize Him, for people were saying, "He is beside Himself" St.Mark 3:21.

This kind of behavior would make sense for the Jews only if the "brethren" wqere older than Jesus, but that alone eliminates them as His biological brothers, since Jesus was Mary's "first-born Son". St.Luke 2:7.

ANd then consider what happened at the foot of the Cross. When Jesus was dying He entrusted His Mother to the Apostle John. Yet, the Gospels mentioned 4 of His "brethren": James, Joseph, Simon and Jude. It's really hard to imagine that Jesus would have totally disregarded family ties as it were and made provision for His Mother with John if these four were also her sons.

So James and the other "brethren of the Lord" weren't Jesus' biological brothers or even half brothers...they were His cousins and this is the most commonly accepted view.

If we put St.Matt. 27:56; St. Mark 15:40; St.John 19:25 and St.Matt. 10:3 together, we see that the Bible demonstrates that they were not the Blessed VIrgin Mary's children.

OH YES I did answer your question only it isn't the answer you want. 

I agree Josephus said "brother" but he meant it as "kinsman", meaning cousin as we use it today. 

I proved that Jesus and James (as well as Joseph, Simon and Jude) were cousins using Scripture, common sense, understanding and knowledge that in the days of Josephus, the Jews used the expression "brother" or "brethren of the Lord" for any near relatives without intending the first degree of blood relationship. 

Inside Scripture, St. James is Christ's first cousin.  

St.Matt. 13:55-56, "Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And are not his brethren James and Joseph, and Simon and Judas?"

then go to 27:55-56 that names 3 woman..."There were also many women there, looking on from afar, who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto Him: among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary (of Cleophas) mother of James and Joseph, and the mother (Salome) of the sons of Zebedee." 

St.John 19:25-27 tells us that "there stood by the Cross of Jesus, His Mother and His Mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen. 26 When Jesus therefore had seen His Mother and the disciple standing whom He loved, He said to His Mother, woman, behold thy son. 27 After that, He said to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour the disciple took her to his own."  

We agree James, Joseph, Simon and Jude were called the brethren (brothers) of Jesus.  Yet we know from 27:56 that James was the son of Mary of Cleophas. This James also was the blood brother of Jude. St.Jude begins his epistle with the words, "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James...." Here Jude makes a critical distinction. He used the word "brother" in the strict sense of first degree blood relationship, and knows that in that first degree blood relationship sense, he cannot call himself the brother of Christ. Why? Because he wasn't. 

According to Scripture, the mother of James and Joseph and Jude was Mary of Cleophas, sister of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which makes them cousins of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Now, let's read Scripture St.John 19: 25-27 with common sense. 

Specifically note Verse 27 ".... After that, He said to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour the disciple took her to his own."  

If James, Joseph, Simon and Jude were direct children of the Blessed Virgin Mary (and they most surely were not), why did Jesus as He died upon the Cross commit His Mother to the care of St.John after His death so that John took her as his own mother? 

Common sense tells us that would be totally unnecessary if she had other children to look after her.

It was precisely becasue Christ knew that His Mother Mary had no other children to care for her that He committed her to the care of His loved disciple St.John asking him to regard her as if she were his own mother. Common sense tells us this final act of Christ giving His Mother to St. John's care proves He had no siblings.    

The most Josephus verified was that Jesus and James were kinsmen, descendants of the same tribe is why the Jews of that day called them "brothers" or "brethren".  At no time did Josephus ever verify they were first degree blood brothers. He did not verify Jesus and James were first degree blood brothers because they were not. 

The RCC Inc. was built on moral and religious fraud and continues to be contaminated by materialism and financial gain to present. Been looking into Martin Luther and detected a sour note from Lula, hehehe. Got to love Martin though; “… The RCC may throw you out, but that has no bearing on your relations with God”, hehehe. I am going to hate myself, but I am going to go to the RCC encyclopedia (misnomer that) and see what they think of Mr. Luther …

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther   this one comes free period.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm  this one comes with a 20% off Sale and free shipping if you act now? Oh those capitalists in the RCC never quit hehehe.

One reads like a rag sheet and the other reads well like an encyclopedia … guess which one is which, hahaha. You decide for yourself but philosophically, Luther had the right of it … Yep, just as expected … little more than RCC trash talk. So, Jesus had brothers too, I guess I just never gave it a thought till now is all, interesting that.

it's all part of the agenda. Goes back to the whole Babylonian mother-son worship (thru diff cultures and centuries) I wrote about on my blog.  

St.John was a relative of Jesus too. 

Remember I said, 

Saint Cleophas was one of the greatest brothers, husband, father and grandfather of the first century. Cleophas was the brother of Saint Joseph, the husband of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Cleophas' wife was Mary of CLeophas. I've just provided the Scripture which shows that the 3 sons of Cleophas and Mary of Cleophas were Simon, James (the Less) and Jude. 

Two of his grandsons are St. James (the Greater) and St.John, sons of Zebedee. Cleophas' daughter,  Mary Salome is their mother. 

Here is the list of the Twelve Apostles:

St. Simon Peter

St. Andrew

St. James, son of Zebedee (Catholics call him St.James the Greater). 

St. John

St. Philip

St.Bartholomew (Nathaniel)

St.Thomas

St.Matthew (Levi)

St.James, son of Cleophas (also spelled Alpheus) (Catholic call him St.James the Less). Acts: 

St.Jude (Thaddeus)

St.Simon the Cananean, also called the Zealot. 

Judas Iscariot 

The reason why I said St.Cleophas was one of the first century greatests is that his 3 sons, Simon, James and Jude and two grandsons, James and John, sons of Zebedee were Apostles of Jesus! 

Cleophas was murdered because of his devotion to the risen Christ. 

Saint Mary of Cleophas was put in a boat by the Jews in 47 AD and pushed out to sea without sails or oars. With her were Saint Mary Magdalen, Saint Martha, Saint Mary Salome (her daughter), Saint Lazarus, Saint Maximin, Saint Sidonius (the man born blind in Scripture), and the body of Saint Anne, the mother of the Blessed Virgin Mary and grandmother of Christ. After that journey, Saint Mary of Cleophas died where she landed on an island in France, they later named les Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer (the Holy Marys of the Sea).

 ............................

So now the Apostles are "boys"? 

................................................

Not in those times, KFC. In the Hebrew language the word "brethren" indicates a relative. 

As far as the sisters, you are right , my bad, I should have quoted the whole thing..I got wrapped up in the four names...

St.Matt. 13:55-56 says, "His brethren James and Joseph, Simon and Jude, and His sisters, are they not all with us?"

Even so, the Jewish expression "brothers and sisters in the Lord" in Scripture  merely refers to relationship in the same tribe or stock. Cousins often came under that title. 

And in doing some more research on this, I learned that in St.John 19:25, that "there stood by the Cross of Jesus, His Mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas", even here, Mary of Cleophas need not have been a sister of the BLessed Virgin Mary in the first degree of blood relationship, but rather in the same lineage in a more remote degree of either consanguinity or affinity. 

Lula's interpretation of the word "brethren" here seems to be correct.

The oldest definition I can find is on the Hebrew Union College's Aramaic dictionary Web site which gives the following meanings for the word:

1 brother Com. --(a) pl.: siblings Syr. 
2 kinsman OfA, OfA^Sam, Qum, Jud. --(a) a royal functionary Palm. 
3 one another PTA.

(Look for ")x".)

In modern Hebrew "ach" (= "brother") also means "comrade" in the communist sense (i.e. Zionists addressed each other as "achim" = "comrades" as all socialists do). The word always had connotations from (biological) "brother" to "anyone who is with me".

Jesus strikes me as someone who would have addressed followers and friends (and complete strangers) as "brother".

However...

It would have been ridiculously unlikely for a fertile woman in Judaea at the time not to have more than one child. Judaism doesn't even allow it (Jewish families must have two children or more).

Matthew 13:55-56 states:
"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all this?"

This is from the Greek, of course, and I don't know what meanings the word "brother" can have there. However, from context it is clear that the text is referring to biological (or at least adopted) brothers.

Jesus' family is summarised here. Nobody would introduce a guy with words that mean "This is Ernest, his mother is Penelope, and his best friends are Kyle and Blake and Tyler and Todd" , at least not outside a Protestant country club in Connecticut.

so Leauki you nailed it head on.  One thing we must drill into our minds is 

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT.  

It's very important when you read and draw out the correct interpretation of scripture.  

Lula posts :

Leauki posts:

It is correct because neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Christ and His disciples, as well as Josephus) had a special word meaning "cousin". So the speakers of those languages used the word for "brother" or "brethren" (which included sister or sisters). 

Another way we know it is correct is by the OT Jewish Scriptures. The OT shows that the word for "brother" had a wide semantic range of meaning. It was not restricted to the literal meaning of a full brother or even half-brother. Rather it could refer to any male/female relative from whom you are not descended, as well as kinsmen, those who are members of the family by marriage, or by law rather than by blood, and even friends or mere political allies. Check out  2Samuel1:26and Amos 1:9.  

Leauki posts:

KFC posts:

Exactly. Both the Hebrew and the Greek word had a wide range of meanings. 

The writers of the NT were brought up using the equivalent of "Brothers'", "brethren" to mean both cousins and children of the same parent---plus other relatives and even non-relatives. 

When they wrote in Greek, they did the same thing the 72 translators did when they translated the OT Hebrew to the Greek Septuagint. In the Septuagint the Hebrew word that includes both brothers, cousins, etc. was translated as "adelphos" as you say. The writers of the NT did just as the translators of the Septuagint and used "adelphos" even for cousins.

……………………………………

Both the Catholic Douay Rheims and the Protestant King James Version has St.Matt. 13:55-56 as having the word "brethren", not "brothers". 

"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary and his brethren James, and Joseph, and Simon and Jude: And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?"

The word used in both the DR and the KJ Version is not "brother" but rather "brethren". The Scriptural passages that speak of "the brethren" of Jesus are St.Matt.12:46-50;13:55, St.Mark 3:31-35; St.Luke 8:19-21; St.John 7:3-10; Acts1:14and 1Cor. 9:5.

KFC posts:

Same thing with all these passages. The Douay Rheims and the King James version has “brethren” not “Brothers”.

Kfc posts:

Yes, indeed. Try it with those passages and you should see that Scripture testifies that the "brethren of the Lord" were Jesus' kinsmen, meaning cousins. 

SCRIPTURE TEACHES that James is the son of Mary, the wife of Cleophas and Cleophas (Alphaeus) was Jame's father.  

We know that Alphaeus was James' father from reading St.Matt. 10:2-3 and Acts 1:13,

"And the names of the twelve apostles are these: THe first Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother. James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother. Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him."  

"And when they were come in, they went up to the upper room where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James." 

Cleophas and Alphaeus were the same person since the Aramaic name for Alphaeus was rendered in Greek as Cleophas. 

SCRIPTURE TEACHES that the words for "brother", "sister" and "brethren" have a wide range of meaning used to designate many different relationships, as well as that of common parentage. 

 In the case of the passage  "the brethren of the Lord" James, Joseph, Simon and Jude SCRIPTURE TEACHES they were Jesus' distant relatives, what we call cousins.  

………………………………..