The song of Mary- an unorthodox perspective

  • 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!

Jim B

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2020
5,793
1,797
113
Santa Fe NM
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's really too bad that people interpret the gospels as though they are Western journalism. The Gospels -- all the "books" of the Bible -- are written for our instruction, to teach us spiritual truths. If one looks for logical contradictions they will find them -- and miss the spiritual truths that they communicate.

In fact, I would say that they are traps to catch those who lack faith and are looking to show others how the word of God isn't true. If the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's really too bad that people interpret the gospels as though they are Western journalism. The Gospels -- all the "books" of the Bible -- are written for our instruction, to teach us spiritual truths. If one looks for logical contradictions they will find them -- and miss the spiritual truths that they communicate.

In fact, I would say that they are traps to catch those who lack faith and are looking to show others how the word of God isn't true. If the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch.
I believe what @Mr E is attempting to show- can only be seen by those with sight.
 

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You still have not answered me why you think Jesus is a "created being/creature"
I suppose on a forum we can be selective to whom we can ask questions.
Because scripture declares it, if you don’t go through all the mental gymnastics.

Now, what about my question too you

The supporting scripture you gave tying what Isaiah wrote too the first century Matthew gospel account was this-

Isaiah 7:16 KJV
[16] For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

My question is who are the two kings in the first century AD,,,,and I’d also like too add doesn’t this say there is a time when the child doesn’t know too refuse evil?
 
Last edited:

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,869
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
My question is who are the two kings in the first century AD,,,,and I’d also like too add doesn’t this say there is a time when the child doesn’t know too refuse evil?
Why should I answer you when you are refusing to admit Jesus is Lord?
Like the JW"s--you place Him in the rank of a "creature?"

People the world over suffer from cognitive dissonance==spending too much time in front of the TV [worshipping other gods] and too tired to study the Scriptures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marks

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why should I answer you when you are refusing to admit Jesus is Lord?
Like the JW"s--you place Him in the rank of a "creature?"

People the world over suffer from cognitive dissonance==spending too much time in front of the TV [worshipping other gods] and too tired to study the Scriptures.
Okay, thanks!
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Quite a many quotes from your post below. First my husband and I also often disagree on passages. There is one we do agree on though. (I think). That one I am bringing up as an example. Not to derail your thread or to debate it. But only as an example. In the beginning of all of creation “Let there be Light”. To me that is messianic. Since you and I seem to clash over what is messianic passages…maybe our definition of Messianic is different? To me messianic means to foreshadow or reveal Christ.
To me then “let there be Light” is messianic. We could debate that light which came before but wasn’t the true light; but instead revealed that True Light.

To me it is the difference of talking about the creation of the sun and moon and the stars or the Light of the knowledge of Christ. You keep saying two branches, two houses. I don’t disagree with you there. Same as “Let there be Light” within the given text of “the beginning of creation” “Let there be Light” …I said my husband and I agree on something and that is: the beginning of creation is Christ and how significant the opening to the Word begins “messianic” with “Let there be Light” …not sun and moon and the stars but “let there be Christ”. This I think is validated in the NT in “let this mind and heart be in you also that was in Christ”.

You may say “why waste my time because this has nothing to do with the topic”. But I’m trying to set up answering your quotes. It makes think of my husband and I debating over “messianic” verses…when maybe neither of us is necessarily wrong. See, we agree on “in the beginning” “let there be Light”. But disagree on Isaiah as messianic. someone could read and find a verse there to prove this is only speaking of “the sun” and “the moon” there; like you did with “when he sins”; but we both agree (my husband and I ) there is another branch, another house, another branch given in “the beginning of the creation” it was dark and God commanded “Let there be Light.”

Oops though… never considered until now that you might say the beginning “Let there be Light.” Is also not messianic.

Then my husband and I go on to disagree over the verses that you shared where he would fully agree with you (I think), that those verses never speak of Christ. Debating its straightforwardness… “Not messianic”. I don’t get how the beginning can be both, but not Isaiah.

The portion I was focusing on (from Isaiah's prophecy regarding a messiah) was this--

When the time comes for you to die, I will raise up your descendant, one of your own sons, to succeed you, and I will establish his kingdom. He will build a house for my name, and I will make his dynasty permanent. I will become his father and he will become my son. When he sins, I will correct him with the rod of men and with wounds inflicted by human beings.
“when he sins” thank you for pointing that out because I do see your point. Considering it there are a few verses which to me also are messianic which again you may disagree: the one in Revelation about the rod and how “my Father will break them with the rod of iron, as he did with me” …not a bad thing to me because chastisement is not to be despised?

OT: He was made a quick study, a quick learner being taught of his father? Solomon? Or Christ the quick student? I suggest Christ because Solomon seemed hard-headed and slow to learn like us. But that is just an opinion.

NT: he learned obedience through the things he suffered. Do you say this is speaks in regard to Solomon or David or Christ?

About when “he sins”
I will chastise him. OT “Our chastisement was upon him” a man acquainted with sorrows and grief “it pleased God to bruise him. Yet he was not destroyed. Although we considered him stricken and despised of God, afflicted.
? Not messianic?

But there is another branch-- and Isaiah distinguishes that a messiah is much more than an earthly king. From the same root of Jesse, the same son David-- but his kingdom and his house was of a different sort.
Agree. I am NOT disagreeing with you there is two houses, two branches. I LOVE what you said …and God doesn’t dwell in one of them. I’m thinking about it…to me it is also like the word of God. There is two creations in the beginning, “Let there be Light” always two branches, two houses …and God doesn’t dwell in one of them. We could go back to Adam and his dominance over the beast and fowls and even what was promised that he would rule over and be given “seed” “fruit” “land” …and the Spirit of God doesn’t dwell in one.


When did God ever say of Solomon? -"This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased."

But that was part of the promise to David-- that for one of David's sons, -God would become his father and he would be God's son and through THIS particular son that permanent dynasty and kingdom would be established. Something never said of the dynasty through Solomon, -which came with a condition--- "IF you follow my rules, observe my regulations, and obey all my commandments..."

Two branches, two houses. I don’t disagree
Precisely. If you think that the one Isaiah was talking about was not Solomon-- rather this one who would be filled with wisdom and build this house was not speaking of Solomon who didn't obey the regulations and commandments, but another-- a messiah/king who was yet to come-- it solves one problem while creating another. I'm just keeping it real. "When he sins, I will correct him with a rod of iron..." Problematic for some who insist Jesus never even farted (to speak idiomatically).

So the prophecy in Isaiah pertains to one branch of Jesse- a dynastic, earthly succession of kings and another branch yet to come of another kingdom and dynasty where his children would sit forever on his throne, though his descendants none can speak of.
But there is another branch, another house there. That is all I am suggesting. For me you can’t claim Isaiah is not messianic unless you omit that branch, that house to prove there is only one branch and one house there in Isaiah.that being the sole point. You already said there is another branch from Jesse…as equally important as “Joseph” and “Mary” is what you speak of from Isaiah but (Imo) also as with Mary AND Joseph …Isaiah is also messianic. Isaiah both speaking of “earthly” and “heavenly”. Again, my point is not to remove the earthy branch you speak of but I’m only scratching my head on how you suggest the removal of an “messianic” branch there also. “NO. It is not messianic.” To me that is like removing messianic from “Let there be Light” and asserting it only speaks of the creation of the sun and moon and stars. We are going to have a problem when “the stars” fall to the earth and there is darkness for they withdrew their light.
You can apply this above to Solomon. The wisest man that ever had lived, scripture tells us. But it isn't intellectually honest to say-- this is messianic only. Then the next line about 'when he sins' --oops- That part is not messianic. And so forth.
Solomon may have been as wise and wiser than any earthly man…but ones wisdom did not descend from men as we are debating that gene, but that wisdom came from above not descending from men. I think of where it is said that the Gods weakness is stronger than men’s strength.
Jesus quoted Isaiah in saying the spirit of the Lord was upon him. God spoke to John and said of Jesus-- 'This is my beloved son' all of this is recorded in scripture perfectly uniting in Mary, the line of David through Joseph and Solomon and the line of David through Nathan, not precluding the necessary line through Joseph, as if he had nothing to do with her pregnation. It's necessary that he was the biological father to satisfy the promise to David and the prophecy of Isaiah alike.
Unity in One. I can see this too. If I understand you correctly it is great insight you have shared. I’m not disagreeing. But in the uniting in “One” of Mary AND
Joseph …NT of two He makes One. Still…Messianic (Imo).
I would even go as far as to suggest all OT is Messianic…
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mr E

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,492
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In the beginning of all of creation “Let there be Light”. To me that is messianic. Since you and I seem to clash over what is messianic passages…maybe our definition of Messianic is different? To me messianic means to foreshadow or reveal Christ.
To me then “let there be Light” is messianic. We could debate that light which came before but wasn’t the true light; but instead revealed that True Light.

Love it. Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I really do appreciate it. It sounds like you and your husband have a wonderful relationship where these things can be discussed and even disagreed upon, in love. If you'll allow I'm going to put this aside for the moment, but come back to it later-- promise. You've hit upon the most 'messianic' story in all of history-- the coming of the Light. Along this line, I think I wasn't articulate enough with respect to Isaiah-- It's not that it isn't messianic. It's that it is messianic in two ways. There are two branches as I've explained in detail. One through Solomon and father to son all the way to Jesus-- the dynastic lineage. But that's not significant to many people apart from the Jews. To the Jews it is of utmost significance however, so it's a big mistake to dismiss it. They will never be persuaded by a messiah that doesn't come from this line, father-to-son through Solomon.

The other line and Isaiah-- is not speaking of that line through Solomon. -That is what I meant specifically, with what I said before. I'm sorry if I confused you. I was trying to make a distinction between what those Jews believe regarding the genetic import of DNA through David and Solomon and so on--father to son. Isaiah is no respecter of the temple. He is speaking against the whole religious system, just as every prophet before him. He is speaking of a different son-of-David and a different temple and a different kingdom-- the very thing Jesus came and told us about. The beauty of scripture and the records (two of them) is absolutely stunning. Showing absolute integrity. continuity and congruity.... God saw to it that both were true. Rather than contradiction the two records harmonize and show that Isaiah's prophecy speaks of a coming messiah to be sure-- messianic, but not in entirely in the manner that they were expecting. They of course expected a champion who they would anoint king, who would overthrow the Roman oppressors and set up a kingdom. What they got instead was a baby.

This, -is the story, of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VictoryinJesus

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,492
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I believe what @Mr E is attempting to show- can only be seen by those with sight.

Actually, just the opposite. Those with sight have no need of a guide.

What I'm presenting is for the blind. For the blind who have been led by blind guides. For some two thousand years they have taught followers of Christ to ignore the contradictions, or pretend they don't exist or don't matter. Taught to put blinders on and don't look at it. Rather than try to understand it, people listened to those guides and accepted every spoonful of work-around theory imaginable without considering that they may well have been misled and misinformed. The end result has been the acceptance of a scenario that is completely unacceptable to the Jews to the degree that we've given them a pass, to say-- "It's all nonsense and fabricated" -and on the basis of this one weed that has been permitted to grow so long, the Jews then dismiss the entirety of the gospel, dismiss the entirety of the New Testament, and in so doing-- miss entirely Jesus, the messiah.

The beauty of those two accounts preserved the way they were is that we have the means to harmonize scripture as written-- if understood, in a way that removes the first and biggest stumbling block for the Jews-- that being the necessity that Jesus is a direct descendant of David (and I've already explained repeatedly exactly what that means). Take away their objection that Joseph was not the father of Jesus and you take away their reason to look no further into his life and teachings.

Matthew is written for them. He makes no bones about Joseph being the father. It would be entirely acceptable to the Jews except for the fact that councils and religious leaders and teachers came along later and decided that they would create a legend like that of Greek Gods who were born of miraculous virgin mothers-- hybrid, sons of the gods and earthly mothers. After all-- it had been prophesied in Isaiah that the virgin would be with child.... the story they concocted fit. It fit perfectly they thought. And so it would seem, and so it was accepted and so it has been taught and so we have it. It's that very weed that was planted.

Luke tells a different story. It contains little factoids that are included based on recollections given to him in interviews he conducted with the players. Luke tells Mary's story as told by her. And so it makes sense that it's her lineage Luke contains, I recognize that. But it isn't instead of the lineage Matthew records as if one is correct and the other is not. It's to demonstrate that in every way-- genetic descent, the messiah that came did fulfill the promise made by God to David-- in two ways.
 

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,492
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Digging into her story now. First, the scriptures.

The full account, from the gospel of Matthew-

Now the birth of Jesus Christ happened this way. While his mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph, her husband to be, was a righteous man, and because he did not want to disgrace her, he intended to divorce her privately. When he had contemplated this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife because the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son and you will name him Jesus because he will save his people from their sins.” This all happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet would be fulfilled: “Look! The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will name him Emmanuel,” which means “God with us.” When Joseph awoke from sleep he did what the angel of the Lord told him. He took his wife, but did not have marital relations with her until she gave birth to a son, whom he named Jesus.

And from the gospel according to Luke- which is distinctly different in that the story told begins and centers on another miraculous pregnancy, that of an old woman, a relative of Mary's, named Elizabeth. Mary's story is introduced within the context of Elizabeth's story which becomes it's prelude. Fast forward a few verses and Mary's story begins like this-

In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, a descendant of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary. The angel came to her and said, “Greetings, favored one, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled by his words and began to wonder about the meaning of this greeting. So the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God! Listen: You will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will never end.” Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I have not been intimate with a man?” The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called the Son of God.

“And look, your relative Elizabeth has also become pregnant with a son in her old age—although she was called barren, she is now in her sixth month! For nothing will be impossible with God.” So Mary said, “Yes, I am a servant of the Lord; let this happen to me according to your word.” Then the angel departed from her.

In those days Mary got up and went hurriedly into the hill country, to a town of Judah, and entered Zechariah’s house and greeted Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. She exclaimed with a loud voice, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child in your womb! And who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me? For the instant the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that what was spoken to her by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: VictoryinJesus

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Digging into her story now. First, the scriptures.

The full account, from the gospel of Matthew-

Now the birth of Jesus Christ happened this way. While his mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph, her husband to be, was a righteous man, and because he did not want to disgrace her, he intended to divorce her privately. When he had contemplated this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife because the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son and you will name him Jesus because he will save his people from their sins.” This all happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet would be fulfilled: “Look! The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will name him Emmanuel,” which means “God with us.” When Joseph awoke from sleep he did what the angel of the Lord told him. He took his wife, but did not have marital relations with her until she gave birth to a son, whom he named Jesus.

And from the gospel according to Luke- which is distinctly different in that the story told begins and centers on another miraculous pregnancy, that of an old woman, a relative of Mary's, named Elizabeth. Mary's story is introduced within the context of Elizabeth's story which becomes it's prelude. Fast forward a few verses and Mary's story begins like this-

In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, a descendant of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary. The angel came to her and said, “Greetings, favored one, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled by his words and began to wonder about the meaning of this greeting. So the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God! Listen: You will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will never end.” Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I have not been intimate with a man?” The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called the Son of God.

“And look, your relative Elizabeth has also become pregnant with a son in her old age—although she was called barren, she is now in her sixth month! For nothing will be impossible with God.” So Mary said, “Yes, I am a servant of the Lord; let this happen to me according to your word.” Then the angel departed from her.

In those days Mary got up and went hurriedly into the hill country, to a town of Judah, and entered Zechariah’s house and greeted Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. She exclaimed with a loud voice, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child in your womb! And who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me? For the instant the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that what was spoken to her by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
Waiting on you to post help with the above. I have maybe stupid questions. For example would a child of the Holy Spirit cause Mary’s stomach to swell? Why would people consider her tainted by another to where Jospeh would consider putting her away quietly? Even today …how unnoticed it goes of men if someone is with child of the Holy Spirit or whether there is his seed (Christ), or if there is fruit of birth growing? Why would there be a dispute where Joseph would need to be reassured? Would men notice Mary conceived?
Why the heaviness of the passage that men will consider Mary having been unfaithful to Joseph before their Union?

I think of the passage of the bitter water.
One woman drinks and her belly swells and her thigh rots.
The other drinks and being free, she bears seed.
 
Last edited:

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,492
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Waiting on you to post help with the above. I have maybe stupid questions. For example would a child of the Holy Spirit cause Mary’s stomach to swell? Why would people consider her tainted by another to where Jospeh would consider putting her away quietly? Even today …how unnoticed it goes of men if someone is with child of the Holy Spirit or whether there is his seed (Christ), or if there is fruit of birth growing? Why would there be a dispute where Joseph would need to be reassured? Would men notice Mary conceived?
Why the heaviness of the passage that men will consider Mary having been unfaithful to Joseph before their Union?

I think of the passage of the bitter water.
One woman drinks and her belly swells and her thigh rots.
The other drinks and being free, she bears seed.

That's a lot of questions -- :coff Maybe we will get to some of them in time. I'll challenge you to set these aside for the moment as well. Good thoughts begin with good questions and vice versa. Sometimes we find ourselves pursuing a line of questioning based on certain beliefs we hold, even without first establishing those beliefs to be true. Maybe someone taught us to think a certain way about something, or we came up with an idea based on what we think or believe, but what if even our most basic assumptions are in error? For instance, if someone approached this subject (and many do) with certain cemented ideas about the virgin birth, everything else must be viewed with that prejudice in place. It becomes a built-in bias and the lens with which you examine anything else. If a person is able to set aside their preconceived notions for a time, then perhaps they can see clearly enough to contemplate the possibility that their original beliefs were misplaced.

I would have to know what you mean by 'a child of the Holy Spirit' within this context. I do know that actual babies do cause a woman's stomach to swell. Perhaps you consider what Mary went through to be something other than what we know to be a natural consequence.

Flesh gives birth to flesh. And in the process, the mother-to-be's flesh swells in response to the growth within.

Spirit gives birth to spirit. And Mary conceived in spirit before that physical experience took place. She was open to it. It was the whole idea of it that Mary first conceived of and she believed what she was shown and told in spirit. And so it was. Would men notice it? Well, Elizabeth did. She knew Mary was preggers before anyone else did, and without being told. Your test is true, however. If there is inner growth, people notice and there will be fruit to show for it.

Let's look at both accounts in detail and see if that answers any of your ponderings. It wasn't the meaning of her name, nor any bitterness of spirit that caused her tummy to swell. It was the growing Light within her.
 

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Waiting on you to post help with the above. I have maybe stupid questions. For example would a child of the Holy Spirit cause Mary’s stomach to swell? Why would people consider her tainted by another to where Jospeh would consider putting her away quietly? Even today …how unnoticed it goes of men if someone is with child of the Holy Spirit or whether there is his seed (Christ), or if there is fruit of birth growing? Why would there be a dispute where Joseph would need to be reassured? Would men notice Mary conceived?
Why the heaviness of the passage that men will consider Mary having been unfaithful to Joseph before their Union?

I think of the passage of the bitter water.
One woman drinks and her belly swells and her thigh rots.
The other drinks and being free, she bears seed.
What’s more interesting too me than the attitudes of men, is that John in the womb of Elisabeth is full of joy upon hearing the voice of Mary, and the reason is due to something The Baptist was quoted as having said in the gospel of John.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VictoryinJesus

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
John 3:27-29 KJV
[27] John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. [28] Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. [29] He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
 

Mr E

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2022
3,492
2,465
113
San Diego
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Because it's a short text and to the point, let's start with Matthew's account, which notably focuses on Joseph. Just like Matthew's genetic history- it's Joseph that matters here and Joseph's story is just a continuation of the narrative that began with that family history establishing his legitimate heritage as a blood-born son of David.

Mary was pledged to become his wife-- we might say they were engaged to be married, but with stronger cultural implications that are more in line with the idea that it was a done deal in every aspect but for one. The one element lacking was that wedding ceremony that culminates in their coming together physically, whereby they "unite" and become one, the true meaning of matrimony from the beginning. You can consider this in the physical sense, a representation and likeness of the spiritual reality, but in truth the physical is but a poor reflection seen dimly when compared to the light from above and the spiritual understanding. In spirit, man and woman were united before they were ever individuals... another story for another time.

Before they had come together.... This means quite literally in the biblical way-- before they had sex--which was what the marriage ceremony culminated in, this union of two becoming one. A celebration and remembrance of the spiritual, as well as the solidification/certification of the physical reality. But BEFORE this wedding celebration and that physical act-- Mary was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit.

I know how most people read it. I know the orthodox understanding that says 'in some way' Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit. That's not what it says. It actually says that her pregnancy became known to Joseph through the Holy Spirit. It's not the means of her pregnancy, rather it's the process of discovery... the manner by which Joseph was shown Mary pregnant. He saw her pregnant in a dream--

Does that mean that she was already pregnant?

If you have a dream and you see yourself happy, carefree, hair blowing in the wind, tanned skin and bright smile on the deck of a sail boat-- that kind of a dream can invoke such strong emotions-- you could awaken and for a moment feel like it was all so very real-- and for a moment forget completely the fact that you don't own a sailboat and you live 2000 miles from the sea. In such visions, or dreams if you prefer-- what you see is not always what is. Agree?

Interpretations and beliefs aside for the moment--- Does the text itself establish that this wasn't a dream- where 'through the Holy Spirit' he discovered Mary to be pregnant? Let me ask-- other than in a dream, where or how else would Joseph find Mary to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit? By observation? Well maybe you could tell that a girl was pregnant because she was 'glowing' or because she was showing (as discussed by others) but though you could surmise she was pregnant, you would not know the father and you certainly would not assume that it was without one-- so how exactly was she found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit? -Joseph was shown this in a dream-- through the Holy Spirit, he saw it and was troubled by the scene.

How do we know it was in a dream that he saw this and in a dream that he was thinking of calling off the wedding? Because that is where (in dreams) we are shown things through the Holy Spirit.

And if you don't believe in dreams and in people who believe in dreams, then you don't belong in this story.

Because the next thing that happens after contemplating (thinking about the dream), he is visited (in dream) by an angel of the Lord who explains what he had been shown- “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife because the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

This is important. It's the key.

Scripture tells us that when he awoke from the dream-- Joseph went and did what the angel had commanded him to do.

What did the angel tell him to do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VictoryinJesus

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Scripture tells us that when he awoke from the dream-- Joseph went and did what the angel had commanded him to do.

What did the angel tell him to do?
Matthew 1:24-25 KJV
24) Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Her virgin-born son, Jesus.

Much love!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I know how most people read it. I know the orthodox understanding that says 'in some way' Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit. That's not what it says. It actually says that her pregnancy became known to Joseph through the Holy Spirit. It's not the means of her pregnancy, rather it's the process of discovery... the manner by which Joseph was shown Mary pregnant. He saw her pregnant in a dream--
Actually, it's right there in the chapter:

Matthew 1:20 KJV
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Much love!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Before they had come together.... This means quite literally in the biblical way-- before they had sex--which was what the marriage ceremony culminated in, this union of two becoming one. A celebration and remembrance of the spiritual, as well as the solidification/certification of the physical reality. But BEFORE this wedding celebration and that physical act-- Mary was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit.

I know how most people read it. I know the orthodox understanding that says 'in some way' Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit. That's not what it says. It actually says that her pregnancy became known to Joseph through the Holy Spirit. It's not the means of her pregnancy, rather it's the process of discovery... the manner by which Joseph was shown Mary pregnant. He saw her pregnant in a dream--
When you look at how it's written, this interpretation doesn't work:

1679353711104.png
The child, "in belly" was "out of the Holy Spirit. Jesus' virgin birth, and conception by the Holy Spirit, is specifically attested to in Scripture.

Much love!