Because the following statement makes no sense coming from the lips of an already-engaged and soon-to-be-married young woman:
Luke 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
We've already been told several verses earlier, in Luke 1:27, that she was "espoused to a man whose name was Joseph ".
Thus, the usual reaction one would normally expect from her in such a situation would be: "Are you telling me that mine and Joseph's future child will be the Messiah of Israel ?"
Hence why the Church's "unbiblical" interpretation of their engagement as being one of paternal protection is more tenable than the equally-unbiblical 1 Protestant belief that their betrothal was meant for future wedding and child-bearing.
1 Unless one can show me just where exactly in the Bible the brethren of the Lord are called "children" or "sons of Mary"...
0 comments :
Post a Comment