Mary's Infidelity

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
Matt 1:18-19 . . Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His
mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she
was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband, being
a righteous man, and not wanting to disgrace her, desired to put her away
secretly.

A righteous man is defined by Luke 1:6 as observing all the Lord's
commandments and regulations blamelessly. The word "all" suggests to me
that Joseph wasn't compliant with just some of the Lord's wishes, nor even
most, rather, the whole ball of wax. That's an amazing track record.


FAQ: Wasn't Joseph supposed to have his betrothed stoned for sleeping
around? (Deut 22:23-27)


A: The covenanted law that Moses' people agreed upon with God in the Old
Testament requires the testimony of a minimum of two witnesses for the
prosecution in capital cases.

Deut 17:6-7 . . At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he
that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he
shall not be put to death. The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him
to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt
put the evil away from among you.

Sans witnesses even Joseph himself became a suspect; in point of fact, the
prime suspect.


NOTE: Compare the woman caught in the act of adultery (John 8:1-11).
Jesus had to dismiss the woman because there was no one willing to testify
against her. And even had he known by omniscience that the woman was
guilty, the Lord couldn't testify against her because he wasn't a legitimate
witness; and besides, he would've been the only one whereas the Jews'
covenanted law requires a minimum of two.
_
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus

prism

Blood-Soaked
Jan 24, 2011
1,895
834
113
So. Cal
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
A righteous man is defined by Luke 1:6 as observing all the Lord's
commandments and regulations blamelessly. The word "all" suggests to me
that Joseph wasn't compliant with just some of the Lord's wishes, nor even
most, rather, the whole ball of wax. That's an amazing track record.
Lu 1:6 says they were both righteous.
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
(Luk 1:6)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joseph77

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
Curiously, the Bible doesn't say one way or the other whether Mary was
righteous, i.e. compliant with the Lord's commandments and regulations
blamelessly. But by means of a judicious blend of extrapolation and fact;
we might at least suggest that she was.

For example:

Luke 1:30 . . Mary, you have found favor with God.

The Greek word translated "favor" is also translated grace in quite a few
places. So we could translate Luke 1:30 like this:

"you have found grace with God."

That wasn't the first time someone found grace with God. Noah did too.

Gen 6:8 . . Noah found grace in the eyes of The Lord.

Noah and Joseph had something in common.

Gen 6:9 . . Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his
time,

I might be taking liberties here; but if Noah found grace with God, and he
was righteous and blameless among the people of his time; then seeing as
how Mary found grace with God, then maybe she too was righteous and
blameless among the people of her time.
_
 
Last edited:

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
22,394
31,447
113
80
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
...Compare the woman caught in the act of adultery (John 8:1-11).
Jesus had to dismiss the woman because there was no one willing to testify
against her. And even had he known by omniscience that the woman was
guilty, the Lord couldn't testify against her because he wasn't a legitimate
witness; and besides, he would've been the only one whereas the Jews'
covenanted law requires a minimum of two.
_
But consider this:

"If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.
Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth.
But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved.
He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.
But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.
And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." John 5:31-37

Is he not saying that the second witness on his behalf is His Father, that is, God? So then if God is our witness, what of us? Are we not to be like Him?

Remember also when Elijah stood alone before the 450 prophets of Baal [I Kings 18]? But when God responded by lighting the fire under the sacrifice was that not the second necessary witness to the truth?

Food for thought, no?
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
The covenanted law that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy allows for neither divine
witnesses nor divine executioners in capital cases. It requires the people to
police themselves. In point of fact it's been that way since Noah came off the
ark; beginning with the capital crime of murder.

Gen 9:4-6 . . Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will
require it. And from every man, from every man's brother I will require the
life of man. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed.

In other words: criminal justice in this world is solely Man's responsibility;
we can't lay this off on God lest we ourselves end up facing God for
dereliction of duty. This goes for Christians too. (Rom 13:1-6)
_
 

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jesus had to dismiss the woman because there was no one willing to testify
against her.
The Scripture says they caught her in adultery, and chose to drag her to Jesus to test/ trap/ Him if they could.
Jesus did not have to dismiss the woman at all.
Jesus did as the Father directed Jesus to do.
 

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Not after the angel appeared to him.
Even before then, Joseph was raised righteously, Torah Taught, and did what was right, mercifully and righteously even before the angel appeared to him.
He was never required to seek stoning of Mary, ever, no, not ever, by Torah nor by Yahweh nor by the Prophets or Psalms or Tanakh or Law or law or Jesus' Way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pearl

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Lu 1:6 says they were both righteous.
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
(Luk 1:6)
Amen. This is Truth.
however,
Other religions, and even 'Christian' , often is mixed up and calls unrighteous what God calls Righteous, and calls righteous what God calls unrighteous, today, as in the past.
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
Luke 2:21 . .On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he
was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he had been
conceived.

Both parents had been commanded to give Mary's boy the name Jesus.

Matt 1:21 . .She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name
Jesus

Luke 1:31 . .You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to
give him the name Jesus.

People in a small town like Nazareth usually know everybody, and know all
about everybody. So it was probably common knowledge that Mary's baby
wasn't Joseph's, viz: they knew Joseph was engaged to a girl whose baby
was, from all appearances, illegitimate; and there was no plausible way for
Joseph and Mary to prove otherwise. In point of fact, I'd not be surprised
that the rumor mill was confident the baby was Joseph's, especially seeing
as how he stood with its mother for the naming.

The Bible doesn't say whether the couple's parents were humiliated by this
business, but it's likely they were.
_
 

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
People in a small town like Nazareth usually know everybody, and know all
about everybody. So it was probably common knowledge that Mary's baby
wasn't Joseph's
, viz: they knew Joseph was engaged to a girl whose baby
was, from all appearances, illegitimate; and there was no plausible way for
Joseph and Mary to prove otherwise. In point of fact, I'd not be surprised
that the rumor mill was confident the baby was Joseph's, especially seeing
as how he stood with its mother for the naming.

The Bible doesn't say whether the couple's parents were humiliated by this
business, but it's likely they were.
The Bible does not say anyone thought the baby was not Joseph's !!!
In fact, JUST THE OPPOSITE ,
the evidence points to people believing it is/was Joseph's !!! That Joseph is/was the father !
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pearl

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
the evidence points to people believing it is/was Joseph's !!! That Joseph
is/was the father !

The identity of Jesus' biological father was suspicious; but when Joseph
stood with Mary to name her baby (Matt 1:21) from then on the lad became
accepted as Joseph's boy.

Matt 13:55 . . Is not this the carpenter's son?

Luke 2:48 . . His mother said to Him, "Son, why have you treated us this
way? Behold, your father and I have been anxiously looking for you."

Jesus was ordained of God to inherit David's throne (Luke 1:32). Now the
thing is; David's throne has never been passed down to one of his sons via a
mother; it's always been passed down via the fathers in his line.

For another thing, the throne has to come down via David's son Solomon.
(1Kings 1:13, and 1Chron 22:9-10). Joseph is related to Solomon (Matt 1:6
and Matt 1:16).

Long story short: it was necessary for Joseph to adopt Mary's boy in order
for the lad to get into Solomon's genealogy and thus qualify as a rightful heir
to the throne promised him during the angel's visit with his mother. (Luke 1:31-33).
_
 
  • Like
Reactions: theophilus

prism

Blood-Soaked
Jan 24, 2011
1,895
834
113
So. Cal
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Amen. This is Truth.
however,
Other religions, and even 'Christian' , often is mixed up and calls unrighteous what God calls Righteous, and calls righteous what God calls unrighteous, today, as in the past.
In this case, the OP seemed to be making the case (or at least implying) that Joseph was more righteous than Mary...
"The word "all" suggests to me that Joseph wasn't compliant with just some of the Lord's wishes, nor even most, rather, the whole ball of wax. That's an amazing track record."
I believe the righteousness referred to was one on account of faith (imputed), not a righteousness one had over the other.
 

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In this case, the OP seemed to be making the case (or at least implying) that Joseph was more righteous than Mary...
"The word "all" suggests to me that Joseph wasn't compliant with just some of the Lord's wishes, nor even most, rather, the whole ball of wax. That's an amazing track record."
I believe the righteousness referred to was one on account of faith (imputed), not a righteousness one had over the other.
I think the op is presenting lessons from his tradition, his school, or his church, unproven and untested true (i.e. not tested to be proven truth with a result of proving true) .
Some looks like it is truth, some looks like it is not. Thus all remains subject to testing, proving, verifying by Scripture, as Scripture Says and as Directed by the Creator, before accepting.
 

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
22,394
31,447
113
80
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
The covenanted law that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy allows for neither divine
witnesses nor divine executioners in capital cases. It requires the people to
police themselves. In point of fact it's been that way since Noah came off the
ark; beginning with the capital crime of murder.

Gen 9:4-6 . . Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will
require it. And from every man, from every man's brother I will require the
life of man. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed.

In other words: criminal justice in this world is solely Man's responsibility;
we can't lay this off on God lest we ourselves end up facing God for
dereliction of duty. This goes for Christians too. (Rom 13:1-6)
_
I was not saying you were completely wrong nor are you wrong in all that you have said here. In the OT the immediate reward was a continuing natural life versus the punishment of man inflicted death on the body of flesh of the offender. In the NT the death to be inflicted that matters is the death of the old man within ourselves that ruled us completely until, or if, we met the Master and the new man was born. We are to be "in" the Spirit of God, led by the Spirit then the reward is not a continuation of natural life, but the receipt of a never ending Life.

"And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?" John 11:26
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
Righteousness-- as it's presented in the story of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph --is
exemplified by the righteousness attributed to the Jewish parents of the
Lord's cousin; John the Baptist.

Luke 1:5-6 . .There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain
priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the
daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. And they were both
righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of
the Lord blameless.

The apostle Paul was another Jew who walked in all the commandments and
ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Phil 3:5-6 . . Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe
of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews . . . touching the righteousness
which is in the law, blameless.

It sometimes surprises people that Jesus Christ wasn't a Christian; he was a
Jew-- born under the law, circumcised the eighth day --as such he was
yet another Jew whose righteousness was measured by the righteousness
which is in the law.

I really don't think it's a good idea to inject Christianity's by-faith
righteousness into the story of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph seeing as how those
folks were all Jews whose righteousness is measured by the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God in the Old Testament-- a.k.a. the law.

Now, it's true that the righteousness which is in the law isn't righteous
enough to attain heaven. However, the righteousness which is in the Jews'
covenant is still to this day righteous.

Rom 3:31 . . Do we then nullify the law through faith? May it never be! On
the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom 7:12 . . The law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous,
and good.
_
 
Last edited:

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I really don't think it's a good idea to inject Christianity's by-faith
righteousness into the story of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph seeing as how those
folks were all Jews whose righteousness is measured by the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God in the Old Testament-- a.k.a. the law.

If you think that Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, (and Moses and Abraham, etc etc etc) ,
were not righteous by faith, (as without faith it is impossible to please Yahweh)

who taught you that ?
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
I didn't set this thread up intending for it to be a venue for testimonies,
they're off-topic; but what the hay; maybe it's time for an intermission.

I was christened an infant into the Roman Catholic Church in 1944, and
eventually attended catechism to complete First Holy Communion and
Confirmation.

My siblings are Catholic, my mother was Catholic, my eldest brother entered
the priesthood and made it to the rank of Friar before passing away in May
2018 of cancer. (Though he was a Friar, my brother was no saint. He had a
problem with alcohol till AA helped straighten him out). My wife is a former
Catholic, her dad was Catholic, his wife was Catholic, my aunt and uncle
were Catholics, and my wife's cousins are Catholic; one of them is qualified
to teach Catechism.

I was loyal to Rome up until I was 24, then one day I was approached by a
Conservative Baptist minister who asked me if I was prepared for Christ's
return.

Well; I must've been either asleep or absent the day that the nuns talked
about Jesus coming back because that man's question was the very first
time in my whole life that I can remember somebody telling me.

My initial reaction was alarm because I instinctively knew that were I called
on the carpet for a face-to-face with Jesus, it would not go well for me
because I had a lot to answer for. Well; I don't like being made to feel afraid
so I became indignant and demanded to know why Jesus would come back.
That's when I found out for the very first time that it was in the plan for
Christ to take over the world. (I had somehow missed that in catechism
too.)

Then the minister asked me if I was going to heaven. Well; of course I had
no clue because Catholics honestly don't know what to expect when they
pass away. I was crossing my fingers while in the back of my mind dreading
the worst.

Then the man said; "Don't you know that Jesus died for your sins?"

Well; I had been taught in catechism that Jesus died for the sins of the
world; that much I knew; but honestly believed all along that he had been a
victim of unfortunate circumstances. It was a shock to discover that Jesus'
trip to the cross was deliberate, and that his Father was thinking of me when
His son passed away, viz: my sins were among the sins of the world that
Jesus took to the cross with him.

At that very instant-- scarcely a nanosecond --something took over in my
mind as I fully realized, to my great relief, that heaven was no longer out of
reach, rather, well within my grasp!

That was an amazing experience. In just the two or three minutes of
conversation with that Baptist minister, I obtained an understanding of
Jesus' crucifixion that many tedious years of catechism classes had somehow
failed to get across. Consequently, my confidence in the Roman Catholic
Church was shattered like a bar of peanut brittle candy dropped on the
sidewalk from the tippy top of the Chrysler building.

Long story short; I eventually went with that man to his church and, side by
side with him and a couple of elders, knelt at the rail down front and prayed
a really simple, naive prayer that went something like this;

"God, I know I'm a sinner. I would like to take advantage of your son's
death"

My prayer wasn't much to brag about; but it was the smartest sixteen words
I'd ever spoken up to that time.

Matt 10:32 . .Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also
acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.
_
 
Last edited:

Joseph77

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2020
5,673
1,325
113
Tulsa, OK
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
that man's question was the very first
time in my whole life that I can remember somebody telling me.
HALLELUYAH! And Let All the ANGELS in HEAVEN and all the Ekklesia on eart REJOICE! HALLELUYAH !

God always knows how and when to reach anyone .....