To the Reader: I do realize that this article may be controversial to some of you out there. Therefore, I’m not compelling anyone to except (or even practice) what’s being said, but only presenting it to you as a plausible and logical way on how Jesus could be related to not only Mary, but Joseph as well. And because it doesn’t violate any scriptures and is backed up by medical studies and performed by Christian couples as well; I felt it would be safe to share with you the reader.
At the bottom of this page are medical studies that backup what's being presented in this article. For any questions or comments, email the author of this article at: reasons2believe@icloud.com
God bless you as you seek to do His will. Amen.
Doesn’t the genealogy recorded in both Matthew and Luke’s gospel seem to indicate that Jesus was related not only to Mary, but to Joseph as well? Why else would they both record it in such detail? And yes, there are those who have come up with one answer or another to explain these two genealogies. However, to me they all appear to be made up because they don’t line up with scripture as a whole. For doesn’t Matthew’s gospel starts out saying, “An account of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham”? (Matthew 1:1 CSB) And doesn’t Luke’s gospel read: “And Jesus himself was beginning to be about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, son of Joseph”? (Luke 3:23 YLT) And let’s take not that this word “supposed” can also mean, “to deem or regard,” as well as “to hold by custom or usage.” So, sense they were both married, there would be a rightful assumption that they were sexually intimate.
Now, it’s important that we first expose some misconceptions found in our modern translation. For most bibles have Matthew’s genealogy through Joseph’s descendants and Luke’s through Mary’s. However, by closely studying God’s word, we can see the opposite is true. For according to the Aramaic Peshitta New Testament and the Revised English Version (as well as a few other antient texts. See video link below), the genealogy in Matthew’s account is that of Mary’s and the one in Luke’s account is that of Joseph. That’s because the Aramaic language has a specific word for “husband” which we see being rightly used in Matthew 1:19. But in verse 16 of this same chapter, the Aramaic translation doesn’t use this same word for “husband,” but one that’s translated as “guardian.” This would make the “Joseph” in Matthew’s account her “guardian,” or even her actual “father.”
However, this is not true in the Greek. That’s because the Greek has no specific word for “husband.” For this same word can be used as ether “father” or “husband” or even as a “man” in general. So, it all lies in the hands of the translators to figure out what word to use. Therefore, because of one’s bias or misunderstanding, we can easily see how corruption could creep into these modern Greek texts of today. So yes, both Mary’s father and her husband share the same name “Joseph.” This is not uncommon because there are three other Joseph’s mentioned in Luke’s genealogy account as well. So, that all being said, the Aramaic English New Testament and the Revised English Version (and a few others) are correct when it comes down to these two genealogies.
Click this link to watch a video concerning Matthews Genealogy account: Joseph, the Father of Mary
“For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” (Ephesians 5:31 NKJV)
Now, we must acknowledge that Jesus was miraculously conceived as scripture says. For Mary told the angel Gabriel before her conception: “But how can this happen? I am a virgin.” (Luke 1:34 NLT) Also, we read that Joseph didn’t undo her virginity, for we read: “And Joseph got up from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.” (Matthew 1:24-25 LSB). Now, some texts say that he (Joseph) “knew her not.” This of course is referring to the fact that he didn’t engage her in vaginal sex. This way he could honestly say that he didn’t have anything to do with the conception of Jesus.
So, how do we make sense of all this you may ask? For on one hand we have Matthew’s account that clearly shows that Jesus was related to Mary because she obviously had him in her womb. And on the other hand, we have Luke’s account showing that Jesus was included in Joseph’s genealogy. Well, we must first realize that even though Jesus was miraculously conceived, he was still related to Mary. For studies have shown that both the mother and child’s DNA naturally pass over to one another through the umbilical cord. And studies have also shown that these passed on DNA’s can also be retain by the recipients. But what about Joseph’s DNA? For we know that he kept Mary a virgin throughout her whole pregnancy. Is there any other way that Joseph’s DNA could be passed on to both Mary and Jesus? Well, in fact there is, so please read on to see how this would be true.
Studies have shown that the components of a man’s semen (including his DNA) are present in the woman’s bloodstream within a few hours after her receiving it. This would be true however she receives it into her body. So, the passage which reads: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh,” would be a fact and not just some metaphor. (Ephesians 5:31 ESV) Also, let’s remember that Luke being a physician, should have easily understood this as well. For even scripture itself says: “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun. Can one say about anything, "Look, this is new"? It has already existed in the ages before us.” (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 CSB)
Yes, what science knows today would have been understood in the past as well. Of course, because of today’s advanced technologies, we know of such things in much greater detail. But again, according to scripture, we know that those of the past had a basic knowledge of what we know today.
“Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.” (Hebrews 13:4 NKJV)
Now, because Joseph and Mary were betrothed (engaged), they could at any time consummate their marriage by engaging in a sexual act. This would be true even though there was no formal marriage as seen in Genesis 24:67 and Genesis 29:21. Therefore, even though Mary was pregnant, there would have been no restrictions placed upon them regarding sexual intimacy. However, we know that Mary remained a virgin throughout her pregnancy with Jesus. I believe this was the right thing for Joseph to do on his part. This way he could honestly say that he had nothing to do with the conception of Jesus. Also, this would help Mary to have a safer pregnancy as well. For there are some studies showing that vaginal sex during pregnancy (especially in the last trimester) could cause a woman to have contractions, and thus deliver a premature baby. And as mentioned above, this knowledge would have been known during Mary’s pregnancy as well.
So, does this mean that Mary while being pregnant had to refrain from all forms of sex with Joseph? Is there any sexual act that she could perform that wouldn’t contradict the scriptures and still be safe? Well yes in fact there is, and that would be the act of oral sex. So, by Mary engaging Joseph in oral sex and ingesting his semen, both she and the Christ child within her womb would become “one flesh” with Joseph.
Therefore, our Lord Jesus would truly be related to both Joseph and Mary. And not only that, by remaining a virgin, her miraculously conception of Christ would still hold true without any question. (Matthew 1:18, Luke 1:35) And again, this would also make sense why Luke (being a Physician with such knowledge) would include Jesus in Joseph’s genealogy as well.
Also, there are studies showing that a pregnant woman who swallows her husband’s semen, can help bring about a safer pregnancy. This is because the further away a couple is from each other’s family gene pool, the more likely there can be a miscarriage. For a pregnancy is similar to having an organ transplant. However, by receives her husband’s semen orally during her pregnancy, both she and her baby in the womb receives the components of his semen which would include his DNA. This of course would cause her body system to view the baby in her womb as family and thus lessen the chances of her having a miscarriage. This of course would be the case for both Mary and the Christ child within her womb as well.
Below are some articles pertaining to what was mentioned above:
“Do not deprive each other of sexual relations, unless you both agree to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time so you can give yourselves more completely to prayer. Afterward, you should come together again so that Satan won't be able to tempt you because of your lack of self-control.” (1 Corinthians 7:5 NLT)
Now, we need to also remember that Joseph was a man with needs and desires. Also, wouldn’t Mary want to bring pleasure to Joseph and show her desire to be “one flesh” with him? For a man to refrain from having sex with his wife for nine months would not only be a hard thing to do, but wrong as well according to that passage quoted above. Therefore, withholding sex (in any form) should only be for a limited time and not for nine months for married couples.
So then, shouldn’t it make perfect sense for Joseph and Mary to engage in such an act that’s not condemned by God, nor violates any scripture. And let me ask you this. How many of you today have ether given or received oral sex? So then, wouldn’t it be hypocritical if you engage in such an act yourselves and yet condemn Mary and Joseph for doing the same? So then, just as it would be for us today, it surely would have been a blessing for not only Joseph and Mary, but for the Christ child within her womb as well. Therefore, this would make Jesus related to not only Mary, but Joseph himself. So again, this would make sense why Luke included Jesus in Joseph’s genealogy.
Below is some articles and videos showing the health benefit of sex:
Now, even though what was said in this article is backed up by not only scripture, but daily life and even science itself, I personally would like to have at least one or two more fellow believers who would see this as being logical and plausible as well. However, because of Ecclesiastes 1:9-10, I do believe that there are others out there who see this to be true as well. I just need to find them.
So, to wrap this all up, I ask that you would please pray, read and do some studying on your own. For we all need to, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15) And please, leave me a comment, especially if you are one that happens to see this article as being logical and plausible as well.
Thank you for taking the time to read this article and may God bless you as you seek to do His will. Amen.
Marriage4life
Copyright © 2024 Marriage4life - All Rights Reserved.
Powered by GoDaddy
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.