Modern Christianity makes Mary, who they identify as the Virgin Mary, the star of Matthew 1.
However, while Mary may have been a leading lady of all the other females mentioned in that chapter, she is only a supporting figure to the star of that chapter, which to any objective viewer is Joseph.
Mary is simply described to the reader.
However, it is Joseph’s genealogy that is being laid out in verses 2-16, not Mary’s.
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Matthew 1:16
And it is a scene from Joseph’s life that is being highlighted — his thoughts expressed, his visitation from the angel revealed, and his actions taken when he wakes up.
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: [For] his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph before they came together, she was found with child of holy spirit.
Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. 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 holy spirit. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Matthew 1:18-21
Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
Matthew 1:24-25
Matthew 1 is not about a mystical “virgin” conception/birth. It’s an explanation of how God keeps His promises to His people — promises made to men concerning their physical seed, all pointing toward the “Anointed” of God, called “Jesus/Ye’shua”.
This Anointed, Jesus/Yeshua, is the star of the whole book of Matthew (emulating the source of all Light, our Creator God). Mary (as a character in this book) is simply the vessel through whom the Anointed came.
Mary certainly matters in the part she played in life, but in the story this author conveys in chapter one (& even chapter two), Joseph gets the higher billing, since it is he the author chose to highlight revealing all the messages conveyed & actions taken through him.
Joseph is the link to the promises made to men & kept by God, that the Enemy of God sought to remove when he sowed the seed of deception of the Virgin Birth Doctrine. But the Truth is there for all who have eyes to see.
There is no virgin birth in the New Testament.
Hi Carrie!
You bring up good points, as always!
Something was brought to my attention though just recently. Another believer shared with me this information, which I had not heard of before. The video below was not what he shared, but the message is the same. In a nutshell, the argument claims that Matthew 1:16 actually says “And Jacob begat Joseph the FATHER (not the husband) of Mary.” I know it sounds crazy, but I thought you might want to look into it.
Here’s the video:
https://m.facebook.com/NehemiaGordon/videos/joseph-the-father-of-mary-matthew-116-nehemiaswallcom/335954514041758/?__so__=permalink&__rv__=related_videos
I’d love to hear your thoughts. 🙂
Hi Kay!
Yes, I’m familiar with that argument. I heard it many years ago and considered it briefly. There are several issues that I see with that rendering.
1. The author lays out a genealogy showing men fathering offspring, using the word “gennao” (G1080), translated in the KJV as “begat” between every generation. Why would he suddenly change his pattern with the second to last generation? (He even uses it in the last generation between Mary & Jesus, but it is translated as “was born” because of its grammatical usage.) If Joseph was the father of Mary, then there’s no reason not to just say “and Joseph begat Mary”.
2. If this genealogy is that of Mary, then this would have been entirely unique to every other genealogy given in the Tanakh (OT), since there are no other genealogies given of women beyond their parents. Why would the author include this? It is irrelevant. Further explanation would have been necessary.
3. If the Joseph mentioned in verse 18 is not the same Joseph in verse 16, then why does it take until the third mention of him in verse 20 before he is *indirectly* identified as to which household he belongs (of David)?
These are the ones right off the top of my head.
Again, very good points! Thanks, Carrie!
I did point out the 2nd argument (that you mentioned) to this believer— that ALL genealogies in Scripture follow the father’s, never the mother’s. To this he presented Galatians 4:22-25, which i told him is not about genealogies, but an allegory for something. Oh well…
Thank you for replying. It is most helpful! Yah bless!
You’re welcome. Thank you for posting the objection. 🙂