Below is
a rough translation and some preliminary comments regarding Matthew 1:18-25,
the gospel reading for the fourth Sunday of Advent. It will always be curious to me how focused Matthew is on Joseph and how focused Luke is on Mary. I'm thankful that we have both, since having access to only one of them would leave us imagining that either Mary or Joseph were just passive parts of the story, instead of engaging as fully as they did.
Have a blessed Advent and
Christmas!
18 Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἡ γένεσις οὕτως ἦν. μνηστευθείσης τῆς μητρὸς
αὐτοῦ Μαρίας τῷ Ἰωσήφ, πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν αὐτοὺς εὑρέθη ἐν γαστρὶ
ἔχουσα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου.
Yet the birth of Jesus Christ was
thus. His mother Mary having been engaged to Joseph, before their coming
together was found having [a child] in her belly out of a holy spirit.
ἦν: IAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
μνηστευθείσης : APPart, gsf to ask in marriage, to woo. In NT only in passive to be asked in
marriage, hence, to be betrothed, affianced.
συνελθεῖν: AAInf, συνέρχομαι, 1) to come
together 1a) to assemble 1b) of conjugal cohabitation 2) to
go (depart) or come with one, to accompany one
εὑρέθη: API 3s, εὑρίσκω, 1) to come upon, hit
upon, to meet with
ἔχουσα: PAPart nsf ἔχω, 1) to have, i.e. to hold
1. I suspect that the phrase, “his mother
Mary having been engaged to Joseph” is a genitive absolute, since there is no
nominative subject there.
2. The phrase ἐν γαστρὶ can mean ‘the
belly’ or ‘the womb. In phrases ‘ἐν γαστήρ ἔχω’ means ‘to be with child.’
3. The phrase πνεύματος ἁγίου is commonly translated “the Holy Spirit.” In this case,
there is no definite article, so it is properly ‘a’ and not ‘the.’ In addition,
both “holy” and “spirit” are in the genitive case, so it may be possible that this phrase could be
translated two different ways: a) “a holy spirit” where both genitives are
objects of the preposition ‘out’ (ἐκ). Or,
b) “a spirit of holiness” “spirit” is the object of ἐκ and “holiness” is
a modifier of “spirit.” I may be bending myself beyond my capability here, so
Greek geeks – have at it. For now, as both are genitive, I'm treating it as "a holy spirit."
19
Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς, δίκαιος ὢν καὶ μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν δειγματίσαι,
ἐβουλήθη λάθρᾳ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν.
Yet Joseph, himself being a just
man and not willing to make her a public example, intended to forgive her/send
her away privately.
ὢν: PAPart nsm, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen,
to be present
θέλων: PAPart nsm, θέλω, 1)
to will, have in mind, intend
δειγματίσαι: AAInf δειγματίζω, 1) to make an example
of
ἐβουλήθη: API 3s, βούλομαι, 1) to will deliberately,
have a purpose, be minded
ἀπολῦσαι: ἀπολύω,
1) to set free 2) to let go, dismiss, (to detain no longer)
1. The word ἀπολύω is very versatile and can mean things as
extremely different as ‘divorce’ to ‘forgive.’ Joseph could be intending to “send
Mary away,” as a prerogative of a betrothed man whose fiancée is found to be
with child, or he could be releasing her from any obligation without all of the
community hubbub that accompanies a formal public shaming, or he could be
forgiving her quietly. The tone of the verse seems to be shaped by the
adjective λάθρᾳ - ‘in private’ or ‘in secret.’ Whatever ἀπολύω is intending to
signify, Joseph – as a righteous person – set out to do so privately.
2. The NIV interprets δίκαιος (typically translated as
“just” or “righteous”) as “being faithful to the law.” I would say that in many
cases being “righteous” and being “faithful to the law” are one and the same,
but it appears to me that one ongoing battle Jesus has with his opponents is
that one can be faithful to the law and not be righteous about it and,
conversely, one can be righteous by not being faithful to the law. I can
imagine someone using the law in this instance – alleging faithfulness to it –
to see Mary stoned to death. That’s why I think the word “private” or “secret”
is the key to this verse and interpreting Joseph’s character.
20 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ' ὄναρ ἐφάνη
αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν
γυναῖκά σου, τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου:
Yet he having pondered these
things behold an angel of the lord was manifest to him in a dream saying, “
Joseph son of David, may you not be afraid to companion Mary your wife/woman, for the
one having been begotten in her is out of a Holy Spirit;
ἐνθυμηθέντος: APPart gms, ἐνθυμέομαι, 1) to bring to
mind, revolve in mind, ponder 2) to think, to deliberate
ἐφάνη: API 3s, φαίνω, 1) to bring forth into
the light, cause to shine, ... 2b) to
become evident, to be brought forth into the light, come to view, appear
λέγων: PAPart nsm, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
φοβηθῇς: APSubj 2s, φοβέω to strike with fear, scare, frighten. Middle or passive as
here, to be put in fear, take fright
παραλαβεῖν: AAInf παραλαμβάνω, 1) to take to, to take with one's self, to
join to one's self 1a) an associate, a companion
γεννηθὲν: APPart nms, γεννάω, 1) of men who fathered
children 1a) to be born 1b) to be begotten 1b1) of women
giving birth to children
ἐστιν: PAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
1. “Joseph son of David,” is a reference to the genealogy that
is given in vv.2-16. While this story about Joseph is a beloved part of the
birth narrative, the genealogy that precedes it is often overlooked. Matthew
makes a clear connection between them. Joseph is no random righteous person and
Mary is not just a random righteous woman. There is a backstory. They are part
of a narrative that Matthew finds important enough to share all of those
genealogical details full of names, a few comments, and some numerical notes
that indicate purpose and fulfillment in this birth.
2. γυναῖκά can be translated either as "wife" or "woman." I'm going to sit on squarely on the fence and render it as "wife/woman" in the next note.
3. παραλαμβάνω can mean simply ‘to take’ which might mean the
angel is saying “Do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife/woman.” But, the word ‘as’ is added in translations that go
this route. The actual phrase is “Mary your wife/woman.” Perhaps this is indicative
of different ‘rules of engagement’ – to use that term literally – at work in
the 1st century, whereby a fiancée was, already in some way, a
‘wife’ during the betrothal, and the wedding itself began a new kind of
companionship. The verb appears again in v.24, when Joseph, in fact, ‘took his
wife/woman’ (again, not ‘as his wife/woman.’)
I’m wondering if the different rules of engagement might account
for the apparent conflict between Luke and Matthew over whether Joseph and Mary
were married before Jesus was born. (Compare Mt.1:24 and Lk.2:5)
4. The verb γεννάω (begotten) is used repeatedly in the
genealogy of vv.2-16 and is connected to noun ἡ γένεσις (the birth)
in v.18. Notice how v.16 skillfully avoids using this term to connect Jesus and
Joseph, bypassing through Mary instead.
5. In v.18 we had the construction ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου. Here we have another genitive construction but with a verb in the midst of it: πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου. Until I am instructed more thoroughly I assume that the “spirit … holy” genitival phrase is subject to the same
possibilities as I explored in v.18.
21 τέξεται δὲ υἱὸν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν, αὐτὸς γὰρ σώσει
τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν.
Yet she will bear a son and you
will call his name Jesus for he will save his people from their sins.
τέξεται: FMI 3s τίκτω, 1) to bring forth, bear, produce (fruit from the
seed) 1a) of a woman giving birth
καλέσεις: FAI 2s καλέω, 1) to call 1a) to call aloud, utter in a
loud voice 1b) to invite 2) to call i.e. to name, by name 2a)
to give a name to
σώσει: FAI 3s σῴζω, 1) to save, keep safe
and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction
1. She will, you will, he will – all three
verbs here are future and assign roles to Mary – birthing; Joseph – naming; and
Jesus – saving. The subjects of ‘she will bear’ and ‘you will call’ are implied
in the personage of the verbs, but ‘he will save’ has a pronoun attached to it,
which I take to signify that Jesus’ role is the one that is most emphasized in
this verse.
2. The etymological connection between
“Jesus,” a rendering of the Hebrew Joshua or “God saves” and σώσει (“salvation”)
is important to note here because of the parallel construction between this
verse and v.23 below.
22 Τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ κυρίου διὰ τοῦ
προφήτου λέγοντος,
Yet this all has taken place in
order that the having been said by the Lord might be fulfilled which is said through
the prophet,
γέγονεν: PerfAI 3s, γίνομαι, 1) to become, i.e. to
come into existence, begin to be, receive being 2) to become, i.e. to
come to pass, happen
πληρωθῇ: APS 3s, πληρόω, 1) to make full, to
fill up, i.e. to fill to the full 1a) to cause to abound, to furnish or
supply liberally
ῥηθὲν : APPart nms, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak 1a) affirm over, maintain
λέγοντο: PAPart gms, λέγω, 1) to say, to
speak 1a) affirm over, maintain
1. This rough translation is terribly awkward, but I am trying
to honor each of the verbs at this stage. At a later stage it can be smoothed
out considerably without doing damage to the meaning, but we have many fine translations that have done that for us already.
23 Ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ
ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον Μεθ' ἡμῶν ὁ θεός.
“Behold the virgin will have [a
child] in belly and will bear a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel,
which is translated ‘the God with us.’”
ἕξει: FAI 3s, ἔχω, 1) to have, i.e. to hold 1a) to have (hold)
in the hand, in the sense of wearing, to have (hold) possession of the
mind
τέξεται: FMI 3s, τίκτω, 1) to bring forth, bear, produce (fruit from the
seed) 1a) of a woman giving birth 1b) of the earth bringing forth its
fruits
καλέσουσιν: FAI 3p, καλέω, 1) to call 1a) to call aloud, utter in a loud
voice 1b) to invite 2) to call i.e. to name, by name 2a) to give a name
to
μεθερμηνευόμενον: PPPart nms, μεθερμηνεύω to translate from one language into another.
1. Terms from the previous verses are repeated here in this
rendering of Isaiah 7:14. ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα from v.18 is repeated in
the phrase ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει (have [a child] in her belly); τέξεται
(will bear) from v.21 is repeated verbatim; and καλέσεις is repeated in
καλέσουσιν (will call).
2. However, key terms are changed as well:
καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν (you will call his name Jesus)
from v.21 is καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ (you will call his
name Emmanuel) here. And the description of “Jesus” as σώσει τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν
from v.21 (he will save his people from their sins) in v.21 is now the
description of Emmanuel as ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον Μεθ' ἡμῶν ὁ θεός
(which is translated ‘God with us’).
24 ἐγερθεὶς δὲ ὁ Ἰωσὴφ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕπνου ἐποίησεν ὡς προσέταξεν αὐτῷ
ὁ ἄγγελος κυρίου καὶ παρέλαβεν τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ:
Yet having risen from the sleep
Joseph did as the angel of the lord ascribed to him and took his wife/woman;
ἐγερθεὶς: APPart nms, ἐγείρω, 1) to arouse, cause to
rise 1a) to arouse from sleep, to awake 1b) to arouse from the
sleep of death, to recall the dead to life
ἐποίησεν: AAI 3s, ποιέω, 1) to make 1a) with the names of things
made, to produce, construct, form, fashion, etc. 1b) to be the
authors of, the cause
προσέταξεν: AAI 3s, προστάσσω, 1) to assign or ascribe to, join to 2)
to enjoin, order, prescribe, command 2a) to appoint, to define
παρέλαβεν: AAI
3s, παραλαμβάνω, 1) to take to, to take with one's self, to join to one's
self 1a) an associate, a companion
1. For Joseph ‘taking his wife,’ see note 3 of v.20 above.
25καὶ οὐκ ἐγίνωσκεν αὐτὴν ἕως οὗ ἔτεκεν υἱόν: καὶ ἐκάλεσεν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν.
And he did not know her until she
bore a son; and he called his name Jesus.
ἐγίνωσκεν: IAI 3s, γινώσκω, 1) to learn to know,
come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel 1a) to become known
2) to know, understand, perceive, have knowledge of 2a) to
understand 2b) to know 3) Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse
between a man and a woman
ἔτεκεν: AAI 3s, τίκτω, 1) to bring forth, bear, produce (fruit from the
seed) 1a) of a woman giving birth
ἐκάλεσεν: AAI 3s, καλέω, 1) to call 1a) to call aloud, utter in a
loud voice
1. Again, this verse echoes the verbs τίκτω and καλέω of v.21.
Unlike
Luke’s gospel, where the emphasis is on Mary, Mary’s visitation by the angel,
Mary’s call to bear the chosen one, Mary’s response of “let it be to me
according to your word,” etc., Matthew’s story attends to Joseph. In fact,
throughout Matthew 1-2, Joseph has four different dreams and visitations by an
angel of the Lord. Here, Joseph is encouraged to take Mary as his wife because
the child within her is of the Holy Spirit. Right after the Magi visit in the
next chapter, Joseph will be instructed in a dream to take the child and his
mother and flee, because Herod is trying to kill the child. After Herod’s
death, Joseph will be given the ‘all clear’ in another dream and depart from
Egypt. And finally, as they are returning home, but on discovering further news
about the distribution of power following Herod’s death, Joseph is warned in a
dream without details, and decides to settle in Nazareth instead of returning
to Bethlehem. The sojourning to Egypt and the return trip to Nazareth are, for
Matthew, ways that the story fulfills Scripture.
In this
first dream sequence, the most detailed of the four, something about Joseph’s
character is shown in his decision not to put Mary away openly. Deuteronomy
22:21 gives Joseph the right to demand Mary’s death: then they shall bring the young woman out to the entrance of her
father’s house and the men of her town shall stone her to death, because she
committed a disgraceful act in Israel by prostituting herself in her father’s
house. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. I do not know if this
law were actually in practice during the time of the Roman occupation (even the
well-known story of John 8:1-11 is a later addition), but surely there would
have been some kind of ritual shaming at Joseph’s disposal as a remnant of the
actual permission to execute her. By choosing, before his dream, to put Mary away privately, we see something
about Joseph’s character. See v.19 n.1 for the versatility of the verb ἀπολύω, which could mean to send Mary away or
perhaps to forgive her. If the best translation of ἀπολύω is that Joseph decided to send Mary away
privately, then Joseph’s menu of choices were either a public demonstration of
breaking the engagement or a private one. The public demonstration would have been
one way of adhering to Leviticus 22:21. One can almost hear the biblical
fundamentalists of Joseph’s day demanding such a public demonstration, if
nothing else to show how faithful they were to the Scriptures and how highly they
regarded a woman’s fidelity to her husband. The dream calls Joseph to do
something even more radical than the private dismissal of his pregnant fiancée.
He is called to embrace her pregnancy as an act of the Holy Spirit – which means,
among other things, to follow God by not
following the law. That strikes me as a powerful statement of what it means to
follow the living God that is actively at work in the world.
I discovered your blog about a month ago after hearing it mentioned on more than one occasion on the Pulpit Fiction Podcast. The last month I added reading your blog to my Sunday night ritual as I begin to explore the text for the week. Thank you for time, dedication, and generosity to share your insights of the text.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Rusty. Glad to have you as part of the journey. MD
DeleteThanks for sharing the results of your studies - you've helped me with my thinking on this passage, and I have a better appreciation now of Joseph's character. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Jonathan. There is some intriguing depth to Joseph's story. Blessings. MD
DeleteInteresting article... Peace on earth.... May I share an article about the Last Supper in Milan in https://stenote.blogspot.hk/2018/03/milan-at-last-supper_3.html
ReplyDeleteWatch also the video in youtube https://youtu.be/7G-Im8pb2i4
Mark, I am always enlightened, inspired, and challenged as I read your words. Blessings, Robin
ReplyDeleteThanks Robin. Miss you.
DeleteMD
I think many "good" people get confused between following the law and following God. Thanks for naming the distinction. Wonderful commentary as always.
ReplyDeleteThanks Carol. MD
Deleteμὴ φοβηθῇς - May you not be afraid. The angel contradicts Joseph's fear-inspired intent to reject Mary - and the unborn child - that would have left her destitute in a world that did most definitely not empower single mothers. The text doesn't say what Joseph feared - ridicule? Loss of standing? Fear is a strong motivator in rejecting people...
ReplyDeleteSometimes I feel too far away from that particular social context to be able to speculate how Joseph might have felt or what all of the ramifications might have been. Even placing it within an honor/shame continuum feels a little like romanticizing some kind of noble social code that may or may not have really played out in the daily lives of average folk. Still , if we don't pay attention to those dynamics, we risk not taking the story seriously.
DeleteMD