The Nativity

[WeberHome]

.
● Luke 1:1-4 . . Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us-- just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us --it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Luke's report is alleged to have been written somewhere around AD60, roughly thirty years or so after the conclusion of the facts. Plus, it's not an eye-witness report; rather, it's essentially hearsay. All I can say to that is Caveat Lector.

Also; Luke's report was written neither to or for a church, it was written to and for a specific person; which leads me to believe that Luke wasn't expecting his report to end up in the Bible. Apparently Constantine's committee felt it was "inspired" so there it is.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Luke 1:26-27 . . And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

That particular sixth month wasn't a date on the Jew's calendar. It was relative to the second trimester of Mary's cousin Elizabeth. (Luke 1:24, Luke 1:36)

NOTE: Mary and Elizabeth were related by blood to Rachel's sister Leah by her two sons Levi and Judah.

The koiné Greek word for "virgin" is parthenos (par-then'-os) which basically means a maiden; particularly a daughter that's not married. In point of fact, at this juncture Mary was engaged.

Joseph's association with David is extremely important in matters related to theocratic royalty.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings WeberHome,

Luke's report is alleged to have been written somewhere around AD60, roughly thirty years or so after the conclusion of the facts. Plus, it's not an eye-witness report; rather, it's essentially hearsay. All I can say to that is Caveat Lector.

Also; Luke's report was written neither to or for a church, it was written to and for a specific person; which leads me to believe that Luke wasn't expecting his report to end up in the Bible. Apparently Constantine's committee felt it was "inspired" so there it is.

Both Luke and The Acts are attributed to Luke, and a careful consideration of The Acts will reveal that it is an eye-witness account of some of Paul’s Journeys. Inspiration does not depend upon Constantine’s Committee, but upon whether God inspired the writer through the Holy Spirit. A careful consideration of Luke and The Acts will verify that both of these are inspired, and especially The Acts is the only proper record of this period, and Divine guidance and providence has preserved this for us. Thus it is more than just inspiration, it is God’s provision and preservation of this record. Where would we be without this record? Instead of reader beware, rather reader consider carefully and take heed to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Luke 1:28 . .The angel went to her and said: Greetings, you who are highly favored!

"highly favored" is translated from the Greek word charitoo (khar-ee-to'-o) which means to indue with special honor. It's a rare word that appears in only one other verse in the entire New Testament at Eph 1:6.

The angel wasn't describing Mary's character as if she was an ultra pious Jew. He merely stated that she was the object of a very special blessing; same as Christ's believing followers are the objects of a very special blessing at Eph 1:6, i.e. the angel informed Mary that she was extremely fortunate; though for the moment she had no clue as to why.

NOTE: The Douay Rheims version of Luke 1:28 says that Mary was "full of grace" instead of highly favored and "blessed are you among women". Those phrases aren't translated from the Greek; i.e. editors took the liberty to insert them because in their opinion that's what the passage ought to say even though it doesn't, so we can safely ignore them.

Arbitrary editing can be troublesome at times because the practice erodes our confidence in the Bible as the inspired word of God. Sometimes arbitrary editing is helpful; but other times it just muddies the waters.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Luke 1:29 . . She was greatly troubled at this statement, and kept pondering what kind of salutation this might be.

Artists generally depict the angel as a celestial being with wings and/or aglow with some sort of ethereal light. But I don't think that's how this one came knocking. He probably looked to Mary no different than an ordinary man because the New Testament Greek word for angel is aggelos (ang'-el os) which refers to all manner of messengers, e.g. prophets (Matt 11:10), delegates (Luke 7:24), church officers (Rev 1:20 3:14), and apparitions. (Rev 22:16)

I rather suspect that Mary was a little nervous that maybe this man talking to her wasn't some sort of crackpot.

● Luke 1:30 . . But the angel said to her: Do not be afraid, Mary,

The New Testament Greek word for "afraid" is phobeo (fob-eh'-o) which basically refers to fright and alarm. Mary was scared; and who wouldn't be when a total stranger walks into your life out of nowhere, talking crazy, and knowing your name to boot?
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Luke 1:30 . .You have found favor with God.

The Greek word translated "favor" is charis (khar'-ece) a common word for "grace" which, in my estimation, is best understood as gracious; and can be defined as kind, courteous, inclined to good will, generous, charitable, merciful, altruistic, compassionate, thoughtful, cordial, affable, non threatening, genial, sociable, cheerful, warm, sensitive, considerate, and tactful.

The equivalent of charis in the Old Testament is chen (khane); for example:

"Noah found favor with The Lord." (Gen 6:8)

I think it fair to say that when someone has found favor with God, it probably means that He's taken a liking to them; or at least an interest; for example:

"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you." (John 15:9)
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Luke 1:31a . . Behold,

The Greek word translated "behold" is idou (id-oo') which, in this case, means to listen up and pay attention 'cause this is important.

● Luke 1:31b . . you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son.

The Greek word translated "conceive" means exactly what it says. We're not talking about a test tube baby here. The very same word is used at Luke 1:24 and Luke 1:36 in talking about Elizabeth's baby.

It's amazing the number of Christians I encounter online who honestly believe that baby Jesus was an implant. i.e. that his mom was a surrogate mother instead of his biological mother.
_

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Joseph's association with David is extremely important in matters related to theocratic royalty.

Joseph's bloodline does not fulfill the bloodline which the promised Messiah would have. In fact, since Joseph came from the bloodline of Jeconiah (Mt.1:11) and that bloodline was cursed (Jer.22:24-30) then we can understand that bloodline was given to prove that David is not the real father of the Lord Jesus.

The bloodline came through Mary who was a virgin. If Joseph was the real father of the Lord Jesus then that bloodline would disqualify the Lord Jesus from sitting on the throne of David.

 

[WeberHome]

.

Joseph's bloodline does not fulfill the bloodline which the promised Messiah would have. In fact, since Joseph came from the bloodline of Jeconiah (Mt.1:11) and that bloodline was cursed (Jer.22:24-30) then we can understand that bloodline was given to prove that David is not the real father of the Lord Jesus.

The bloodline came through Mary who was a virgin. If Joseph was the real father of the Lord Jesus then that bloodline would disqualify the Lord Jesus from sitting on the throne of David.

Those issues were addressed in a thread titled Eve's Posterity.

I would greatly appreciate it if you did not discuss that thread's issues on this thread.
_

 

[Jerry Shugart]

.Those issues were addressed in a thread titled Eve's Posterity.

I would greatly appreciate it if you did not discuss that thread's issues on this thread.
_

I would greatly appreciate it if you will explain what point you are trying to make when you said the following on this thread which you started:

Joseph's association with David is extremely important in matters related to theocratic royalty.

In what way was Joseph's association with David of extreme importance in that way?

Thanks!

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Luke 1:31c . .You are to give him the name Jesus.

The Greek word for "Jesus" is Iesous (ee-ay-sooce') which is the Hebrew equivalent of Yehowshuwa' (yeh-ho-shoo'-ah) and/or Yehowshu'a (yeh-ho shoo'-ah) which essentially mean: saved by Jehovah. (Note the grammatical tense: it's past rather than present or future.)

Anyway, that was Joshua's name; the Jewish military commander who led Moses' people during the conquest of ancient Palestine.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that Jesus' name was chosen specifically rather than arbitrarily because of it's historical significance.

NOTE: Joshua wasn't the only military commander in charge of the conquest. There was another of higher rank, superior to Joshua.

● Josh 5:13-15 . . As Joshua approached the city of Jericho, he looked up and saw a man facing him with sword in hand. Joshua went up to him and asked: Are you friend or foe?

. . . Neither one; he replied. I am commander of Yhvh's forces.

. . . At this, Joshua fell with his face to the ground in reverence. I am at your command; Joshua said. What do you want your servant to do? The commander of Yhvh's forces replied: Take off your sandals, for this is holy ground.

. . . And Joshua did as he was told.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WeberHome,

Luke 1:31c . .You are to give him the name Jesus.
Anyway, that was Joshua's name; the Jewish military commander who led Moses' people during the conquest of ancient Palestine.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that Jesus' name was chosen specifically rather than arbitrarily because of it's historical significance.

Joshua and his role pointed forward to Jesus who would lead His people and bring them into their land, but the main reason why God gave his Son the Name Jesus is because Jesus would save His people from their sins, as Matthew records:
Matthew 1:21 (KJV): And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
Jesus' mom was instructed to give her miraculous baby the name Jesus.

● Luke 1:31c . .You are to give him the name Jesus.

Joseph was instructed to do the same.

● Matt 1:20-21 . . An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said: Joseph son of David . . . you are to give him the name Jesus

Joseph complied.

● Matt 1:25 . . And he gave him the name Jesus.

So Christ went in the books as Joseph's son because that's how it worked in those days when a man stood with a woman to name her child (cf. Luke 1:59, Luke 2:21).

From that day on; Joseph was identified by all, including Mary, as Jesus' father. (Matt 13:55, Luke 2:27, Luke 2:41, Luke 2:48)

Now; the thing to note is that adopted children have just as much legal right to an inheritance as a father's biological children; especially a right to the father's name; and that's how baby Jesus got into Joseph's genealogy at Matt 1:1-17. Had the little guy been Joseph's foster child, or his stepchild; then it would've been fraud for Matthew to place the boy in Joseph's genealogy.
_

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Now; the thing to note is that adopted children have just as much legal right to an inheritance as a father's biological children; especially a right to the father's name; and that's how baby Jesus got into Joseph's genealogy at Matt 1:1-17. Had the little guy been Joseph's foster child, or his stepchild; then it would've been fraud for Matthew to place the boy in Joseph's genealogy.
_[/size][/font]

So is that your evidence to support what you said previously?:

Joseph's association with David is extremely important in matters related to theocratic royalty.

Are you saying that the Lord Jesus' right to the royal throne of David was through Joseph?

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Matt 1:21 . . He shall save his people from their sins.

The word "save" is from the koiné Greek word sozo (sode'-zo) which basically means to rescue and/or protect.

Rescuers typically provide their services to desperate people who are thoroughly incapable of getting themselves out of overwhelming difficulties.

"his people" refers to the Jews.

● Heb 2:16-17 . . Assuredly he does not give help to angels, but he gives help to the descendant of Abraham. Therefore, he had to be made like his brethren in all things, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

Baby Jesus wasn't related to Aaron, so his high priesthood would not be in accord with the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Jesus' high priesthood would be in accord with a Gentile high priest; in point of fact, baby Jesus' high priesthood would be in accord with a man whose ethnic identity isn't known, nor is anything known about his family or his ancestors.

The boy was to become a high priest in accord with a man that the Jews have heard of, but never actually seen for themselves. The man's name is Melchizedek; he's mentioned way back in the past in association with Abraham. (Gen 14:18-20, Ps 110:1-4, Heb 6:20-7:22)

Now, unless "his people" extends all the way back to Abraham, then the rescue referred to in Matt 1:21 would be limited to some of his people but not all. But according to Isa 53:6, it's all; which is a tremendous improvement over Aaron's high priesthood. His isn't retroactive that far back. It only extends to the year of the installation of the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

● Deut 5:2-4 . .The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. It was not with our fathers that The Lord made this covenant, but with us, with all of us who are alive here today.
_

 

[Zeke]

.
● Luke 1:31a . . Behold,

The Greek word translated "behold" is idou (id-oo') which, in this case, means to listen up and pay attention 'cause this is important.

● Luke 1:31b . . you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son.

The Greek word translated "conceive" means exactly what it says. We're not talking about a test tube baby here. The very same word is used at Luke 1:24 and Luke 1:36 in talking about Elizabeth's baby.

It's amazing the number of Christians I encounter online who honestly believe that baby Jesus was an implant. i.e. that his mom was a surrogate mother instead of his biological mother.
_

Paul's revelations concerning the OT Biblical narratives told in duplicity as history yet actually symbolic/allegorical holding the mystery of dualism's dream of separation (Galatians 4:22-25, same "story" retold in Elizabeth and Mary, Proverbs 1:6, Matt 11:11, Galatians 4:1) is only exposed by applying them inwardly to the awakening process Ephesians 5:14. Acts 7:48,17:24 .
Scattering the stories in the world of multitudes of appearances causes observational chaos Luke 17:20-21, where dualism reigns over the minds of men, unwilling to transpose them into personal narratives detailing their own conscience journey into the invisible kingdom of cause and effect, the multiple effects being the observational guide of theological separatist judging by historical signs and wonders where Jew and Gentile, male and female, play the observational pretense of spiritually which is a glass of effects/spiritual shadows, Psalm 78:2, Psalms 40:6, John 5:22.

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Matt 1:18 . . His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.

Mary must've let the cat out of the bag or how else would Joseph know about God's involvement in his best girl's baby. But I really don't think Joseph believed Mary's story because his next thought was to dump her.

● Matt 1:18-19 . . Joseph her husband, being a righteous man, and not wanting to disgrace her, desired to put her away quietly.

The covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God requires engaged women to be executed when they willingly sleep with another man.

● Deut 22:23-24 . . If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death-- the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife.

But the law is very particular in capital cases. Nobody can be executed for any crime sans the testimony of a minimum of two witnesses.

● 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.

The Bible says that Joseph was a righteous man; which means that he was a stickler for due process in strict accord with the covenant.

So then, in the absence of two witnesses, Joseph had to let Mary slide; the same as grown-up Jesus had to let a woman taken in the very act of adultery slide for lack of witnesses. (John 8:9-11)
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Matt 1:20a . .The angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said: Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary your wife because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

According to Matt 1:18, Joseph had been apprised of God's involvement in his best girl's baby; but didn't believe it. The angel's corroboration became essential to prevent the couple from parting company.

Incidentally; the koiné Greek word for "wife" just simply means woman. The difference is made by modifying it with a possessive pronoun so that "your wife" is actually your woman.

It's not too difficult to figure out why Joseph was afraid to go thru with the engagement. I mean; just think how humiliating it would be for a decent man to stand before friends and family to marry a girl coming down the aisle knocked up with another man's baby.

And besides; if Mary was already sleeping around, who's to say she wouldn't sleep around again later on after she and Joseph were married? No; immoral girls are a bad bet because they can't be trusted to be faithful and true.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Matt 1:22-23 . . Now all this took place that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying: Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel; which translated means: God with us.

The prophet's name was Isaiah, and the prophecy is located in verse 14 of the 7th chapter of his book.

Now, Joseph and Mary were instructed to name her baby "Jesus". So the identity of "they" in the prophecy wasn't his parents. It was actually the Jews.

● Luke 7:14-17 . . Jesus came up and touched the coffin; and the bearers came to a halt. And he said: Young man, I say to you, arise! And the dead man sat up, and began to speak. And Jesus gave him back to his mother. And fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying: God has visited His people! And this report concerning him went out all over Judea, and in all the surrounding district.

NOTE: The name Emmanuel (a.k.a. Immanuel) appears only three times in the whole Bible: twice in Isaiah, and once in Matthew.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: The Nativity

.
● Matt 1:24-25 . . When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord commanded. He brought Mary home to be his wife, but she remained a virgin until her son was born.

The couple didn't marry right away. According to Luke 2:1-7 they journeyed to Bethlehem as an engaged couple rather than a married couple.

At first glance it appears that Mary and Joseph began shacking up; but I hardly think so. The Bible says Joseph was a righteous man. Well; righteous men don't shack up. The "home" that Joseph brought Mary to was likely his family's home rather than a bachelor pad.

Preachers sometimes compose whole sermons to explain why Joseph didn't sleep with Mary right away, but the fact of the matter is: she and Joseph weren't wed till sometime after Jesus was born. Well; righteous men are men of character with high moral standards; viz: they don't sleep with women they aren't married to.
_