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?

[tam]

Peace to you,

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?

Does a person need to be a theologian or a scholar to know that God spoke life into existence, or that God created man from the dust of the earth? To reason that God could ensure that a virgin conceived a child in an unusual way, with holy spirit?

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.

Your opinion is noted, but it is just that... an opinion.

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.

You are the one who is claiming that the text is saying something other than what it actually says. You are the one saying that 'power' and 'overshadow' and 'come upon' are euphemisms for sexual intercourse. How is that the plain meaning of the text?

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.

Where is the law on this?

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.

Because she had only been told at this point that she would conceive a child, and that this child would be great, and that he would be given the throne of David, and that he would be called the Son of the Most High. Since she was a virgin, she asked how it could be possible.

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.

Being a believer does not mean a person is filled with holy spirit and you have no scripture to back that statement up. Israel was in a covenant with God. Some of them - such as prophets - were anointed with holy spirit. But not everyone was anointed with holy spirit.

Again, this is obvious with holy spirit being poured out upon the apostles (who were also Jewish).

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).

But it does show the power of God making it possible for something to happen with a person that could not have happened otherwise. It does show that this explanation would not have been 'gobbledygook' to Mary. She might not have understood how exactly this would happen, but she knew it had to do with the power of God.


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

[RedEye]

Does a person need to be a theologian or a scholar to know that God spoke life into existence, or that God created man from the dust of the earth? To reason that God could ensure that a virgin conceived a child in an unusual way, with holy spirit?

I have already addressed this point. Please refer to my previous answers.

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.

You are the one who is claiming that the text is saying something other than what it actually says. You are the one saying that 'power' and 'overshadow' and 'come upon' are euphemisms for sexual intercourse. How is that the plain meaning of the text?

Because it is and I'm not the first to have noticed it. From Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible:

• The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee. The words, "upon thee", are left out in the Syriac and Persic versions; but are retained in others, and in all copies: the formation of Christ's human nature, though common to all the three persons, yet is particularly, and most properly ascribed to the Spirit; not to the first person, the Father, lest it should be thought that he is only the Father of him, as man; nor to the second person, the Son, since it is to him that the human nature is personally united; but to the third person, the Spirit, who is the sanctifier; and who separated, and sanctified it, the first moment of its conception, and preserved it from the taint of original sin. His coming upon the virgin must be understood in consistence with his omnipresence, and immensity; and cannot design any local motion, but an effectual operation in forming the human nature of her flesh and substance; and not in the ordinary manner in which he is concerned in the formation of all men, Job 33:4 but in an extraordinary way, not to be conceived of, and explained. The phrase most plainly answers to , in frequent use with the Jews (x), as expressive of coition,
  
  And the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. By "the power of the Highest" is not meant the Lord Jesus Christ, who is sometimes called the power of God; but rather the Holy Ghost, as before, who is styled the finger of God, and power from on high, Luke 11:20 unless it should be thought that the perfection of divine power common to all the three persons is intended: and so points out the means by which the wondrous thing should be performed, even by the power of God; and which should not only be employed in forming the human nature of Christ, but in protecting the virgin from any suspicion and charge of sin, and defending her innocence and virtue, by moving upon Joseph to take her to wife. In the word, "overshadow", some think there is an allusion to the Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters, in Genesis 1:2 when, he brooded upon them, as the word may be rendered; and which is the sense of it, according to the Jewish writers (y) as a hen, or any other bird broods on its eggs to exclude its young: and others have thought the allusion may be to , (z), "the nuptial covering": which was a veil, or canopy, like a tent, supported on four staves, under which the bridegroom and bride were betrothed; or, as Dr. Lightfoot thinks, it is a modest phrase alluding to the conjugal embraces, signified by a man's spreading the skirt of his garment over the woman, which Ruth desired of Boaz, Ruth 3:9 though the Jewish writers say (a), that phrase is expressive of the act of marriage, or taking to wife. The phrase of being "overshadowed", or "covered with the spirit of prophecy", as the virgin also was, is used by the Targumist, on 1 Chronicles 2:55.

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.

Where is the law on this?

Come now. Are you really suggesting that Jews were okay with the thought of producing demi-gods? Really? Even to this day they spurn Jesus as being a false messiah who was most certainly not divine. Ask any Jew how they would react in this scenario.

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.

Because she had only been told at this point that she would conceive a child, and that this child would be great, and that he would be given the throne of David, and that he would be called the Son of the Most High. Since she was a virgin, she asked how it could be possible.

You're ignoring the point I was making. Why would her virgin status be relevant unless she was immediately thinking that sex had to be involved? You must agree that this was her first thought. Her second thought would have been (or should have been) - "this is blasphemy".

(I am snipping out the discussion on the meaning of the Holy Spirit reference as it was only ever an aside and not central to my argument in the OP. You can take that as a concession if you like. I'm not fussed).

Btw, please don't be a slave to anyone. Only sheep need a shepherd and only someone whose mind was enslaved would crave a slave-master.

[JehovahsWitness]

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

No. Gentles and Jews did not mix, period.

They did not sit together on the bus to work, they didn't shop in the same supermarkets, they didn't go to the same gyms. They did not live in the same areas , their children didnt go to the same schools, interaction would mean risking being rejected by the Jewish commujnity. So no, strange as it may seem to some, Mary would not have left the house alone, jumped in her converable, popped open a coke and driven over to pick up a gentile girl friend to go clubbing.


JW

[RedEye]

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

No. Gentles and Jews did not mix, period.

Don't be ridiculous. Jesus was a Jew and he mixed repeatedly with gentiles. Read your Bible.

[Willum]

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

No. Gentles and Jews did not mix, period.

JW

No, they only married and, according to the Talmud, had illegitimate children with them who later claimed to be Saviors.

[tam]

Peace to you both!

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

No. Gentles and Jews did not mix, period.

Don't be ridiculous. Jesus was a Jew and he mixed repeatedly with gentiles. Read your Bible.

My Lord mixed with Samaritans. Jews may have considered Samaritans to be Gentiles (they considered anyone except Jews to be Gentiles). But the Samaritans were actually Israel, and Christ came for the lost sheep of Israel.

From the Samaritan woman who spoke with Christ at the well:

"Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his livestock?"


She called Jacob (Israel) their father because Samaritans are also Israel, descended from the ten tribe kingdom of the north (after the Kingdom of Israel divided into two: the ten tribe Kingdom of "Israel"; the Samaritans... and the two tribe Kingdom of "Judah"; the Jews)

Christ mixed repeatedly with Samaritans. He did not mix repeatedly with Gentiles.


But regardless of what my Lord did or did not do, Jews and Gentiles did not mix. Jews did not even mix with Samaritans (that is not a rule from God, but from themselves). As JW pointed out, Mary would not have been hanging out with Gentile women.



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

[Willum]

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

No. Gentles and Jews did not mix, period.

Don't be ridiculous. Jesus was a Jew and he mixed repeatedly with gentiles. Read your Bible.

As a footnote, Jesus was not Judaic and probably not Jewish:
'Jews' rejected Jesus for cause:
Materlinearity, "Jew by mother" is not an established convention in history, certainly not by Jews whom use the father's last name, BUT especially it is not mentioned in Judaic religious works.
STRIKE ONE.
According to the Talmud, Jesus' father was Tiberius Panthera, a soldier for Rome. Thus a bastard-child, and so by Deuteronomy 23:2, not Jewish/Judaic (respectively).
STRIKE TWO.
If he WAS the son of God, God's genes dominate by far, and we can assume Jesus' mother could have been a kangaroo for all the effect it should have on the story.
STRIKE THREE.
Wrapping things up: He violated Commandments: He advocated paying the tithes to the god Caesar, using coins that had graven images of false gods on them, and abrogated the penalty for adultery. Something no true Jew or Judaist would.
THROWN OUT OF THE GAME.
Is there any any any reason to suspect he is Jewish, except that people find it intuitive?
And pork, let's not even talk about pork!

[RedEye]

Peace to you both!

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

No. Gentles and Jews did not mix, period.

Don't be ridiculous. Jesus was a Jew and he mixed repeatedly with gentiles. Read your Bible.

My Lord mixed with Samaritans. Jews may have considered Samaritans to be Gentiles (they considered anyone except Jews to be Gentiles). But the Samaritans were actually Israel, and Christ came for the lost sheep of Israel.

You both don't know your own Bible:

https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Gentiles,-In-Nt

• Mark 7:24-30
  Jesus got up and went away from there to the region of Tyre. And when He had entered a house, He wanted no one to know of it; yet He could not escape notice. But after hearing of Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately came and fell at His feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, of the Syrophoenician race. And she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter.

• Matthew 8:5-13
  And when Jesus entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, imploring Him, and saying, "Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, fearfully tormented." Jesus said to him, "I will come and heal him."

Not only did Jesus help a Roman centurion but this chap was also probably gay as well. A gay Gentile and Jesus had no problem!

The truth is that the Palestine area of that time was a melting pot of people. It was a major trade route to and from Egypt by land. It was under Roman rule which brings administration and soldiers. There were whole cities in the region considered largely gentile. Also, some Hellenic ex-pats were converting to Judaism (as proselytes). They would have been inter-meshed with Jewish society. Wealthy Jewish families had the means to keep slaves and those non-Jewish slaves very often had child-rearing duties. Please don't try and tell us that the Jews lived completely apart from the rest of society.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 28 by RedEye]

Superb, common sense, down to earth understanding and analysis of the society of tge time and place.

No gods, no virgins, no angels, no scurrying stars, no magic miracles and other fantastical make-believe.

Thank you.

I still proffer the hypothesis that the sect Joseph and Mary belonged to were expecting their god to sire the next heir to the David throne ...

The one who would summon the armies if angels and set THEM up as the rulers of the world ...

Just as is expected when the failed Jesus comes for the second time.

It's just mundane human politics wrapped up in the bloviated language of religious fantasy ...

It keeps the everyday people in thrall.

In my view.

And I'll admit when I'm shown to be wrong.

[FarWanderer]

• 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.

Because she had only been told at this point that she would conceive a child, and that this child would be great, and that he would be given the throne of David, and that he would be called the Son of the Most High. Since she was a virgin, she asked how it could be possible.

Easy. She conceives the normal way with Joseph, some time in the future.

Yet somehow such a thought never even occurred to her. Hmm.