ShekinahLife

Arise and Shine

THE VIRGIN BIRTH 2.0

One of my many detractors has stated that my views make no sense and that I offer no proof to support my position. Have I not said over a thousand times that I can't post this information in mere soundbites!? So, here's the whole ball of wax in one huge post. I know that no one will take the time to read this through, but ... I'm posting this largely just to harmonize Matthew and Luke and set forth a timeline and explanitory notes.

THE VIRGIN BIRTH 2.0


"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused (married) to Joseph...." (Mat 1:18a).

"And in the sixth month (of Elizabeth's pregnancy) the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin (Grk. parthenos; Heb. al'mah - a young woman; newly wed) espoused (Heb. kiddushin - betrothed) to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's (newly wed's) name [was] Mary." (Luke 1:26-27).


NOTE: In short, Joseph and Mary had already had sexual intercourse (bi'ah). Joseph had given Mary an object of value or money (kessef) and/or had presented a "written declaration of marital intent" (shetar).


Maurice Lamm writes (P. 146), "After the man has addressed the marriage formula [contained in the shetar] to the woman before two witnesses, the couple reitres to a private place with the intent of effecting the betrothal [kiddushin] through intercourse."

That completed the kiddushin (betrothal) phase of the two-stage marriage process. Joseph and Mary were legally married at this point and had Joseph changed his mind, for whatever reason, then he would've had to give Mary a bill of divorce (get).


It was at this point that Mary's marriage contract (ketubah) would have been drafted and the couple would have remained separated from each other, while Joseph built or put the final touches on their home. Eventually, the ketubah (marital contract), which served as the woman's "token" or "sign" of marriage and outlined her property and alimony rights (etc) if widowed or divorced, would be read in public, at some point during the period of separation leading up to the kichah (taking).

The kichah (taking) would have been timed to avoid conflicting with Mary's menses and the seven days following it, so that Mary could immerse herself in the local mikveh (ritual bath).


In Yeshua's parable of the Ten Virgins (Newly Wed's), we see the already "newly wed" women waiting for the kichah (taking), when the bridegroom comes in a formal procession of his friends (chaverim) to whisk his wife away to the home that he has prepared for her. (Cf. "... I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also" John 14:3; "... his bride has made herself ready" Rev. 19:7).

This kichah (taking), would culminate with the already legally married couple's she'khivah (sleeping together), thus effecting the unification (yichud); thereby ending the nuptial phase (nissuin) that completed the two-stage marriage process. In ancient times, the custom was for the she'khivah (sleeping together) to take place in the fields, but by Yeshua's day and age, that custom had been deemed immodest by the sages. END NOTE.


"And the angel came in unto her, and said, 'Hail, [thou that art] highly favoured, the Lord [is] with thee: blessed [art] thou among women.' And when she saw [him], she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, 'Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, you have conceived (sullempse) in thy womb, and [shall] bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Yeshua.'" (Luke 1:28-31).

"... before they [Joseph and Mary] came together (sunelthein), she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." (Matt. 1:18b).


NOTE: The word for "came together" is sunelthein and alludes to the kichah (taking) and the subsequent she'khivah (sleeping together), in the couple's home, thus effecting the unification (yichud); thereby ending the nuptial phase (nissuin) that completed the two-stage marriage process. The word for "came together" (sunelthein) doesn't preclude that Joseph and Mary engaged in sexual intercourse (bi'ah) as part of the betrothal (kiddushin) phase of the two-stage marriage process.


What about Mary being found with child of the Holy Ghost? According to Judaism, everyone has three parents:

QUOTE:
There are three partners in man ... his father supplies the semen of the white substance out of which are formed the child's bones, sinews, nails, brain and the white in his eye. His mother supplies the seed of the red substance (mazra'at odem) out of which is formed his skin, flesh, hair and black of his eye. G-d gives him the soul and breath, beauty of features, eyesight, hearing, speech, understanding, and discernment. When his time comes to depart this world, G-d takes his share and leaves the shares of his mother and father with them - Niddah 31a; cf. She'iltot, Yitro, 56; Leviticus Rabbah 14.5 (on Psalms 27:10). END QUOTE. END NOTE.


"[The angel states] 'He shall be great (Grk. megas; Heb. rav or gadol), and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.' Then said Mary unto the angel, 'How shall this be, seeing a man I know not?'" (Luke 1:32-34).

NOTE : I submit that the words in Luke 1:34b, "seeing a man I know not," are an interpolation of the Gentile Church.

Luke 1:34b is not referenced or quoted in the writings of Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, the Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, Papias (Bishop of Hierapolis), Justin Martyr the Samaritan, Irenaeus (Bbishop of Lugdunum), Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras of Athens, Clement of Alexandria or even Tertullian! You'd think that at least one of these ante-Nicene Fathers would have quoted Luke 1:34b as a proof text for Mary having been an untouched virgin, right?


Yes, Tatian the Assyian's Diatessaron, which seeks to harmonize the Four Gospels, does contain Luke 1:34b; however, there are many problems associated with the Diatessaron not the least of which is the late date for the extant manuscripts.

In Luke 1:31, the angel states, "you have conceived" (sullempse), and this perfect-past tense agrees with the statement that "Elisabeth, she hath ALSO CONCEIVED a son" in Luke 1:36. So, in Luke 1:34, Mary isn't saying, "How shall this be (that I shall be pregnant)?" Mary has been told that she has already conceived (sullempse)! Mary is simply asking, "How shall this be (that my son shall sit upon the Throne of Daivd)?" END NOTE.

"And the angel answered and said unto her, 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.'" (Luke 1:35).


NOTE : The Holy Spirit has already taken part in the conception of Yeshua. Now the angel is answering Mary's question about "How shall this be (that my son shall sit upon the Throne of David)?" The angel tells Mary that the Holy Spirit will come upon her and overshadow her ... just as it comes upon Elizabeth (Luke 1:41). In short, both John and Yeshua were imbued with the Ruach Ha-Qodesh from the womb (Luke 1:15; 1:35) in order to fulfill their assigned roles - one coming in the Spirit and Power of Elijah and the other coming in the Spirit and Power of the Anointed King. END NOTE.

"'And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. For with God nothing shall be impossible.' And Mary said, 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.' And the angel departed from her." (Luke 1:36-38).


"Then Joseph her husband, being a just [man], and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily." (Matt. 1:19).


NOTEL: Once Joseph was informed of this situation he was concerned that the gossips and/or the non-Torah observant and/or the ultra-Conservative disciples of Shammai, might take issue with him having acquired his bride via sexual intercourse (bi'ah) and thereby having impregnanted her, during the betrothal (kiddushin) phase of the two-stage marriage process.

Maurice Lamm writes (p. 146), "The Sages considered this to be gross, virtually an act of prostitution [fornication], and in the third century Rav decreed flogging for those who chose this manner of betrothal [kiddushin]. Nonetheless, if the marriage was performed in this way it was legally valid. Only kessef (money) is performed today."


This is why we hear Yeshua's opponents among the Judean disciples of Shammai saying, "We be not born of fornication [prostitution]; we have one Father, [even] God." This could have simply been their Judean bias against the Galilean custom of acquiring a wife via sexual intercourse (bi'ah), during the betrothal (kiddushin) phase of the two-stage marriage process. In other words, these Judean disciples of Shammai were throwing this accusation in Yeshua's face.

So, given this unforeseen problem of having to speed up the kichah (taking) before Mary started showing that she was with child, which would be fodder for the gossips, the non-observant and the ultra-conservative Jews, Joseph thought about just putting Mary away privately and thereby avoid any hassle or embarassment during the kichah (taking) and the she'khivah (sleeping together), which was to complete the nuptial phase (nissuin) of the two-stage marriage process. END NOTE.


"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 (kichah) unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Yeshua: for he shall save his people from their sins.' Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 'Behold, a virgin (Grk. parthenos; Heb. al'mah - a young woman; newly wed) shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us' (cf. Luke 1:15; 1:35). Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took (kichah) unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Yeshua." (Matt. 1:20-24).

"And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Judea; And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth." (Luke 1:39-40)
.


NOTE : So, Joseph completed the kichah (taking), but didn't complete the she'khivah (sleeping together). Further, in order to avoid giving the gossips (et al) any juicey tidbits ... Mary went into the Judean hill country to visit Elizabeth for about three months (Luke 1:56). Problem solved! Crisis averted!


Why would Joseph not have completed the she'khivah (sleeping together)? Why would he abstained from sexual contact with Mary during her pregnancy? Probably because he didn't want her to use a "mokh" and/or he didn't want to risk superfetation.

According to Jewish Law, there are three kinds of woman who must use a device called a "mokh" for the absorption of the spermatic liquid:


QUOTE:
"R. Bebai recited before R. Nahman: Three [categories of] women must use a mokh in marital intercourse; a minor, a pregnant woman, and a nursing mother. The minor, because [otherwise] she might become pregnant and die. A pregnant woman, because [otherwise] she might cause her foetus to become a sandal [i.e., a flat fish-shaped abortion due to superfetation]. A nursing woman, because [otherwise] she might have to wean her child prematurely, and he would die...." (Y'vamot 12b). END QUOTE.


The use of a "mokh" (i.e., a tuft of wool or cotton padding) is rather problematic, because the halakhic rulings state that the "mokh" must effectively block the Cervix in order to prevent the sperm from entering the Uterus, while not preventing the man's phallus from having unimpeded contact with the woman's vaginal wall, in order that the two might literally become "one flesh" (Gen 2:24).

Also, the man's seed must be sown in the woman, rather than in the "mokh," which means that the ejaculate must come into contact with the vaginal wall before being absorbed by the "mokh." The "mokh" is simply meant to block the Cervix by absorbing any semen that tries to make its way into the Uterus. See the problems involved here?


Given that, the Essene solution to the problematic use of the "mokh" was to focus on the higher ethics involved. Josephus states of certain Essenes that, "They do not approach those with child, showing that they marry not for self-indulgence, but for the procreation of children" (War 2.160-61).

No, I'm not saying that Joseph was a card-carrying Essene, because he was most likely a Tzadiq (Righteous One) of the plebeian Chasidic-Separatists for whom there existed a balance between the "ethical" and the "practical."

In other words, the Chasidic-Separatists understood the necessity of procreation as well as the legitimacy of sexual pleasure, but they weren't above enduring a hardship in order to "fulfill" the letter of the Law nor did they shy away from shouldering an ethical burden in order to "fulfill" the spirit of the Law, especially if doing so meant that they could avoid being a stumbling block to others.


The fact that Joseph took Mary as his bride prior to learning the specifics of her ketubah (marriage contract), if we follow the Shem Tov text of the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, and the fact that he refrained from having sexual intercourse with her throughout her pregnancy attests to this being a love-match and shows that Joseph was not motivated by lust or greed. He went beyond the letter of the Law, as would any Chasid (Pious One), yet conducted himself according to the traditions and customs of the plebeian Galilean sages. How could he do otherwise? After all, he was known to be a Tzadiq (Righteous One).

Again, I don't expect Christians to accept this explanation, because it goes against 1,800 years of Church dogma and paints a picture of Yeshua's family that is simply too Jewish for most non-Jews to stomach. IMO, it puts to rest many questions that people have about the so-called "Virgin Birth." Again, this is only a "working model". I make no claim to having a monopoly on universal truth. I leave those claims for the Church to make. END NOTE.



Written by a seeker of HaShem

Views: 77

Reply to This

We are serious about your spiritual/physical health & well being~~~

Thank you for joining and adding value to the quest of the meaning of life/chayim
~Shalom/Welcome to SHEKINAH~LIFE'¬  Your hosts Jim and Terry Hamilton

B"H.
As The Zohar itself proclaims: "Woe unto those who see in the Law nothing but simple narratives and ordinary words .... Every word of the Law contains an elevated sense and a sublime mystery .... The narratives of the Law are but the raiment within which it is swathed."

Shalom to one and all/.....Your host:
Jim and Terry
http://ShekinahLife.ning.com/m (mobile)\

TZEDAKAH / donations

Tzedakah - Charity "Kol Yisrael arevim zeh bazeh." ="All YIsrael is responsible for one another." (Talmud Shavuot 39a)


SHALOM ALEICHEM

join us here Shekinah~Life

Leaving Comments: The Comments section of  ShekinahLife-is provided in the interests of free speech only.

It is mostly moderated, however comments that are off topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying-and-or-spamming stand a chance of being edited or deleted

Enjoy your Journey~"Y&T"

Latest Activity

James and Terry Hamilton replied to James and Terry Hamilton's discussion Introduction To The Study Of The Ten Sefirot
"Thank you for this great post"
Jul 19, 2017
James and Terry Hamilton shared their discussion on Facebook
Jul 19, 2017
James and Terry Hamilton promoted James and Terry Hamilton's discussion Introduction To The Study Of The Ten Sefirot
Jul 19, 2017
James and Terry Hamilton posted a photo

Rose sharon -shekinahlife

In the beginning of the "Zohar" the Article, the Rose,..it says: "Just as the rose among thorns is…
Apr 8, 2017

© 2024   Created by James and Terry Hamilton.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


We are serious about your Spiritual/Physical Health & Biblical Growth~~~
Serious students Listen, write notes, and study~~~
Take this to heart~~Anti-Rabbinism, Polygamy proponents and anti-Scholasticism will not be tolerated here!
May the Torah truth be Revealed to All who come to this site
Lastly a simple reminder; Read-Read-Read your TaNaKh until HaShem's Torah Becomes seamless within you
As Sephardic Jews of the house of IsraEL,and Moderators of shekinahLife and in order to keep the Shalom... We do not endorse Paganism of any sort. so lets keep it in line with historical truth..and we thank you in advance....
**********************************************

WavingRabbi
~~~


~~~~~