Learning from Joseph and Mary
(Bible Study - January 2003)
When Joseph found out Mary was expecting a child, he planned to put her away until he was told by an angel of the Lord not to do so (Matt. 1:18-24). The villagers of Nazareth, however, received no such angelic visitation and therefore had their own ideas about the conception of Jesus -- false ideas that attached a stigma to Joseph, Mary, and Jesus.
Anticipations of Messiah
To appreciate some lessons for ourselves, we need to picture the general
setting of the time and place in which Jesus was born. At the time, there
were great Messianic expectations, based largely on detailed calculations of
the seventy weeks prophecy recorded in Daniel 9. This expectation is
specifically alluded to in Luke 3:15.
In the case of Joseph and Mary, the genealogies recorded for us by Matthew and Luke enable us to understand that there must have been an intense expectation on the part of those who knew Joseph and Mary that perhaps they would be the parents of the Messiah. Joseph was of the lineage of David through Solomon. Mary was also in the lineage of David, but through David’s son Nathan. Furthermore, we know that Mary was also of Levitical stock, seeing as Elizabeth her “cousin” or “kinswoman” (Luke 1:36) was “from the daughters of Aaron” (Luke 1:5).
Divine intervention
Joseph and Mary were betrothed, and in a few short months they would be
married, possibly to become the parents of the Messiah. At this point,
Gabriel appeared to Mary, informed her that Elizabeth was expecting and then
gave her the great news. Mary herself would miraculously conceive and bear
a son who would sit forever on the throne of his father David (Luke
1:26-38). So Mary went from Nazareth to the home of Zacharias and Elizabeth
in the hill country of Judah, where she stayed for three months (Luke
1:39-40, 56) before returning to Nazareth.
Sometime after her return, Mary began to show the unmistakable signs of pregnancy. Put yourself in Joseph’s shoes and picture how this must have looked to him. He must have been devastated. His hopes concerning his future marriage with Mary must have been dashed – she had obviously transgressed while she was away visiting Elizabeth. Worse yet, a quick calculation would yield the conclusion she must have begun “fooling around” very quickly.
Joseph, “being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to put her away secretly. But when he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream” (Matt. 1:19-20, NASB) and told him about the miraculous circumstances of Jesus’ virgin conception. In humble compliance, “Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife” (Matt. 1:24).
Now put yourself in the villagers’ shoes. Mary left for three months, has been back for maybe a month or so, and appears to be about four months pregnant. Furthermore, Joseph does not put her away. How must this have looked to them?
The
apparent precedent of Judah and Tamar
Consider the events recorded in Genesis 38 regarding the births of Perez and
Zerah to Judah and Tamar. We read in the first eleven verses of this
chapter about the circumstances leading to Tamar’s decision to disguise
herself as a harlot so that she might entice Judah to lay with her, which he
did. This occurred in Timnah (Gen. 38:12-14), which, significantly, is
expressly said to be located in the hill country of Judah (Josh.
15:10,20,48,57). About three months after lying with Judah, it was
discovered that Tamar was with child (Gen. 38:24), and so Judah determined
to “put her away” by having her burned.
Tamar, in turn, confronted Judah by showing him the signet ring, cord, and staff that he had given to her as a pledge of payment. After examining and recognizing the items, and thus the fact that he was indeed the father, the order to have her burned was rescinded. The point is that he rescinded this order for only one reason – he was himself the father, and it would be utterly inappropriate for him to have her executed for a crime of which he was guilty.
When the friends and family of Joseph and Mary knew that she was expecting and that Joseph had not put her away, they came to the only conclusion available to them: Joseph was the father. How disappointed they all must have been in Joseph and Mary. “A beautiful young couple, well versed in the Scriptures, with the lineage that they had, and they didn’t wait until marriage.” Such a statement was surely the kind of thing said repeatedly around Nazareth by those who knew and loved Joseph and Mary.
The
truth would seem unbelievable
Did Joseph and Mary try to cut off these false rumors by explaining the
unique, miraculous circumstances of Jesus’ conception? My own feeling is
that they did not, with the possible exception of some close family
members. I suspect that most of the family and friends who, had they been
told, would have reacted negatively, saying something like, “How dare you
try to justify your own sinfulness by saying something as preposterous as
that!”
Joseph and Mary, therefore, had to live with the stigma attached to what everyone thought they knew about the circumstances of Jesus’ conception. This stigma seems to have been long remembered, as several references suggest. Consider the statement by those in Nazareth, “Is this not Joseph’s son?” (Luke 4:22; see also Matt 13:53-57 and Mark 6:1-4) Also consider the similar statement in John 6:42 and the smear against Jesus recorded in John 8:41, “We were not born of fornication.” They were implying that he was.
Lessons for ourselves
In a variety of ways, there may come times in our lives when we are acting
righteously but unavoidably give the appearance of evil, and not be able to
fully explain ourselves. Hopefully, we will diligently strive to keep these
to a minimum, and work to mitigate their effects whenever possible. But
should we still find ourselves in such a circumstance, let us entrust
ourselves to God who judges rightly (see, for example, I Sam. 16:7 and Matt.
7:1-6,16-18). Joseph and Mary, finding themselves in such circumstances,
nonetheless stayed together despite the false rumors, and did their part in
raising up for God a godly seed (see Mal. 2:15-16).
There is a secondary exhortation, as well, which is perhaps even harder. What should we do if we find ourselves in the position of the villagers? What if someone in the ecclesia who seems to be caught red-handed in sin defends himself/herself by relating an improbable, but remotely possible situation? This is a very difficult situation to react to properly, one that requires great wisdom. Let both parties recognize the difficultly of the situation and proceed with great understanding regarding the other’s dilemma. Until our King returns to the earth and renders perfect judgment (cf. Isa. 11:1-5), we must recognize the limitations of our own ability to judge rightly, and proceed with sympathetic caution.
Dean Brown