Sermon
Matthew
1:18-25 (NRSV)
18 Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took
place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before
they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19
Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to
public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly. 20 But just when he
had resolved to do 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, for
the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will bear
a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their
sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the
Lord through the prophet:
23 “Look, the virgin shall conceive and
bear a son,
and
they shall name him Emmanuel,”
which
means, “God is with us.” 24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as
the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife, 25 but
had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him
Jesus.
Year A
Fourth Sunday of Advent
December 18, 2016
Cross~Wind
December 20, 2010
Cross~Wind
Title: A Life-Giving Christmas of Love
Pre-Message: Name a time that you
experienced undeserved love.
Post-Message: “The most important
thing in life is to learn how to give out love, and to let it come in.” (Morrie
Schwartz)
Introducing the passage
Our passage is primarily about Immanuel, God with us, in
the fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14. Joseph welcomes Jesus by adopting him as his son.
Jesus is a descendent of David. In verse 16, the end of the genealogy, Matthew
refers to Joseph as the husband of Mary and to Mary as the mother of Jesus, who
is called Christ. This story is an expansion of that note in the genealogy.
Joseph has a similar role to that of the father of Moses. Hebrews 11:23 praises
him and his wife for their faith. We also see the role of the Holy Spirit in
the birth of Jesus, and thus, we already have awareness of the Father, Son, and
Spirit working together in the birth of Jesus. The Holy Spirit is the creative
movement of God toward creation. Since we have a reference to betrothal, I
should stress that this act involved more than our notion of engagement. We see
Joseph behaving in a way that most devout people of any age and culture would
act. Yet, we also see his love for Mary exhibited here. The child receives two
names. His name, Jesus, contains his mission, that will save his people from
their sins. His name, Immanuel, suggests another dimension of the coming of Jesus,
that God is with us. The promise is the fulfillment of scripture. Joseph will
quietly and humbly obey the word of the angel.
Introduction
Joseph
is an amazing man. Joseph consistently gets out of the way to make room for God
to do God's work in his life. He allows God to add to him, rather than trying
to force his own will, even when God's plans completely alter the course of his
life. We need to be more like Joseph, someone in whom the presence of God grows
large.
He
is the supporting actor to the starring role that Mary has. Dads are often in
the background when it comes to family. You know the “joke.” Father spends time
playing football with his son, son eventually scores winning touchdown, looks
into the camera, and says, “Hi, mom.” In
the Christmas play, the little boy complained that he had to play Joseph, for
he has nothing to do but stand there. Love is like that, of course. It is often
in the background. For a few moments, the plan of God is in the hands of this
man.
How much love did Joseph have?
Our culture approaches unwed pregnancy so differently
today, it might be difficult for us to relate.
Carlo
Carretto tells of visiting a village among the Arab people. It was not long until he became acquainted
with the Tuaregs, who lived in tents along a rocky basin where water surfaced. A girl in the camp where he stayed was betrothed
to a boy in another camp. She had not
gone to live with him because he was too young.
Joseph, he remembered, was betrothed to Mary, but they were not living
together. Two years later he came back
to the camp. During conversation around
the campfire, he asked if the marriage had taken place yet. There was awkward silence. He did not pursue the subject. Later, he asked a friend from the camp what
the silence meant. He looked cautiously
around. Because he trusted Carlo
Carretto as a man of God, he made a sign, passing his hand under his chin. It meant that she had her throat cut. The reason?
Before, the wedding it was discovered that the girl was pregnant. In what sociologists call an honor and shame
culture, she betrayed her family. It required her sacrifice. For Carlo
Carretto, a shiver went through him as he thought of a girl being killed
because she had not been faithful to her future husband (Blessed are you who Believed).
Throughout the Gospel of Matthew, we learn that the
followers of Jesus are to have a righteousness that exceeds that of the scribes
and Pharisees. Maybe Joseph is the first
example of such righteousness. The righteous man is the merciful man, the
loving man.
Matthew realizes that God is not simply coming for one isolated
sleepover, in a visit from an angel to a sleeping man. No, God is moving in
with us, permanently. Jesus is Immanuel, God with us, now and forever! Forget
about making up a bed in the guest bedroom. It is time to build an addition!
Application
God knows that we have trouble with our neighbors.
Neighbors can be a pain.
But as bad as these relationships between people can be,
our relationship with God is equally problematic. We indulge our selfish
desires, trample the commandments and drive fast through life without thinking
of the consequences.
From the Lord’s perspective, each of us can be a pain.
Despite this, God wants to move in with us, get to know us
better and repair the broken relationships that continue to plague us. God
breaks through the divine-human barrier in Jesus, and he challenges us to break
through human-human barriers as well. God comes to us as Immanuel, God with us,
because God wants to be In the Neighborhood.
So what does God discover?
First, a great number of people today are terribly lonely
and do not know how to make connections.
The good news of Christmas is that God enters human life in
Jesus to overcome this separation. God comes to earth as the Christ child to
break down barriers and reconnect us to our Creator. As Paul so memorably puts
it:
“[I]n
Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses
against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us” (2
Corinthians 5:19).
As ambassadors of Christ, we
are to do whatever we can to reach out to our neighbors, make connections and
work to overcome the state of separation that is such a sinful condition in our
world today.
The second discovery is that most people are overscheduled
and busy, but still their lives are empty.
George Eliot’s novel Silas Marner is the story of a
bitter old man, unlucky in love and shunned by his community. He withdraws into
an isolated cottage to eke out his days as a weaver. Silas cares for little,
other than sending the shuttle of his loom back and forth — and the money he
earns doing it. And so, one day, when a burglar breaks in and steals every last
piece of gold from the hiding place under his floorboards, it seems Silas has
nothing left to live for. He spends his evenings standing at the open doorway
of his cottage, hoping against hope that someone will happen along and return
his treasure. What Silas receives, instead, is a very different treasure. A
little blond-haired girl — whose homeless, opium-addicted mother has just died
in the snow near his home — toddles toward the light of his doorway and walks
in as though she owns the place. The little girl falls asleep on his hearth. As
he gazes down at the golden-haired child, Silas thinks to himself: “Gold! — his
own gold — brought back to him as mysteriously as it had been taken away! He
felt his heart beat violently ... the heap of gold seemed to glow ... he leaned
forward at last and stretched forth his hand; but instead of the hard coin, his
fingers encountered soft, warm curls.” The rest of the novel tells the story of
the melting of Silas Marner’s heart as he adopts the toddler and becomes both
father and mother to her. Plundered of his life’s savings, robbed of all that
he once held dear, Silas Marner is granted a sign of God’s love — not a babe in
a manger but a little child stretched out upon the warm stones of his hearth.
Eliot writes:
“In old
days, there were angels who came and took men by the hand and led them away
from the city of destruction. We see no white-winged angels now. But yet men
are led away from threatening destruction; a hand is put into theirs, which
leads them forth gently towards a calm and bright land, so that they may look
no more backward; and the hand may be a little child’s.”
Conclusion
Jesus’ great commandment is to love (Matthew 22:34-40). His
great commission is to make disciples, baptize and teach (Matthew 28:16-20). A
sense of peace and purpose can come from following Jesus this way — something
we will never find in jobs, degrees, athletics or hobbies.
Notice also that we cannot avoid our neighbors when we
focus on Jesus and walk in his way. After all, you cannot practice love or
discipleship in isolation.
That is just another good reason to welcome the God who has
come and made a home with us.
Going deeper
Matthew 1:18-25 is the story of
Immanuel, as Joseph adopts Jesus as his son. The question dealt with is the “how”
of the identity of Jesus, in that Joseph, a descendent of David, will accept
him. Raymond Brown suggests that Matthew has conditioned this entire passage by
his sense that Isaiah 7:14 finds its fulfillment here.[1]
Krister Stendahl has called Matthew
1:18-25 an “enlarged footnote to the crucial point in the genealogy.” Matthew
has just established Jesus’ messianic eligibility as a Jewish descendant of
David, but he has still to explain the last step in the family tree — the
legitimacy of Jesus’ birth. As early as the second century, we have documented
evidence of non-Christians questioning the legitimacy of Jesus’ lineage.
Several sources report that he was slandered as “Jesus son of Pantera,” which
was a pun on the Greek word for virgin, present here in 1:23
(parthenos/parthena). In addition, Pantera was a plausible name for a Roman man
and was popular among soldiers. It is possible that rumors like this were
circulating already at the time of Matthew’s composition, especially given the
low profile given to Joseph in New Testament texts (he is mentioned only in
Matthew and Luke, and only at the beginnings of each). Furthermore, Matthew has
demonstrated elsewhere that he is sensitive to rumors and wants to quell them
with his gospel (see Matthew 28:11-15).
Matthew is also
familiar with Jewish insinuations about Mary.
A man whose name was Amram, one of the nobler sort of the Hebrews, was
afraid for his whole nation, lest it should fail, by the want of young men to
be brought up hereafter, and was very uneasy at it, his wife being then with
child, and he knew not what to do. Hereupon he betook himself to prayer to God;
and entreated him to have compassion on those men who had nowise transgressed
the laws of his worship, and to afford them deliverance from the miseries they
at that time endured, and to render abortive their enemies' hopes of the
destruction of their nation. Accordingly God had mercy on him, and was moved by
his supplication. He stood by him in his sleep, and exhorted him not to despair
of his future favors. He said further, that he did not forget their piety
towards him, and would always reward them for it, as he had formerly granted
his favor to their forefathers, and made them increase from a few to so great a
multitude. (Josephus, Ant. ii. 212, 16)
And the spirit of God came upon Miriam one night, and she saw a dream
and told it to her parents in the morning, saying I have seen this night, and
behold a man in a linen garment stood and said to me, Go and say to your
parents; Behold he who will be born from you will be cast forth into the water,
likewise through him the water will be dried up. And I will work signs through
him and save my people, and he will exercise leadership always. And when Miriam
told of her dream, her parents did not believe her. (Pseudophilo, Ant. ix. 10.)
It is important to Matthew that
Jesus is a descendent of David, which became reality through the legal
parentage of Joseph. That is more
important than the virgin birth. One should not read the prophecy fulfillment
passages in the first two chapters as apologetic passages, however. Raymond
Brown says it well:
“A more plausible explanation is that
the formula citations had a didactic purpose, informing the Christian readers
and giving support to their faith. Some of the citations are attached to the
minutiae of Jesus’ career, as if to emphasize that the whole of Jesus’ life,
down to the last detail, lay within God’s foreordained plan.”[2]
Matthew portrays Joseph in a way similar
to that of the father of Moses. Joseph followed the general pattern of
contemporary Jewish piety.
The purpose of Matthew is to show
that Jesus is the promised Jewish Messiah.
Among the questions scholars pursue
is whether Matthew had a pre-Matthew source in constructing the birth
narrative. Raymond Brown suggests that Matthew has conditioned this entire
passage by his sense that Isaiah 7:14 finds its fulfillment here. For him, the
pre-Matthew content reads like this:
His mother Mary was pledged to be
married to Joseph, … an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said,
"Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife ...
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because
he will save his people from their sins." … When Joseph woke up, he did
what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.[3]
For Bultmann, verses 18-21 are in
the source that Matthew had, while Matthew inserts verses 22-23.[4] Raymond Brown suggests that
the dream in verses 20-21 and 24-25 are from a pre-Matthew source. [5]
Matthew
1:18-25 (NRSV)
18 Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took
place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before
they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. [Matthew
makes a direct link to the previous genealogical table. Jesus, legal son of
Joseph, is now in the Davidic lineage even though not a direct descendant of
Joseph. This double claim did not trouble Matthew's theology: Jesus, Son of
Abraham, Son of David; and Jesus, Son of God. Further, Jewish betrothal was
such that people already called the fiancé “husband.” The man could release
himself from the bond only by repudiation, as in v. 19. The penalty for fornication was death for
both guilty parties. A betrothal, while less than a full marriage, was
certainly more than any modern notion of an "engagement." Out-of-wedlock pregnancies were a far more
serious issue than in our permissive culture, and the formal nature of Joseph
and Mary's betrothal raised the event of this untimely pregnancy to a new
degree of seriousness. While a legal marriage did not exist until the husband
had taken his wife into his home and consummated their union, a betrothed
couple was, nevertheless, a legal entity and already bound by the strict
Hebraic codes of conduct. Just as Jewish practice considered a woman whose
betrothed husband died a widow, it also considered a betrothed woman who had
sexual relations with another man an adulterer. When Mary became pregnant, she
faced the full measure of the adultery laws found in Deuteronomy 22:23-24.]
19 Her husband Joseph, being a righteous
man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her
quietly. [The effect of the conception is embarrassment to
Joseph. Maybe because Joseph is upright
he does not want to give his name to a child whose father is unknown. As Schnackenburg suggests, in the eyes of
Matthew, he was righteous precisely because he refused to hold up Mary to
public ridicule and to the legal punishment for adultery. The divorce would
happen secretly, before chosen witnesses, to avoid public scandal. Joseph probably did this out of obedience to
the law. He must put the evil away, so
he divorces the adulterer. In this case, "secretly" refers to not
making public charges that could have led to Mary's death. In Matthew's
account, there is a moment when God's plan rested in the simple hands of the
man, Joseph. If he had followed through
on his plan to dismiss her, he would have been without the validity of a
Davidic heritage. He is righteous as
well as compassionate. Joseph was
"a righteous man," a moral state that both forced his hand and yet
allowed him to act with mercy. Joseph's
response to the announcement of Jesus' birth highlights the ambiguity, the
threat that this strange birth posed for righteous people like Joseph.
Righteousness in Matthew is fraught with ambiguity. As one whom was
'righteous," Joseph's obedience to the law insisted that he have nothing more
to do with Mary. Joseph could choose one
of two ways to disintegrate their betrothal contract. He could bring public charges of adultery
against Mary and let the law take its full course. Alternatively, Joseph could simply take two
witnesses with him as he formally confronted Mary with charges of
adultery. In the presence of just those
two witnesses, Joseph could divorce his betrothed.] 20
But just when he had resolved to
do 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, for the child conceived
in her is from the Holy Spirit. [The focus of attention
in this regard is verses 18 and 20, both of which state that the child is “from
the Holy Spirit.” For Barth, the phrase, “for the child conceived in her is
from the Holy Spirit,” is not a statement one should regard as a theologically
irrelevant legend. To do so is to obscure the important basic connection
between Jesus and the Spirit. Jesus is not a man who was subsequently gifted
and impelled by the Spirit like others, like prophets, apostles, or even us.
Jesus has the Spirit at first hand and from the very first.[6]
In verses 20-21, 24-25, we find the first of three divinely inspired dreams
Joseph will have. Raymond Brown says that it stems from a pre-Matthew source.[7]
According to Pannenberg, Matthew defends the idea of divine Sonship and the
activity of the Spirit of God against obvious objections by reporting a special
revelation to Joseph about the origin of the pregnancy of Mary. He refers to
Dibelius, “Here the opponents' suspicion is refuted by refuting Joseph's
suspicion.” Further, the primary interest of Matthew is in the fulfillment of
the Old Testament prophecy in Jesus.[8]]
[The focus of attention in this
regard is verses 18 and 20, both of which state that the child is “from the
Holy Spirit.” Pannenberg refers to Dibelius in saying that Matthew seems to
think here of a supernatural procreation.[9] Raymond Brown suggests that the use of
“begotten” means that for Matthew, the conception is through the agency of the
Holy Spirit is also the becoming of the Son of God.[10]
Pannenberg points out that the various discussions by Barth of these verses
“strangely” provoke only a discussion of the relationship between the Spirit
and the Son, but no discussion of the distinction between them. From the
standpoint of Trinitarian theology, such distinctions are important to make.
Yet, what Barth says about the relationship is significant and something we
need to explore.[11] Barth points out that these passages do not
say that the man Jesus is the son of the Holy Spirit or that the Holy Spirit is
his Father. Rather, they suggest that this conception in the womb, is miracle
in so far as this man has no physical father, and that in the event of his conception
God deals with the mother as creator to the exclusion of male volition and
action. The relationship of this man to the Holy Spirit is so close and special
that he owes his existence to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is this creative
movement of God toward creation.[12] Earlier, Barth speculates that he might have
to accept a relationship of origin between the Spirit and Son that is neither
begetting nor breathing, but a third thing. One might have to add that the
circle of mutual relations in which God is one in three modes of being is only
then closed and complete, and that already for this reason one should postulate
an origin of the Son from both the Father and the Spirit. However, Barth
rejects this move in general. As he continues his exposition, he says that the
virgin birth story and the baptism story are parallel, for both suggest that
the man Jesus of Nazareth becomes the Son of God by the descent of the Spirit.
In specific reference to this passage, the incarnation of the Word of God from
Mary cannot consist in the fact that here and now the Son of God comes into
being for the first time. It consists in the fact that here and now the Son of
God takes to Himself that other which already exists in Mary, namely, flesh,
humanity, human nature, being as a person. Furthermore, the dogma of the Virgin
Birth does not imply in any sense that the Holy Spirit is the father of the man
Jesus and thus becomes, in the incarnation of the Son, the Father of the Son as
well. It tells us that the man Jesus has no father, just as he has no mother as
the Son. What is ascribed to the Holy Spirit in the birth of Christ is the
assumption of human existence in the Virgin Mary into unity with God in the
mode of being of the Logos. That this is possible, that this other, this being
as a person, this flesh, is therefore God, for fellowship and even unity with
God, that flesh can be the Word when the Word becomes flesh, is the work of the
Holy Spirit in the birth of Christ.[13]
Later, Barth still wants to insist that is not a statement about the one who
was and is and will be the Son of God as to how, but rather, the way, in which
the Son became a human being. For him, the New Testament and responsible
theology avoids myth at this point. The Holy Spirit is not the divine Father of
the man Jesus. The Son becomes a human being in this way. God could have acted
in other ways, but chose this way. The virgin birth is the sign that
accompanies the mystery of the Incarnation. God stands at the beginning of this
man, Jesus. God gives to Mary the capacity to be the mother of this Son. God
makes the divine Son the Son of Mary. God gives to her what she could not
procure for herself.[14]]
21 She will bear a son, and you are to
name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” [In
verses 21-23, Matthew highlights two names for Jesus. In the naming of the
child, Joseph takes full responsibility for him. The first name is that of
Jesus, a name commanded by the angel. “Jesus” is a Hellenized rendition of the
Hebrew Yesua (Joshua), a shortened form of Joshua, which means, "Yahweh
saves" or “Yahweh is salvation.” Popular belief focused on Savior. What
was unique was the emphasis on salvation from sin. On the positive side, salvation is not only
from sin, but also consists of God being with us. In the naming of the child,
Joseph takes full responsibility for him. The first name is that of Jesus, a
name commanded by the angel. “Jesus” is a Hellenized rendition of the Hebrew
Yesua (Joshua), a shortened form of Joshua, which means, "Yahweh
saves" or “Yahweh is salvation.” Popular belief focused on Savior. What
was unique was the emphasis on salvation from sin. "People" refers to Jews. The interpretation of the name of Jesus is
comprehensible only in Hebrew. The name
has more stress than the birth itself.
It was a common Jewish name. The translation in verse 21 of the name of
Jesus suggests to Bultmann that an originally Semitic report is the basis of
the story. However, this could have included the unheard of conception within
Jewish circles of a virgin birth. He agrees with Klostermann, who said that the
idea of divine generation from a virgin is quite impossible to the Old
Testament. For him, then, the notion of the virgin birth occurs in the
transformation to Hellenism, where the idea of the generation of a king or hero
from a virgin by the gods was wide spread. The old story had simply told how an
angel promised Joseph that his son would be Messiah. This is supported by the
fact that Joseph is expressly addressed as “Son of David,” and that in verse 21
we may well read with the Syriac, “She will bear thee a son.” Similarly, the
antenatal naming of the child, with the associated prophecy, is a traditional
motive of the Old Testament and Jewish literature. The angelic messenger's
formal address to Joseph emphasizes the important reason for Joseph to marry
Mary legally and thus claim her child as his own. This dream tells Joseph to
take a quite different course of action than the one he had been considering.
The angel tells Joseph to go ahead with the marriage because the adultery
accusation is not true. He should not make Mary subject to the law because her
pregnancy came about through the activity of the Holy Spirit - divine activity
conceived the child she bears, not human disobedience. The angelic announcement
follows a tradition of birth announcements of Ishmael in Genesis 16:7-12 and
Isaac in Genesis 17:1-19. John the Baptist also receives this angelic
announcement in Luke 1:11-20. The only time the New Testament refers to anyone
other than Jesus as “son of David” is here, when Matthew refers to Joseph in
that way. The Spirit is the creative, life-giving force of this birth.] 22 All this took place to fulfill what had
been spoken by the Lord through the prophet:23 “Look, the virgin
shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means,
“God is with us.” [The second name, “Immanuel,” does not appear
elsewhere in the gospel. On the positive side, salvation is not only from sin,
but also consists of God being with us. The name “Immanuel” does not appear
elsewhere in the gospel. God intends salvation for the people of God. God never
abandons humanity. Clearly the association of Isaiah 7:14 with Jesus' birth
predate Matthew, since we also find the name in Luke 1:31. The Hebrew term 'almah is used in Isaiah 7:14, and is
usually rendered as "the young woman." The Septuagint, however, chose
to use the term parthenos, that is
"virgin," to describe the woman in Isaiah's text. Matthew himself
then cites the text as "the virgin shall conceive," further
emphasizing Mary's innocence and thus the divine parentage and heritage that
Jesus enjoys. Some scholars suggest that the Septuagint's choice of the term
parthenos shows a desire to depict Israel's role as the virgin awaiting God's
activity. It is the virgin Israel, in this rendition, not any particular
individual, that will give birth to the Messiah in the redemptive future. Yet
Matthew's use of this text and his emphasis on Mary's innocence seem to define
Mary as the representative of the virgin Israel.God intends salvation for the
people of God. God never abandons humanity. For Barth, the reference here is to
single, final, and exclusive act of the God of Israel as the goal and
recapitulation of all the divine acts. However, this act, the birth and naming
of Jesus, is similar to the events in the days of King Ahaz in that once again
we have come to a change in the relationship between God and the people of God.
For Matthew, what took place before this was a prelude. The Immanuel sign has
it in common with the name of Jesus that the latter, too, although this time in
the reverse direction, is a sign of both judgment and blessing. Yes, “God is
with us,” but also, “God helps (saves).[15]]
24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as
the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife, 25 but
had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him
Jesus. [In verses 24-25, Joseph's obedience to the angelic
messenger's command is complete. Without
hesitation, he takes Mary for his wife. As further evidence of his
righteousness, he refrains from having sexual relations with her. She remains
the embodiment of the virgin Israel.]
The account by Matthew contains
much simplicity and restraint. Matthew's description of Jesus' conception and
birth focuses on Joseph. It is concerned
with technicalities and issues of precise legality. Joseph's name and reputation are on the line
here. God gives Joseph explicit
foreknowledge that the child Mary bears is none other than the Messiah, the one
who will bring about the reality of God's saving forgiveness for all Israel.
The story of the virgin birth means God gave this Jewish man, who is also the
Son of God, to the world. Even the theatrical,
thrilling appearance of the angel to Joseph does not distract from the
Matthew's major thrust: God's only Son has arrived on planet Earth. That
Matthew can construct such a lean narrative with such profound theology is only
one of many marvels at Matthew's genius as a theologian.
Matthew has just established Jesus’ messianic eligibility as
a Jewish descendant of David, but he has still to explain the last step in the
family tree — the legitimacy of Jesus’ birth. As early as the second century,
we have documented evidence of non-Christians questioning the legitimacy of
Jesus’ lineage. It is possible that rumors like this were circulating already
at the time of Matthew’s composition, especially given the low profile given to
Joseph in New Testament texts (Matthew and Luke mention him only once, and only
at the beginnings of each).
[1] (Birth of the Messiah, 1977, 153)
[2] (The
Birth of the Messiah [New York: Doubleday, 1993], 97-98):
[3] (Birth of the Messiah, 1977, 153)
[4] (History of the Synoptic Tradition, 1963,
291)
[5] (Birth of the Messiah, 1977, 110)
[6] (Church
Dogmatics, IV.2 [64.4], 324)
[7] (Birth of the Messiah, 1977, 110)
[8] (Jesus
God and Man, 143)
[9] (Jesus
God and Man, 120)
[10] Birth of the Messiah, 1977, 140)
[11] (Systematic
Theology, Vol. 3, p. 5)
[12] (Church
Dogmatics, III.2 [46.1]
[13] (I.1,
[12.2]
[14] (IV.1
[59.1])
[15] (IV.1
[57.1], 6)
No comments:
Post a Comment