Someone asked me a question recently that I hadn't considered before. In the story of Joseph and Mary, there appears to be a contradiction as to their marital state at the time of Christ's birth. For instance this is what we read by Matthew's account:
“Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us). When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.” (Matthew 1:18–25, ESV)
Note particularly that when Joseph awoke after his encounter with the angel the text reads: "he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son." What does "took his wife" mean? The usage in the Old Testament would affirm that Mary become Joseph's lawful wife. For example:
· Genesis 21:21 (ESV)
o 21 He lived in the wilderness of Paran, and his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt.
· Genesis 38:6 (ESV)
o 6 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar.
· Exodus 2:1 (ESV)
o 1 Now a man from the house of Levi went and took as his wife a Levite woman.
· Deuteronomy 24:3 (ESV)
o 3 and the latter man hates her and writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, or if the latter man dies, who took her to be his wife,
· 1 Kings 16:31 (ESV)
o 31 And as if it had been a light thing for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, he took for his wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and went and served Baal and worshiped him.
So if "took a wife" means legally married then Matthew's qualifier ("but knew her not") would imply that Joseph married Mary but they did not consummate the marriage.
Now when we read Luke's account, we see this:
“In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be registered, each to his own town. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. And while they were there, the time came for her to give birth.” (Luke 2:1–6, ESV)
Luke records that Joseph and Mary were "betrothed" to be married. The word betrothed means someone legally engaged to be married. The Greek: μνηστεύω, a verb meaning to be asked in marriage, or promised to be married.[2] So are Matthew and Luke in opposition to each other? Probably not.
Consummation or consummation of a marriage, in many traditions and statutes of civil or religious law, is the first (or first officially credited) act of sexual intercourse between two individuals. Its legal significance arises from theories of marriage as having the purpose of producing legally recognized descendants of the partners, or of providing sanction to their sexual acts together, or both, and amounts to treating a marriage ceremony as falling short of completing the creation of the state of being married. Thus in some Western traditions, a marriage is not considered a binding contract until and unless it has been consummated. Some would argue that the Bible supports this notion. In covenantal language sexual intercourse is the final “seal” on a marriage covenant. The basis for this argument is the fact that sexual intercourse between a husband and wife is the ultimate fulfillment of the “one flesh” principle (Genesis 2:24; confirmed: Matthew 19:5; Ephesians 5:31). Although there is little support biblically some traditions would even consider the marriage fictional if the couple had not consummated their marriage. The Bible more readily supports the idea that the marriage is legal but not completed.
What does this mean? Simply stated, if one holds the view that a marriage is not completed until consummated sexually, there is a sense whereby one may be married legally, but not married really. Or one might be married in Matthew's eyes, but still engaged in Luke's eyes. Dr. MacArthur affirms this view as he seeks to support the Lucian understanding. He notes: " But they did not consummate their marriage until after the birth of Jesus (Matt. 1:25). Therefore, technically, they were still betrothed."[4]
Luke's betrothal view in no less binding because the marriage act had not been accomplished. The Holman Bible Dictionary affirms this: " The biblical terms, betrothal and espousal, are almost synonymous with marriage, and as binding. Betrothal and marriage comprised a moral and spiritual principle for the home and society. The penalty under the law of Moses for disrupting this principle by adultery, rape, fornication, or incest was death by stoning (Deuteronomy 22:23-30)."
The importance of maintaining the indissoluble bond in Jewish engagement and marriage; and maintaining the unique notion that only the consummation enforces the reality of that reflects on the Christian Gospel. Paul used the betrothal concept to explain the ideal relationship that exists between the church as a chaste virgin being presented to Christ:
“For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:2, ESV)
Paul also taught marriage as a type in Ephesians 5 as a bride being readied for her husband. In his vision in Revelation 19:7-10, John, the Apostle saw and heard the heavenly multitudes praising God because the wedding feast of the Lamb—literally the "marriage supper"—was about to begin. What John’s vision in Revelation pictures is the wedding feast of the Lamb (Jesus Christ) and His bride (the Church) in its final, consummation phase. It is then that what is securely promised to the Bride of Christ today will find its ultimate fruition.
Today the Church is legally married to Christ, yet still in Its betrothal stage. The dowry price has been paid and the transaction is completed. Yet it is not yet completed at the same time for it requires the consummation – the final act. In similar language Paul clearly tells us that we are adopted (“For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”” (Romans 8:15, ESV)); yet we are still anticipating our future and final adoption (“And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.” (Romans 8:23, ESV)).
My conclusion to the matter is that not only were Matthew and Luke in accurate harmony with one another; they uniquely portrayed the glorious truth of the Gospel.
[2] Strong, J. (1996). The exhaustive concordance of the Bible : Showing every word of the text of the common English version of the canonical books, and every occurrence of each word in regular order. (electronic ed.). Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship.
[4] MacArthur, J. J. (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed.) (Lk 2:5). Nashville: Word Pub.
For 23 years I have taught relentlessly, never perfectly, always passionately on the sovereignty of God in salvation. The tension between God's work in salvation and man's necessary response troubles many, many people. Myriads of people struggle to accuratelyarticulate sovereign electing grace in biblical harmony with necessary human choice; and do so without diminishing one or the other. This week I experienced something so vivid it woke me up to a reality. Like a framing hammer hitting me over the head I came to this sad but evident realization:
