The atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ “embraces, sustains, supports, and gives life to all other gospel doctrines.  It is the foundation upon which all truth rests and all things grow out of it and come because of it.”1 “The wondrous and glorious Atonement was the central act in all of human history.”2 Because of these statements, all things also point to Christ and His atonement.  Those who lived before Christ looked forward to Him and His infinite and eternal sacrifice.  Those who live after Christ look back to this greatest of all events and “remember what was done.”3

There were many different ways in which the blood sacrifices before Christ were types and shadows of the great and last sacrifice.  Note a few of the details:

First, like Christ, the [sacrificial] animal was chosen and anointed by the laying on of hands. (The Hebrew title Messiah and the Greek title Christ both mean “the Anointed One.”) Second, the animal was to have its life’s blood spilt. Third, it had to be without blemish—totally free from physical

flaws, complete, whole, and perfect. Fourth, the sacrifice had to be clean and worthy. Fifth, the sacrifice had to be domesticated; that is, not wild but tame and of help to man (see Lev. 1:2–3, 10; Lev. 22:21). Sixth and seventh, for the original sacrifice practiced by Adam and the most common sacrifice in the law of Moses, the animal had to be a firstborn and a male (see Ex. 12:5; Lev. 1:3; Lev. 22:18–25). Eighth, the sacrifice of grain had to be ground into flour and made into breadstuffs, which reminds us of our Lord’s title the Bread of Life (see John 6:48). Ninth, the firstfruits that were offered remind us that Christ was the firstfruits of the Resurrection.”4

About 74 years before Christ, the prophet Amulek wrote about how Christ’s sacrifice would eventually end blood sacrifices:

It is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice . . .
And behold, this is the whole meaning of the law, every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal. (Alma 34:10, 14)

Nine years before that, the prophet Alma also testified of Christ,

And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.
And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities. (Alma 7:11-12)

The Savior of all mankind came and fulfilled the law.  He is the great and last sacrifice.  The pain that He went through was “so hard to bear” that we cannot comprehend it, and His suffering was so great that He–God, the greatest of all–trembled because of the pain, bled from every pore, and suffered both body and spirit (See Doctrine and Covenants 19:18).

With His death, the law of Moses was fulfilled.  Yet, the law of Moses is not exactly the same thing as the law of sacrifice.5 We still keep the law of sacrifice.  The Savior taught concerning the fulfilling of the law and what we are to sacrifice nowadays:

And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.
And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit.  And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost. (3 Nephi 9:19-20)

Malachi 3:8-10 is often quoted to motivate us to pay our tithes and offerings.  “Will a man rob God?” the record reads,

Yet ye have robbed me.  But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee?  In tithes and offerings.
Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of Hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.  (Malachi 3:8-10)

Because one of the offerings we are to give to the Lord is “a broken heart and a contrite spirit,” the same principle of blessings applies.  I testify that when we offer up to the Lord a broken heart and a contrite spirit that He will pour out a blessing upon us that is so great that we will not have room enough to receive it.  Our cup of blessings will fill to overflowing, even so much that those around us will also receive blessings.

Yet, no matter how contrite our spirit or how broken our heart, our sacrifice is nothing compared to the one that happened in the meridian of time.  Indeed, there is one offering that pours out a blessing so great upon all of mankind, that none can even begin to comprehend the greatness of it.  This offering is so great that it has power to bless—and save—all mankind: “black and white, bond and free, male and female” (2 Nephi 26:33).

In conclusion, hear another testimony from another prophet in the Book of Mormon–King Benjamin:

And lo, he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death; for behold, blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people.
And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary.
And lo, he cometh unto his own, that salvation might come unto the children of men even through faith on his name; and even after all this they shall consider him a man, and say that he hath a devil, and shall scourge him, and shall crucify him.
And he shall rise the third day from the dead; and behold, he standeth to judge the world; and behold, all these things are done that a righteous judgment might come upon the children of men.
For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned. (Mosiah 3:7-11)

Hence, “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”6

Notes

1 Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966, 60.
2 Neal A. Maxwell, “Willing to Submit,” Ensign, May 1985, 70.
3 Hymns of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Salt Lake City, 1980, 185.
4 M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct 1998, 7.
5 Ibid.
6 Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Ed. Joseph F. Smith, Deseret Book: Salt Lake City, 1976, 121.

Sometimes some of the simplest questions are also some of the most profound.  These types of questions are therefore some of the most difficult to answer.  “Why is Jesus called the Son of God?” is one of these questions, simple, profound, and difficult to answer.  But as one of my English Professors told me the other day, “The hard questions are really the only questions worth asking.”  In that case, Why is Jesus called the Son of God?

In a basic sense, the question is closely related to the question the Spirit of the Lord asked Nephi: “Knowest thou the condescension of God?” (1 Nephi 11:16).  Note a definition of “condescend” that the Oxford English Dictionary gives the word, “To depart from the privileges of superiority by a voluntary submission; to sink willingly to equal terms with inferiours.”  I feel like I can use Nephi’s response to the Spirit’s question as my own response, “I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things” (1 Nephi 11:16-17).

What the record says next is a basic answer to the question.

“And he [the Spirit] said unto me [Nephi]: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.
And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the Spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!
And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.
And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father!”  (1 Nephi 11:18-21).

James E. Talmage, a biblical scholar, wrote about the Savior’s birth and what it means that Jesus is the Son of God:

“That Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the “Son of the Highest.” In His nature would be combined the powers of Godhood with the capacity and possibilities of mortality; and this through the ordinary operation of the fundamental law of heredity, declared of God, demonstrated by science, and admitted by philosophy, that living beings shall propagate—after their kind. The Child Jesus was to inherit the physical, mental, and spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that characterized His parents—one immortal and glorified—God, the other human—woman. (Jesus the Christ. Deseret Book: Salt Lake City, 1990. 77.)

When speaking of a son, we mean a male child of a father and a mother.  Calling Jesus Christ the Son of God is closely related to calling Jesus the Firstborn.  Also, to be called a firstborn son implies being an heir and inheriting “the leadership of the family. . . This is often spoken of in the scriptures as birthright” (Bible Dictionary: Firstborn).  Because Jesus is the Son of God and the Firstborn, He is therefore heir to “all . . . that the Father hath” (John 16:15).  Furthermore, He “is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father, [and] the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh” (Bible Dictionary: Firstborn).

The second of these last two statements from the Bible Dictionary, that Jesus is the “Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh,” reiterates what the Spirit said to Nephi, that Mary is “the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh” (1 Nephi 11:18).  The phrase “after the manner of the flesh” is interesting.  It specifies that Mary is Jesus’ mortal mother.  But by specifying, the phrase alludes to the existence of a life before Jesus received a physical body.  “We are not now thinking about the Virgin Birth,” said C. S. Lewis, “We are thinking about something that happened before Nature was created at all . . . ‘Before all worlds’ Christ is begotten” (Lewis, 157).  This is essentially a rewording of the first statement from the Bible Dictionary, that Jesus “is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father.”

But because of the definition of “son” that was defined above, that a son is a male child of a father and a mother there is another corollary.  The definition of “son” implies that during the Premortal Life, “before Nature was created at all,” Jesus, “the firstborn of the spirit children,” must have a Heavenly Mother as well as a Heavenly Father.  Eliza R. Snow once wrote,

I had learned to call thee Father,
Thru thy Spirit from on high,
But, until the key of knowledge
Was restored, I knew not why.
In the heav’ns are parents single?
No, the thought makes reason stare!
Truth is reason; truth eternal
Tells me I’ve a mother there. (Hymns 292)

For some, all this will be hard to comprehend.  But, “There is no good complaining that these statements are difficult.  Christianity claims to be telling us about another world, about something behind the world we can touch and hear and see.  You may think the claim false, but if it were true, what it tells us would be bound to be  difficult—at least as difficult as modern Physics, and for the same reason” (Lewis, Mere Christianity 156).

Yet, just because these statements are difficult does not mean they are not possible to comprehend with study and faith.  “For with God all things are possible” (Mark 10:27).

I know I have certainly not come close to describing every way (or even one way) in which Jesus is the Son of God, but I hope this basic explanation will invite the reader to study more deeply the life of the Savior, and the “great . . . plan of our God” (2 Nephi 9:13).

In the first verse of the first gospel as it appears in our New Testament, Matthew calls Jesus Christ “the son of David” as if it were a sort of preface to the genealogy he is about to write, and perhaps, a preface to Matthew’s entire testimony of the Savior. Following this preface is the line of royal descent from Joseph, Mary’s husband, back to David, King of Israel (Cf. Matthew 1:1-16).  Because Joseph is listed as a descendant of David, Joseph can also be called a son of David.

Joseph treated Jesus as if He were his own son, and by those who knew not of His divine origin Jesus was presumed to be “the son of Joseph” (Luke 3:23), or “the carpenter’s Son” (Matthew 13:55).  It may be said, then, that Jesus is the adopted son of Joseph.  However, Joseph was not Jesus’ literal Father.  As James E. Talmage explained,

“That Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the “Son of the Highest” (Jesus the Christ. Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1922. 82).

Hence Christ is called the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh; he had a mortal mother and an immortal Father.  Therefore, in order for Jesus to be a literal descendant (and therefore a son) of David, Mary must also have been of Davidic descent.  Talmage explained further that:

“A personal genealogy of Joseph was essentially that of Mary also, for they were cousins. Joseph is named as son of Jacob by Matthew, and as son of Heli by Luke; but Jacob and Heli were brothers, and it appears that one of the two was the father of Joseph and the other the father of Mary and therefore father-in-law to Joseph.  That Mary was of Davidic descent is plainly set forth in many scriptures; for since Jesus was to be born of Mary, yet was not begotten by Joseph, who was the reputed, and, according to the law of the Jews, the legal father, the blood of David’s posterity was given to the body of Jesus through Mary alone” (Jesus the Christ. Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1922.  87).

Jesus is therefore a son of David.  But because the title “son of David” recognizes the genealogy of Jesus Christ means it must have a deeper meaning.  In order to find out what this deeper meaning is, the title itself must be defined.

David was the great king of ancient Israel.  His reign “was the most brilliant of Israelitish history, for (1) he united the tribes into one nation, (2) he secured undisputed possession of the country, (3) the whole government rested upon a religious basis, and the will of God was the law of Israel (Bible Dictionary: David).  Because David was king of Israel, his descendents, under the patriarchal order, were entitled to the throne.  However,

“At the time of the Savior’s birth, Israel was ruled by alien monarchs. The rights of the royal Davidic family were unrecognized; and the ruler of the Jews was an appointee of Rome. Had Judah been a free and independent nation, ruled by her rightful sovereign, Joseph the carpenter would have been her crowned king; and his lawful successor to the throne would have been Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” (Ibid. 88).

Finally, perhaps the analysis can go one step further if we distinguish “son of David” with a lowercase ‘s’ from “Son of David” with a capital ‘S.’  The lowercase ‘s’ version denotes any son or descendant of David.  Absalom, Amnon, Solomon, and others are given this title (Cf. 2 Samuel 13:1, 2 Chronicles 1:1).   But the title “Son of David” with a capital ‘S’ is reserved for only one being that has ever walked the earth.  It is applied only to Jesus of Nazareth, usually when asked to perform a miracle.  Hence, by addressing “Jesus as Son of David” one “demonstrates . . . belief that He was the Messiah of Israel” (Ibid. 335).

Messiah is an Aramaic word that means “the anointed” (Bible Dictionary: Messiah).  In Old Testament times, kings were anointed to their offices, as were priests, high priests, and prophets (Cf. 1 Samuel 10:1, Exodus 40:15, Leviticus 21:10, 1 Kings 19:16).  It is, therefore, fitting that Jesus is called Messiah—the Anointed One—for He is Prophet, Priest, and King.  David was anointed when he became king of Israel, and he, as heretofore quoted, “united the tribes into one nation, . . . secured undisputed possession of the country, . . .  and [made] the will of God . . . the law of Israel” (Bible Dictionary: David).  David, in a sense, delivered Israel.  It is therefore also fitting that the Anointed One—the Messiah—“denotes the King and Deliverer whose coming the Jews were eagerly expecting” (Bible Dictionary: Messiah).  The Jews were “eagerly expecting” that Deliverer because the Old Testament is full of references, types, shadows, and prophecies of the coming of One who would unite Israel once and for all, give them the law of God to live by, and deliver unto them their nation.  This Deliverer was and is Jesus the Christ, the Son of David.

Yes! Jesus Christ had a high respect for women, often including them as positive role models of faith and dedication in his teaching and parables (see, for example, the widow of Zarephath who fed Elijah, Luke 4:25-26; and the woman who gave her two mites into the treasury, Mark 12:42-44). Although the New Testament accounts of the women who followed Jesus are limited in their number and scope, it is still clear that they played a role in Jesus Christ‘s ministry.

From the very beginning, Mary, Elizabeth and Anna understood who the infant Jesus Christ was and testified of his ministry. Mary received angelic instruction that she would conceive a son who “will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:31-33). Elizabeth, when the pregnant Mary visited her, “was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, ‘Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!’” (Luke 1:42). Likewise Anna, when Mary and Joseph brought Jesus to the temple, saw the babe and “gave thanks to God, and spoke of him to all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem” (Luke 2:38). Although we have no record of any further part Elizabeth and Anna may have played as followers of Jesus Christ, Mary is present at, and facilitates, Jesus’ first miracle of turning the water into wine (John 2:1-11), at the cross where Jesus commends her to the apostle John (John 19:25-26), and is numbered among the Jerusalem members who met after Jesus’ ascension (Acts 1:14).

Throughout his mortal ministry, we also find a number of other women following Jesus Christ. As Luke begins his travel narrative he writes, “Soon afterward he [Jesus] went on through cities and villages, preaching and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with him, and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom were seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their means” (Luke 8:1-3). Mary Magdalene seems to have been the leader of the women disciples because she is always mentioned first in the lists of women (see also Mark 15:40, 47; 16:1; John 19:25). The description that these women “provided for them out of their means” indicates that they provided material sustenance for Jesus Christ during his journey. The word translated here as “provided” (diakone?) is, however, also used by Luke as a noun to describe the apostles’ “ministry (diakonia) of the word” (Acts 6:4). This Lukan usage may suggest that the women also participated in the teaching of the word. These women disciples are also conspicuously present at Jesus’ crucifixion and tomb, with Mary Magdalene being the first person to see the resurrected Jesus and the one to announce the resurrection to the disciples (John 19:11-18).

In addition, the gospels describe a number of other women whose faith led them to seek Jesus Christ. The Syro-Phoenician woman, although a Gentile, implored Jesus to heal her daughter who was possessed with a demon. Her commitment to Jesus, despite the initial negative response by Jesus and his disciples, resulted in Jesus declaring, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was immediately healed (Matt. 15:21-28). The woman with an issue of blood for twelve years, reached out to touch Jesus’ garment, even though she knew such an act would render him ritually unclean. Jesus, recognizing that “power had gone forth from him” immediately stopped and sought out the woman. He declared to her, “Daughter, your faith has saved (s?z?) you. Go in peace and be healed from your disease” (Mark 5:25-34). The unnamed woman who came to Simon’s house loved Jesus greatly because he had forgiven her sins. She came and anointed Jesus’ feet with her tears, wiped them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment. Jesus declared to her, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (Luke 7:36-50).

Lastly, both the gospels of Luke and John also mention two sisters, Mary and Martha. John records, “Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister [Mary], and [their brother] Lazarus” (John 11:5). Luke says that Martha received Jesus into her home during the travel narrative part of his gospel when Jesus was journeying to Jerusalem. Jesus went into that home fully expecting to be fed since he and his disciples relied upon the generosity of others during this journey (Luke 8:3; 9:58; 10:4). While staying in the home, Mary “sat at the Lord’s feet, and listened to his teaching.” Some manuscripts include a relative pronoun in the sentence which would then read, Mary “also sat at the Lord’s feet,” (italics added) indicating that Mary joined her sister in listening to Jesus. In John’s gospel both sisters are prominent disciples. Martha, along with Peter, is a quintessential example of people who have testimonies of Jesus as the Christ. She declares, “I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God who is coming to the earth” (John 11:27; cf. Peter’s declaration in John 6:68-69). Mary shows her devotion to Jesus be attentively listening to his teaching (Luke 10:39) and by anointing his feet with expensive ointment and then wiping his feet with her hair (cf. the unnamed woman who performed a similar act of devotion in Luke 7:36-50). Although Judas criticizes her actions, “Jesus said, ‘Let her alone, let her keep it for the day of my burial. The poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me’” (John 12:7-8).

After Jesus’ death, women continued to play an active role in his Church. Lydia and Chloe may have been patrons of house churches in Philippi and Corinth (Acts 16:14-15; 1 Cor. 1:11). Luke records that a significant number of women joined the Church (Acts 5:14; 8:12; 17:4, 12). Priscilla participated alongside her husband Aquila in teaching the gospel to Apollos (Acts 18:24-26; see also Rom. 16:3; 1Cor. 16:19). Although at times Paul chastises women members of the Church for their behavior (1 Cor. 14:34-35; 1 Tim. 2:9-15), women do contribute through prayer and prophesying (1 Cor. 11:5; see also Acts 21:8-9), and it is a woman, Phoebe, “a servant of the Church which is at Cenchrea,” to whom Paul entrusts the carrying of his pivotal letter to the Romans (Rom. 16:1-2).

Ben Witherington III

“Jesus’ views of women and their roles do not fit neatly into any of the categories of His day. He was not a Qumranite, nor was he a traditional rabbi in these matters, though he had certain things in common with both groups. His use of women, both fictitious and real, as examples of faith for his followers, and His teaching on honouring parents, is not without precedent in rabbinic literature. His calling of men and women to radical commitment to God, in view of the inbreaking of the Kingdom, has certain affinities with the teachings of both John the Baptist and Qumran. Yet, on the whole, and especially in view of His Jewish context, Jesus appears to be a unique and sometimes radical reformer of the views of women and their roles that were commonly held among his people. Perhaps this is the very reason why the Third and Fourth Evangelists take pains to present various women as religious models for their audiences.” Ben Witherington III, Women in the Ministry of Jesus: A Study of Jesus’ Attitudes to Women and their Roles as Reflected in His Earthly Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 126. Dr. Witherington III is Professor New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky.

Jews typically had only a single name, which has caused difficulties in distinguishing between individuals with the same name in the New Testament. For example, the New Testament records the names of at least seven different Marys. To distinguish among them, the New Testament authors included nicknames or other identifying facts about them, such as where they were from (Mary Magdalene or Mary of Magdala).

Who was Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ?

Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, lived in Nazareth, probably with her parents, when the annunciation of Jesus’ birth came, although Matthew and Luke report strong connection among her, her husband, and Bethlehem (Matthew 1:16-23; Luke 2:4-7). She was a witness to the miracle in Cana (John 2:3), portions of the ministry (Matthew 12:46), the crucifixion (John 19:25), and possibly the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Matthew 28: 1; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:10). She is also mentioned as being present during a meeting of disciples after Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 1:14). Nowhere in the Bible is Mary’s genealogy reported, although later traditions attempted to identify the genealogical record found in Luke as that of Mary (Luke 3:23-38).

Who was Mary Magdalene?

Mary Magdalene was from the town of Magdala. She probably offered financial support for Jesus Christ’s ministry as suggested by her ability to travel freely (Mark 15:41; Luke 8:1-2) She was healed miraculously of demonic possession (Luke 8: 2). She witnessed the crucifixion, burial, empty tomb, and Jesus’ resurrected body (see Matthew 27:55-56, 61: John 20:14-18). According to the Gospel of John, she was the first person to see Jesus after the resurrection.

Who was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus?

Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus, was commended for her discipleship when her sister reported to Jesus Christ that she was overwhelmed with the domestic shores of the house (Luke 10:41-42). Mary also anointed Jesus’ feet with spikenard and dried them with her hair prior to his burial, thus making Mary the first person besides Jesus to openly call attention to his impending death (John 12:3-7).

Who is Mary, the mother of James and Joses?

Mary, the mother of James and Joses, was a disciple who followed Jesus Christ from Galilee (Matthew 27:55-56). The Gospel of Mark presents her as a benefactor of the public ministry; she was also a witness to the empty tomb (Mark 15:40-41; Matthew 27:56). She is probably the “other Mary” referred to in the accounts of the empty tomb (Matthew 27:61). Interestingly, Jesus had four brothers, the two eldest of whom were named “James and Joses” (Mark 6:3), making it possible that this Mary is the same as Jesus Christ’s mother, a conclusion supported by Mark’s assertion that this Mary was the mother of “James the less”, a popular nickname for Jesus’ younger brother by the same name (Mark 15:40).

Who is Mary, the wife of Cleophas?

Mary, the wife of Cleophas, is mentioned by name only in John 19:25 as a witness to the crucifixion and is called “Mary the wife of Cleophas” or, more literally, “Mary of Cleophas.” Some have thought she was Mary, the mother of Jesus’ sister. However, it seems unlikely that two sisters would have had the same name. Therefore, some scholars believe the reference in John listed Jesus’ mother and “his mother’s sister,” and “Mary the wife of Cleophas,” as three separate people.

Who is Mary, the mother of John Mark?

Mary, the mother of John Mark, was an important disciple who opened her home to the Saints in Jerusalem shortly after the death of Jesus Christ (Acts 12:12). Luke describes her as a woman of means (Acts 12:12-14).

Who is Mary mentioned in Romans?

Mary, mentioned in Romans, appears to have no connection to any of those mentioned in the canonical Gospel, but she was a great blessing to the congregations in Rome. Paul extolled her service saying, “Greet Mary who bestowed much labor on us” (Romans 16:6).