«Home

Did Joseph Legally Separate From Mary After Jesus' Birth?

According to reported story in the bible,when joseph discovered that mary was with a child,he got a revelation that it was through the power of the holy spirit.

Subsequently,the bible was silent concerning the actions that joseph took later but events show that there was a secret legal separation between the two .

My reasons are as follows:

-Joseph was not present at the miraculous conversion of water into wine

-joseph was not present at the scene of the crucifixion

-joseph was not present on the pentecost day with other disciples

Avatar
Newbie
23 answers

St Joseph the foster father of jesus probably died before he began his active ministry ,that explains the non-mention of his name in the gospels after Jesus's childhood.Mary and Joseph could not have been divorced .

About Mary having other children,it has been proved over and over again that James and others mentioned as brothers of Jesus were actualy his cousins.

It is not that James the just played a peripheral role in christianity that we don't know much about him,he was actualy the first bishop of jerusalem and alongside Peter and Paul was among the three most influential christian leaders of the first century.The word brother was used in the gospels to describe his relationship to Jesus because there wasno greek word then for cousin.

for more about James the Just the so called brother of Jesus see the link below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_the_Just

0
Avatar
Newbie

@maven- Alex is revealing the truth yet you don't want to listen, i have a very good example for you

the case of trinity, trinity was never mention in the bible but it was scholars that analyse and brought it out as a concept, the same thing with joseph and mary here

0
Avatar
Newbie

There are some people you dont just bother yourself to attempt explaining biblical accounts and concept,silly mohammadins like abuduzola comes to mind,perhaps you should tell us what the koram says abt this issue

0
Avatar
Newbie

Secondly mavenbox,the bible is not self-explainatory in most cases like the one below from REVELATION:

And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that GREAT CITY the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

11: Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;

12: And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:

13: On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.

14: And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

15: And he that talked with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof.

16: And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. THE LENGHT AND THE BREADTH AND THE HEIGHT OF IT ARE EQUAL

17: And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.

18: And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.

19: And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;

20: The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolite; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.

21: And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.

22: And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

23: And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

24: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

25: And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.

26: And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

27: And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

What do you think the city refer to:It is simply THE TRUTH but very few can read meaning to it.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Listen mavenbox.

'Espouse' is defined as a  a formal state of engagement TO BE MARRIED.

You are well educated enough to understand that.

My question is did they finally got married according to the jewish customs?

Secondly.the bible is all about legend,myths and stories and the 'sect' you referred to are the offsprings of the authors of the bible.

You believe in your community whether yoruba,ibo or hausa but none of these can be found in the bible.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@alex0026: Your evidence is not admissible, still because you are referring to legends, myths and stories of sects and groups with their variegated beliefs. WHERE IS YOUR REFERENCE FROM THE BIBLE OR JEWISH BOOK OF HISTORY THAT THEY GOT DIVORCED?

0
Avatar
Newbie

And now Abuzola is quiet. Did I hit a sore spot?

But you also appear to be confused because this is pure equivocation considering your current argument:

So what are you saying exactly, Abuzola?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Historically speaking,  it was the Ebionites, an early sect of Mosaic Law Christians with whom St. Justin communicated through his letters to Trypho the Jew who first gave rise to the heterodox belief that Christ had biological brothers, born of his mother Mary. They originally taught Jesus was the biological offspring of Mary and Joseph, but relented and later taught that Jesus was indeed conceived by the Holy Ghost, but that Mary and Joseph then had other children afterward. They were ultimately condemned as heretical because of this and other beliefs.

The Antidicomarianites, designated "the opponents of Mary" then took this belief up in 200 AD to counter the popular Christian belief - already the Greek and Roman liturgies reverence her as "the ever-virgin Mary" - but again, were condemned by the early Church as heretical and refuted by St. Epiphanius. Helvidius also was a proponent of Mary having other children and wrote a tract upon it around 380 AD. His tract was refuted by none other than St. Jerome himself who translated the Bible into Latin (creating the Latin Vulgate) from the original languages and who was a linguistic master. Helvidius was condemned as a heretic.

Considering the evidence of the early Church's attitude upon Christ's brethren, it would seem that the perpetual virginity of Mary has always been recognized as the truth. In addition to the above, St. Ambrose of Milan 338-397, one of the four original doctors of the Christian Church wrote concerning the perpetual virginity of Mary the Mother of Christ. His developed doctrine and theology as well as the public reception of his work demonstrate the beliefs he was recording were already well known and wide spread in the Christian Church.

Over one thousand years later the Protestant exegetes would resurrect the challenge that James had Mary, the mother of Christ, as his own biological mother. This was a response not only to Catholic devotions to Mary, which they saw as idolatry or at least misguided devotion, but as a declaration of their independence from Rome regarding the interpretation of Scripture.

Do you think mary could had concieved and bore other children through joseph after the belief that she is forever a virgin?

Finally,remember that she is still the only recorded virgin in history and is still called virgin mary till today.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Abuzola, correct me if I am wrong. Your mother is not alive. So does that mean if a visitor comes to your house and sees you, he can say that it means she divorced your father?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Do you need to find the context 'jesus excrete' before agreeing that jesus excreted ? Since jesus like you said incarnated as a man that means he has to undergo human rule, the same way this is analyse so is the case of joseph and mary, you do not expect everything to be written down in plain white

0
Avatar
Newbie

@Alex0026: Did you REALLY read my post, or you just glossed over it? Because it sounds more conclusive that what you have said, and answers some of the questions you posed.

@Abuzola: The Bible cannot record everything about Joseph, husband of Mary. If the Bible had done that, the next question I would hearing would be that we didn't hear enough about Zebedee, father of James and John.

@A K O: I have learnt a lot from you, just observing how you make your posts. Thank you.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Yes I did, and his analysis doesn't prove that Joseph divorced Mary.

Divorce is the key word here.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Wow, i love this, pure uncertainty , this is what the bible is all about

AKO did you read alex post, he had made it clear with his analysis

0
Avatar
Newbie

Also show me where it was recorded that Joseph left Mary.

Don't base your argument on inconclusive evidence and then demand conclusive responses.

There is a lot the bible does not say explicitly, but which we can deduce from careful study.

So for example, Joseph's behavior until he is no longer mentioned does not suggest divorce at all.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I kindly recommend this little biblical analysis for your attention.

According to the early Christian Church, James the less, identified in Galatians 1:19 is the son of Mary of Cleophas and Cleophas, who was also known as Alpheus and hence James is "brother" to Jesus Christ in so much as he is a blood relation, a cousin, not a biological brother. Mary of Cleophas was either a sister of Mary the mother of Jesus (not supported by Christian Tradition) or Mary's sister in law.

In Jewish custom, the word "brethren" or "brother" is applied to step-brothers as well as to brothers by blood, and in Scriptural, and Semitic use generally, is often loosely extended to all near, or even distant, relatives (Genesis 13:8, 14:14-16; Leviticus 10:4; 1 Chronicles 15:5-10, 23:21-22). The word itself gives no certain indication of the exact nature of the kinship. James, as well as Jude and Simon who are sometimes advanced as direct kin to Jesus, were not the sons of Joseph and Mary. The New Testament cites Mary as the Mother of Jesus exclusively. Mary's annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem (Luke 2:41) would have been improbable if she had other offspring since she would be caring for a great many children if these are assumed to be all hers (Matthew 12:46; Mark 3:31; Luke 8:19; Acts 1:14). It is unlikely that she would have made this annual pilgrimage so often while pregnant and with an increasing number of small children to care for (at least four other sons and of several daughters, Matthew 13:56). At His death Jesus recommended His mother to St. John. The care of His mother would have fallen to his brothers, who, if apostles, were still alive. In fact, it would have been their duty to care for her. Yet, they make no claim and Christian Tradition speaks of her living in St. John's care until the end of her life.

Secondly,you need to understand the fact that the bible is a make-believe story that has gone through cultural and political influence before you finally have access to it.

Show me where it was recorded that mary(the mother of christ) was pregnant a second,third, fourth,etc and if joseph was responsible?

0
Avatar
Newbie

It appears that you are 'over-interpreting' the bible.

Yes, he is absent at all these times but that does not automatically imply that he left Mary.

All his actions are consistent with a character that is contrary to your assertion.

If he left Mary, he would probably have shown some signs of withdrawal / resentment

0
Avatar
Newbie

If you don't ve fact but probability then back off

0
Avatar
Newbie

I don't claim expert knowledge of the Bible, but it surely doesn't say that they were separated. So why must we come to this conclusion, when there are other equally probable conclusions? Mine is a "what if". I'm not stating it as a fact.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Died ? Do you know the bible at all

0
Avatar
Newbie

What a narrow minded assumption. What if he had died?

0
Avatar
Newbie

True talk the bible is a fallacy

0
Avatar
Newbie

@ op - b 4 i answer u ,answer my question 1st : ar u a muslim ,xtian or babalawo ?

0
Avatar
Newbie
Your answer
Add image

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.