spin

Just a small thought:

According to the gospel birth narratives, Mary was not married to the father of her child (she wasn't as yet married to anyone), so her child, Jesus, was illegitimate in the eyes of the law. This would have rendered him a mamzer and ineligible to enter the temple precincts according to Jewish thought.


spin

CX

But didn't Joseph decide to keep it all hush hush since Jesus was the son of god?

Vinnie

I mentioned mamzer here before. Its based off of one line in the Matthean infancy narrative. I think it is said that creation of this by one immersed in Judaism of the time is not likely since the statement could easily lead to scandal// Jesus being a mamzer.

Rather, the birth narrative may partially be an explanation of some "embarrasing" or "alternate core". For those interested, Bruce Chilton takes up this reconstruction in his book Rabbi Jesus.

This poses an interesting line of thought for Jesus' (multiply attested) saying against the temple//temple incident reconstructed by exegetes like Dom Crossan and others.

Vinnie

spin

Oh no, Vinnie, not embarrassing again? Can you get more embarrassing to a Jew than to be a mamzer? Wasn't that the implication of the question about John Hyrcanus I's mother? The best the Jew will accept is that God opens the womb of a barren woman, a trope which you find frequently on the HB.

How can Jesus fulfill the law if he can't enter the temple? Obviously he can't, so knowledgeable apologists have to explain it away and what better way for someone already jettisoning material to toss a bit more? It was probably earmarked for extinction anyway.

As usual your texts are unavailable to me so excuse me for not being able to even look at them.


spin

mrmoderate

By biblical accounts, Jesus was not only not excluded from the temple but was considered a rabbi who had every right to teach in the temple.

Jesus's birth story is not told until after Jesus's death and resurrection so He most likely would not have been considered a mamzer by the people of the times.

Since Jesus was conceived in Nazareth where Joseph did come to pledge to marry Mary and was born in Bethlehem it is very possible that no one ever considered Jesus's birth to be suspect. A pledge of marriage gave all of the rights of marriage in these times.

Since no one has ever made this connection it is safe to assume that there was no connection to be made by the social standards of biblical times.

Asha'man

But Jesus would have known, right? And the law about keeping bastards out of the temple came straight from God, right? So Jesus deliberately broke God's law, and kept it a secret so man wouldn't punish him for it? Wow, what a fine moral example he sets....

mrmoderate

But...Jesus also was aware of who His true father was. So, Jesus would have considered Himself exempt from that earthly law.

Vinnie

Huh? I thought I agreed with you? The best reason for viewing Jesus as being a mamzer is that one line that would lead to scandal. If Matthew didn't make it up it fits. If Matthew made it up we have no evidence Jesus was a mamzer. Furthrmore, that it could lead to such scandal if made up leans me towards it not being made upo but this is a single line in a third stratum source.

Of course one might use GThomas 101, 105 and the family issues in Mark (true Mother, they thought he was crazy) and confirming by John (even hsi borthers didn't believe in him) to score a supplementaty point.

And also the tmeple stuff I already referenced.

And I didn't reference you to Chilton. I said anyone interested in this issue can find a little bit more information on it in his work.

Vinnie

spin

Sorry, Vinnie, yes you did! I should have acknowleged the fact then. I was just taken aback with the injection of embarrassment here as well, but I guess that's your take on those who deal with the problem in crab-like manner.

Luke makes it clear that Jesus was nothing to do with Mary's husband to be. She was still a virgin, ie the relationship with Joseph not yet consumated. Any method to say Jesus had better claim than Joseph would have been tantamount to evidence that he was mamzer.

I guess this is just further evidence for what we know about the birth stories.

Thanks for the clarification.


spin

Al Kafirun

I always used the exclusion from the temple theory to combat Christian circumcision. Never worked because in the world of fiction the author is God.