Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | When did Joseph and Mary go to Bethlehem | Luke 2:5 | Brent Douglass | 181460 | ||
I know tradition indicates that Mary gave birth the night of her arrival in Bethlehem. However, that seems rather like a dramatic addition. Is there any clear indication in Scripture or elsewhere historically that people in Nazareth (other than Joseph and presumably Mary's immediate family) knew that Mary was pregnant before she left for Bethlehem, or did Mary leave perhaps early in her 2nd trimester before she was showing? I'm not aware of any clear and direct accusations toward Jesus about being conceived out of wedlock, and I would expect them if His birth was well known. It seems like the timing of Mary's visit to Elizabeth, the decree of Caesar, and the flight to Egypt kept the miraculous and scandalous conception a secret -- but one that could be later easily confirmed by those closest to Mary and Joseph still alive after Jesus' resurrection. Any insight or comments on this concept and question? | ||||||
2 | When did Joseph and Mary go to Bethlehem | Luke 2:5 | DocTrinsograce | 181466 | ||
Dear Brent, You deem portions of Scripture narrative as "dramatic additions?" That presupposition forms a foundation rendering further discussion of dubious value, since any conclusion would be based on a mere embelishment, rather than the truth. In Him, Doc PS John 6:42 is a reference to society's view of Jesus' dubious parentage. |
||||||
3 | The "dramatic addition" is extrabiblical | Luke 2:5 | Brent Douglass | 181475 | ||
Doc, I think you misunderstood my reference to a "dramatic addition?" I do not deem any portion of Scripture to be a "dramatic addition." Rather what I question as being a "dramatic addition" is the idea of Mary arriving in Bethlehem on the very night when Jesus was born. This is an extrabiblical interpretation -- albeit a very popular one. Luke 2:5-6 states simply that Mary was pregnant ("with child") when Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem. They also say that Jesus was born "while they were there" -- indicating some time during their stay rather than immediately upon arrival. Matthew 2:11 states that the magi visited in a house (not a stable), and Matthew 2:16 states that Herod had all boys killed in Bethlehem "from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the magi." This indicates the magis' visit to Bethlehem and departure were likely nearly 2 years after Jesus' birth -- after they had begun living in a house. In addition, Matthew 2:22-23 also teach that Joseph's reason for returning to Nazareth of Galilee rather than Bethlehem of Judea as a home was because of the fear of Herod's son Archelaus finding them in Bethlehem. They had apparently resettled in Bethlehem after the census -- and would have apparently been expected to settle there upon their return if not for Joseph's concern for their safety from Herod Archelaus. It seems to me that the amount of time from Joseph and Mary's departure (after marriage but perhaps prior to any outward signs of pregnancy) until the time of their arrival back in Nazareth was sufficient for people not to be aware of any oddity regarding the time of their marriage and Jesus' age upon their return from Egypt. In addition, any relatives living in Bethlehem when they arrived simply knew that they were married and that Mary was pregnant and had her first child while there. Finally, I don't see any reference to "dubious parentage" (based on out-of-wedlock conception) whatsoever in John 6:42. It seems to me the clearest reading of John 6:42 is the exact opposite -- that everyone assumed Joseph to be Jesus' natural father as the husband of Mary and were puzzled by Jesus' claim to have come supernaturally from heaven. There is no suggestion in John 6:42 of out-of-wedlock conception -- which would be expected from any detractors if the timing of conception (prior to marriage) were public knowledge. |
||||||
4 | The "dramatic addition" is extrabiblical | Luke 2:5 | Brent Douglass | 181477 | ||
I see in the Amplified the description of Mary's condition as "about to become a mother." What level of connotation does this word carry that is translated simply "with child" in the NAS but "about to become a mother" in the Amplified? Does it definitely mean something beyond "pregnant" -- requiring a translation of "about to deliver her child" or something like that? Or is it possible that this can refer to a woman in her 2nd trimester? | ||||||
5 | The "dramatic addition" is extrabiblical | Luke 2:5 | CDBJ | 181479 | ||
Greetings BD and Merry Christmas, Your questions and obsession with details on certain aspect of Scripture fascinates me. You remind me of the man that was so captivated by the infinitesimal mosquito flying around his head that he was completely oblivious to the 13,000 pound elephant charging straight at him on a dead run. Have fun, CDBJ |
||||||
6 | The "dramatic addition" is extrabiblical | Luke 2:5 | Brent Douglass | 181483 | ||
Merry Christmas CD, I'm definitely fascinated with God's plan and how He worked it out so far as He has revealed. I believe it's the glory of God to conceal certain things in such a way that we can delight in discovering them later (Proverbs 25:2). This is one of those little aspects that bubbles to the surface for me every year at Christmas as I try to imagine in my mind's eye what happened. This has been the case for many years, as these questions have lain dormant but unanswered. It seems that this forum is a good place to seek insight on such a topic. The sending of Mary to Elizabeth's home for the first 3 months of her pregnancy (when there are usually certain physical results associated with pregnancy) and the apparent lack of the expected stigma of a baby conceived prior to wedlock seem to me to reveal a providential concealing of the timing except to those of Mary's, Joseph's, and Elizabeth's family to whom God or Mary and Joseph chose to reveal the miracle. Without this concealment, it seems to me that the scandal would have been a constant cloud over the family. Joseph, as a "righteous man," assumed the normal natural cause of Mary's pregnancy (unfaithfulness) rather than an unprecedented supernatural (but true) cause. I would expect others to do the same but to go further by following their natural fleshly inclinations and ruin the family's reputation through gossip. Yet no such gossip seems to be present in the gospels. This seems to me providential, but there is little room to examine such providence in the current image that is in most of our minds from media (in this case, well-intentioned media that are valuable in helping us imagine the event). This doesn't remove the wonder of "God with us" and the perfect providential plan to bring light and salvation to our hopeless race. It is clearly a secondary but interesting (and I believe valuable) consideration nevertheless. |
||||||
7 | The "dramatic addition" is extrabiblical | Luke 2:5 | CDBJ | 181493 | ||
Greetings, Taking into consideration all of the meticulous studying that you have pursued in your quest of Bible knowledge; what do you consider to be most pertinent single doctrine that God conveys to mankind? Let’s say if you could elaborate on just one aspect of the Bible what would it be; or putting it another way: if a person only had six weeks to live and you had the privilege of communicating the Bible to that person, what would you want them to know? James 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we shall incur a stricter judgment. Have a great day, CDBJ |
||||||