What Would a Good Jewish Girl Do?

[RedEye]

I want to pose a hypothetical scenario. Imagine a young Jewish girl a couple of thousand years ago. She is pledged to be married but the marriage has not been consummated yet. This girl is a devout follower of Judaism like her parents and husband-to-be. She attends her local Synagogue with them and listens earnestly to the Rabbi reciting Jewish scripture and teachings. Judaism teaches that there is only one true God (Yahweh). There are no other gods or demi-gods.

The region in which she lives is occupied by the Romans and she is aware that they worship a pantheon of gods and demi-gods. (Demi-gods are produced by a male god mating with a human female or a human male mating with a female god). They even worship their emperor in Rome like a god. She has no doubt had some contact with Greeks (gentiles) in her town too and come to know that they also have a pantheon of their own gods and demi-gods. Her Rabbi warns her against such pagan beliefs and constantly stresses that all these other gods are false. There is one and only one true God and his name is Yahweh.

Then one day an apparition appears to our Jewish girl. It tells her that God wants to inseminate her so that she can give him a son. Now, what would a good Jewish girl do in these circumstances?

A. Run immediately to her parents and tell them that a pagan god wants to inseminate her before she is married. (It has to be a pagan god because Yahweh would never ask for such a thing).
B. Run to her future husband and ask for help so that she does not end up committing adultery against her will.
C. Run to her Rabbi, tell him of this blasphemous request and get advice on how to deal with this demon that approached her.
D. Acquiesce meekly despite it going against everything she has ever been taught as a devout Jew.

Which course of action makes the least sense given the cultural context?

[RedEye]

[Replying to post 1 by RedEye]

Judaism teaches that there is only one true God (Yahweh). There are no other gods or demi-gods.

Don't know that they were able to push that line right then ...?

Hebrew writings only insist that Israelites/Jews adopt Yahweh as their patron deity ...

Yahweh being the pick of the bunch, of course.

My time period is 2,000 years ago (which just happens to coincide with a certain Joseph and Mary - pure coincidence of course!). By that time Judaism was firmly monotheistic regardless of the origins of Yahweh (who I agree started off as a tribal god among others).

[RedEye]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

which I believe reflects the reality of the day when a single Jewish girl would have zero unchaperoned contact with any man,

That was the social taboo of the day yes...but are you arguing that Mary literally had no unchaperoned contact with a man? Every society has its taboos, things that people just ought not to do...and yet they still are done.

Also, were there no gentile women around for Mary to have social contact with?

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 3 by RedEye]

Secondly, Mary had little idea beforehand what the messenger she talked to had in mind. Given the culture she was in she would almost certainly have thought that it involved a sexual union with a god.

Given the Jewish culture that she was in, God spoke life into existence; and God also created man from the dust of the earth. Yet you assume she could not imagine or accept that God could place a child in her womb, without sexual intercourse?

Does that seem like a reasonable conclusion based upon her culture?

All she was told was "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you". That sounds like a euphemism for sex to me.

That tells us how you think. That does not tell us how this young Jewish girl thought.

I would not have thought of this in that way - not as a woman and not as a young girl.

It certainly would have sounded that way to a young girl's ears in those times.

How do you come up with that? Do you know how young girls thought in those days? Did they all think the same?

(Even the term "Holy Spirit" used in that way would probably have been gobbledygook to her since everyone who was a believer, including herself, already possessed the Holy Spirit).

This is incorrect. If people (believers or otherwise) had already possessed holy spirit, then how could they have later RECEIVED this holy spirit?

He was speaking about the spirit, which those who believed in Him were later to receive. For the spirit had not yet been given, because [Jesus] had not yet been glorified. John 7:39


And after His death and resurrection:

When He had said this, He breathed on them and said, Receive holy spirit." John 20:22




Peace again to you!

[RedEye]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 3 by RedEye]
Secondly, Mary had little idea beforehand what the messenger she talked to had in mind. Given the culture she was in she would almost certainly have thought that it involved a sexual union with a god.

Given the Jewish culture that she was in, God spoke life into existence; and God also created man from the dust of the earth. Yet you assume she could not imagine or accept that God could place a child in her womb, without sexual intercourse?

Does that seem like a reasonable conclusion based upon her culture?

Yes. I'm not saying that she couldn't imagine it. What I am saying is that she had no reason to imagine it. She wasn't a theologian. She was just a normal Jewish girl who must have had some exposure to pagan beliefs regarding gods procreating with humans. It was all around her. What would her first thought have been when told she was chosen to bear God's son?

All she was told was "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you". That sounds like a euphemism for sex to me.

That tells us how you think. That does not tell us how this young Jewish girl thought.

I would not have thought of this in that way - not as a woman and not as a young girl.

Come now. The words are highly suggestive. What do you think "power" is a reference to? What mental image does "overshadow you" bring to mind? The messenger did not say "God is going to magically plant a zygote in your womb without any physical contact". No. Instead it is "God will come on you". I mean really, how much more explicit can it be without being pornographic?

It certainly would have sounded that way to a young girl's ears in those times.

How do you come up with that? Do you know how young girls thought in those days? Did they all think the same?

I have already explained that by the culture she was living in. Please read the OP again. We can only ever make educated, plausible guesses.

(Even the term "Holy Spirit" used in that way would probably have been gobbledygook to her since everyone who was a believer, including herself, already possessed the Holy Spirit).

This is incorrect. If people (believers or otherwise) had already possessed holy spirit, then how could they have later RECEIVED this holy spirit?

The act of becoming believers is when the Holy Spirit was received. That is what you will find in the Jewish Bible. (Don't confuse it with Christian theology. Mary was not a Christian. Neither was her son).

He was speaking about the spirit, which those who believed in Him were later to receive. For the spirit had not yet been given, because [Jesus] had not yet been glorified. John 7:39

And after His death and resurrection:

When He had said this, He breathed on them and said, Receive holy spirit."John 20:22

This is exactly what I was referring to. Mary had no knowledge of John (or any other Christian scripture in the NT). None of it had been written yet!

[tam]

Peace again to you,

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 3 by RedEye]
Secondly, Mary had little idea beforehand what the messenger she talked to had in mind. Given the culture she was in she would almost certainly have thought that it involved a sexual union with a god.

Given the Jewish culture that she was in, God spoke life into existence; and God also created man from the dust of the earth. Yet you assume she could not imagine or accept that God could place a child in her womb, without sexual intercourse?

Does that seem like a reasonable conclusion based upon her culture?

Yes. I'm not saying that she couldn't imagine it. What I am saying is that she had no reason to imagine it. She wasn't a theologian. She was just a normal Jewish girl who must have had some exposure to pagan beliefs regarding gods procreating with humans. It was all around her. What would her first thought have been when told she was chosen to bear God's son?

You are implying then (and you must assume) that she had more exposure to "pagan beliefs" than she had to her own religion and her own God?

(Oh, and her first thought was actually a question of how this would happen.)


Because according to her own faith, her own God is more than capable of forming a child in her womb without sexual intercourse. Since that would be the same God who spoke life into existence, and even formed man from the dust of the earth.

All she was told was "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you". That sounds like a euphemism for sex to me.

That tells us how you think. That does not tell us how this young Jewish girl thought.

I would not have thought of this in that way - not as a woman and not as a young girl.

Come now. The words are highly suggestive. What do you think "power" is a reference to? What mental image does "overshadow you" bring to mind? The messenger did not say "God is going to magically plant a zygote in your womb without any physical contact". No. Instead it is "God will come on you". I mean really, how much more explicit can it be without being pornographic?

Language does not work that way. You are taking modern slang and applying it back two thousand years ago. People give sexual innuendo to multiple words and phrases today, and that is probably why you see pornographic language where it does not exist. But those words would not have had a modern slang meaning attached to them two thousand years in the past.


Here is a link to the usage of the greek word used:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 1904&t=KJV

It certainly would have sounded that way to a young girl's ears in those times.

How do you come up with that? Do you know how young girls thought in those days? Did they all think the same?

I have already explained that by the culture she was living in. Please read the OP again. We can only ever make educated, plausible guesses.

And I countered that with the God OF her culture being able to simply SPEAK life into EXISTENCE, as well as form man from dust of the earth. Her God could certainly form a child - even HIS child - in her womb, without actual sexual intercourse.

(Even the term "Holy Spirit" used in that way would probably have been gobbledygook to her since everyone who was a believer, including herself, already possessed the Holy Spirit).

This is incorrect. If people (believers or otherwise) had already possessed holy spirit, then how could they have later RECEIVED this holy spirit?

The act of becoming believers is when the Holy Spirit was received. That is what you will find in the Jewish Bible. (Don't confuse it with Christian theology. Mary was not a Christian. Neither was her son).

I think you might be confusing it with Christian theology, but it is hard to tell since you have not provided any support for your statement. Perhaps you could do that now?

Provide scriptural support from the Jewish bible (do you mean the OT?) stating that the act of becoming believers is when "the Holy Spirit" was received. Thank you!


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[RedEye]

Peace again to you,

[Replying to post 3 by RedEye]
Secondly, Mary had little idea beforehand what the messenger she talked to had in mind. Given the culture she was in she would almost certainly have thought that it involved a sexual union with a god.

Given the Jewish culture that she was in, God spoke life into existence; and God also created man from the dust of the earth. Yet you assume she could not imagine or accept that God could place a child in her womb, without sexual intercourse?

Does that seem like a reasonable conclusion based upon her culture?

Yes. I'm not saying that she couldn't imagine it. What I am saying is that she had no reason to imagine it. She wasn't a theologian. She was just a normal Jewish girl who must have had some exposure to pagan beliefs regarding gods procreating with humans. It was all around her. What would her first thought have been when told she was chosen to bear God's son?

You are implying then (and you must assume) that she had more exposure to "pagan beliefs" than she had to her own religion and her own God?

I'm not implying that at all. All she needed was some exposure and the wording used by the messenger. As I said, she was not a theologian or a scholar. When asked to bear a baby with a god, her first thought should have been ... ugh, blasphemy! The mechanism by which it was going to be achieved should have been the least of her concerns (although the messenger gave her a pretty clear indication).

All she was told was "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you". That sounds like a euphemism for sex to me.

That tells us how you think. That does not tell us how this young Jewish girl thought.

I would not have thought of this in that way - not as a woman and not as a young girl.

Come now. The words are highly suggestive. What do you think "power" is a reference to? What mental image does "overshadow you" bring to mind? The messenger did not say "God is going to magically plant a zygote in your womb without any physical contact". No. Instead it is "God will come on you". I mean really, how much more explicit can it be without being pornographic?

Language does not work that way. You are taking modern slang and applying it back two thousand years ago. People give sexual innuendo to multiple words and phrases today, and that is probably why you see pornographic language where it does not exist. But those words would not have had a modern slang meaning attached to them two thousand years in the past.

Are you claiming that people didn't understand innuendo 2,000 years ago? Words like "power" and "overshadow you" and "come on you" have nothing to do with modern slang. The intended meaning is blindingly obvious. You can't deny it.

Here is a link to the usage of the greek word used:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 1904&t=KJV

Yes, exactly. So it involves, in context, a physical arrival by God who then descends upon Mary. That's precisely my point. (I wasn't drawing any comparison between "come" and "cum" if that is what you were getting at. Who has the dirty mind now? )

It certainly would have sounded that way to a young girl's ears in those times.

How do you come up with that? Do you know how young girls thought in those days? Did they all think the same?

I have already explained that by the culture she was living in. Please read the OP again. We can only ever make educated, plausible guesses.

And I countered that with the God OF her culture being able to simply SPEAK life into EXISTENCE, as well as form man from dust of the earth. Her God could certainly form a child - even HIS child - in her womb, without actual sexual intercourse.

I have already addressed this. See above.

(Even the term "Holy Spirit" used in that way would probably have been gobbledygook to her since everyone who was a believer, including herself, already possessed the Holy Spirit).

This is incorrect. If people (believers or otherwise) had already possessed holy spirit, then how could they have later RECEIVED this holy spirit?

The act of becoming believers is when the Holy Spirit was received. That is what you will find in the Jewish Bible. (Don't confuse it with Christian theology. Mary was not a Christian. Neither was her son).

I think you might be confusing it with Christian theology, but it is hard to tell since you have not provided any support for your statement. Perhaps you could do that now?

Provide scriptural support from the Jewish bible (do you mean the OT?) stating that the act of becoming believers is when "the Holy Spirit" was received. Thank you!

Yes I mean what became the OT (Christians appropriating Jewish literature). These are the only references to "Holy Spirit" that you will find:

• Psalm 51:11
  Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.
  
  Isaiah 63:10-11
  Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them.
  Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people" where is he who brought them through the sea, with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them,

I think you will find that, in context, all God's chosen children (the Israelites) were filled with the Holy Spirit (except when they rebelled).

[tam]

Peace again to you,

Peace again to you,

[Replying to post 3 by RedEye]
Secondly, Mary had little idea beforehand what the messenger she talked to had in mind. Given the culture she was in she would almost certainly have thought that it involved a sexual union with a god.

Given the Jewish culture that she was in, God spoke life into existence; and God also created man from the dust of the earth. Yet you assume she could not imagine or accept that God could place a child in her womb, without sexual intercourse?

Does that seem like a reasonable conclusion based upon her culture?

Yes. I'm not saying that she couldn't imagine it. What I am saying is that she had no reason to imagine it. She wasn't a theologian. She was just a normal Jewish girl who must have had some exposure to pagan beliefs regarding gods procreating with humans. It was all around her. What would her first thought have been when told she was chosen to bear God's son?

You are implying then (and you must assume) that she had more exposure to "pagan beliefs" than she had to her own religion and her own God?

I'm not implying that at all. All she needed was some exposure and the wording used by the messenger. As I said, she was not a theologian or a scholar. When asked to bear a baby with a god, her first thought should have been ... ugh, blasphemy! The mechanism by which it was going to be achieved should have been the least of her concerns (although the messenger gave her a pretty clear indication).

And yet, you said this from the OP:

This girl is a devout follower of Judaism like her parents and husband-to-be. She attends her local Synagogue with them and listens earnestly to the Rabbi reciting Jewish scripture and teachings.

All she was told was "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you". That sounds like a euphemism for sex to me.

That tells us how you think. That does not tell us how this young Jewish girl thought.

I would not have thought of this in that way - not as a woman and not as a young girl.

Come now. The words are highly suggestive. What do you think "power" is a reference to? What mental image does "overshadow you" bring to mind? The messenger did not say "God is going to magically plant a zygote in your womb without any physical contact". No. Instead it is "God will come on you". I mean really, how much more explicit can it be without being pornographic?

Language does not work that way. You are taking modern slang and applying it back two thousand years ago. People give sexual innuendo to multiple words and phrases today, and that is probably why you see pornographic language where it does not exist. But those words would not have had a modern slang meaning attached to them two thousand years in the past.

Are you claiming that people didn't understand innuendo 2,000 years ago? Words like "power" and "overshadow you" and "come on you" have nothing to do with modern slang. The intended meaning is blindingly obvious. You can't deny it.

People (not all of them) would have understood innuendo. That does not mean that there is any innuendo being used here... nor does it meant that a young and good Jewish girl would understand it even if it were being used.

It certainly would have sounded that way to a young girl's ears in those times.

How do you come up with that? Do you know how young girls thought in those days? Did they all think the same?

I have already explained that by the culture she was living in. Please read the OP again. We can only ever make educated, plausible guesses.

And I countered that with the God OF her culture being able to simply SPEAK life into EXISTENCE, as well as form man from dust of the earth. Her God could certainly form a child - even HIS child - in her womb, without actual sexual intercourse.

I have already addressed this. See above.

You have not addressed the fact that with God all things are possible or that this belief would have been part of her faith.

(Even the term "Holy Spirit

" used in that way would probably have been gobbledygook to her since everyone who was a believer, including herself, already possessed the Holy Spirit).

This is incorrect. If people (believers or otherwise) had already possessed holy spirit, then how could they have later RECEIVED this holy spirit?

The act of becoming believers is when the Holy Spirit was received. That is what you will find in the Jewish Bible. (Don't confuse it with Christian theology. Mary was not a Christian. Neither was her son).

I think you might be confusing it with Christian theology, but it is hard to tell since you have not provided any support for your statement. Perhaps you could do that now?

Provide scriptural support from the Jewish bible (do you mean the OT?) stating that the act of becoming believers is when "the Holy Spirit" was received. Thank you!

Yes I mean what became the OT (Christians appropriating Jewish literature). These are the only references to "Holy Spirit" that you will find:

• Psalm 51:11
  Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.
  
  Isaiah 63:10-11
  Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them.
  Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people" where is he who brought them through the sea, with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them,

I think you will find that, in context, all God's chosen children (the Israelites) were filled with the Holy Spirit (except when they rebelled).

So you have no scripture to back up your statement. None of the above states that the act of becoming a believer is when 'holy spirit' is received. Not to mention that there are specific scriptures that speak to the Spirit of God coming upon a person (like Samson). (Judges 15:14, 15) Samson was a believer before that time, was he not?


Peace again to you!

[Willum]

[Replying to post 17 by tam]

No, tam, he has quite called you out.
You have not deflected his arguments in the least.
You can't have things both ways, and can't claim isolated means what you need it to mean, instead of a more reasonable expectation.

I don't see how you can make it a matter of scripture. Next you'll be wanting it to tell you what she had for breakfast.

[tam]

Peace to you Willum,

[Replying to post 18 by Willum]

I don't remember mentioning the word isolated, Willum. I do not know what you are talking about.

[RedEye]

Peace again to you,


And yet, you said this from the OP:

This girl is a devout follower of Judaism like her parents and husband-to-be. She attends her local Synagogue with them and listens earnestly to the Rabbi reciting Jewish scripture and teachings.

So? If you attend your church and listen to the weekly sermon does that make you a theologian or a scholar?

People (not all of them) would have understood innuendo. That does not mean that there is any innuendo being used here... nor does it meant that a young and good Jewish girl would understand it even if it were being used.

I didn't say it was innuendo. That was your word. The author of Luke was just using circumspect language so as to not offend the sensibilities of his readers. The intent is clear enough. You can keep claiming that the text is saying something else but a plain reading of it makes it obvious what the messenger was relaying to the girl was going to happen. This is all a side-show though because you are avoiding the real issue. That issue is that having a baby with a god is blasphemy in Judaism however that conception is achieved.

You have not addressed the fact that with God all things are possible or that this belief would have been part of her faith.

Yes, I did. This would not have been her first thought. In fact she stated her concern right up front:

• Luke 1
  34 How will this be, Mary asked the angel, since I am a virgin?

Why would her virgin status be troubling to her if God could magic a foetus into her womb? She was thinking that sex had to be involved. Obviously.

So you have no scripture to back up your statement. None of the above states that the act of becoming a believer is when 'holy spirit' is received.

Sure it does. It's a birthright of God's chosen people. The Jews were believers (with a few exceptions). Yahweh was their god. They were all filled with the holy spirit. I fail to see the problem.

Not to mention that there are specific scriptures that speak to the Spirit of God coming upon a person (like Samson). (Judges 15:14, 15) Samson was a believer before that time, was he not?

That's something different. In this case it was more about the Power of God entering Samson to provide him with superhuman strength. It's not the same concept. Ditto with other such references to the Spirit of God or the Spirit of the Lord. They are to do with God entering certain people to help them or guide them (as in the case of Moses).