Matthew 1:18-25

Introduction

Matthew 1:18 “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.” The first part of v.18 could be understood as the origin of God as man happened in this way. Matthew provides us with the birth story of how and why God became man. It is important not to forget that though Matthew writes of Jesus’ birth before He was conceived in Mary’s womb by the Holy Ghost, He was 100% God. He was not 100% of God that is Modalism. Modalism teaches that God is not co-existing as a triune God but can manifest Himself in three different ways. He can be the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Ghost. But He is not all three at the same time. This is why I made a distinction between Jesus is 100% God and not 100% of God. Therefore, in the next eight verses, we discover why a Being that has a divine nature took on a dual nature. The moment He was conceived of the Holy Ghost, Jesus possessed two natures: divine and human.

In short, Jesus was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost (Matthew 1:18 and Matthew 1:20 “But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost”) to save His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21 “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins”).

Luke is the only other gospel that writes about the birth of Jesus but he does so through the Mary’s lens. Matthew gives us the account of the conception, birth and early childhood of Jesus from Joseph’s lens. A number of years ago, I preached a series of sermons leading up to Christmas Sunday entitled: “People connected with the Christmas Story.” I do not remember how many people I preached on but I do remember preaching on Joseph as one of the main characters to the Christmas Story. I entitled the sermon: “The Unsung Hero of the Christmas Story.” We hear sermons about Mary, the Shepherds and Wisemen, the angel Gabriel, and Herod, but not many sermons about Joseph’s contribution to the birth of Jesus Christ. The Lord being my helper, we will appreciate the importance of Joesph to Jesus’ birth.

Before moving to the first point, I want to highlight one additional item. The New Testament was written in Greek. In English our sentence structure follows as syntactical order. Our subject comes before the verb, and the verb comes before the direct object. However, in Biblical Greek, they followed a morphological order; therefore, the verbs or direct objects could precede the subject of the sentence. The reason they had this flexibility was to highlight a word or put “emphasis (1)” on a word or concept. The subject of the sentence is as seen in our English translation: “the birth.” However, in the Greek “of Jesus” comes first. Highlighting and emphasizing the importance of the birth is Jesus Christ. The birth account that Matthew writes about in 1:18-25 is normal or regular; rather, extraordinary, miraculous, and one of a kind.

Today’s theme is who was Joseph, the husband of Mary? Matthew 1:18–19 “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.”

Matthew divulges two essential pieces of information about Jospeh that are related to the birth of Jesus: He is engaged to Mary and He is righteous.

He is engaged to Mary

Joseph was “espoused” or engaged to Mary when she became pregnant with Jesus. There were two parts to a Jewish marriage during the time of Jesus. The first part was a betrothal period. The betrothal usually occurred a year before the marriage. During this time, the bride would live in her father’s house (2). Mary and Joseph would not have much contact during the betrothal period and the time a part served as a time of probation and fidelity one to another (3)Their engagement meant “a great deal more than the ‘engagement’ today. It was legally binding (a contract signed by witnesses) and could be broken only by a writ of divorce (4).” Knowing this background helps us to acknowledge Joseph and Mary’s predicament. Even though Matthew does not focus of Mary’s predicament, she is in a more precarious situation. The law stipulates in Deuteronomy 22:23-24 that a woman who is betrothed to a man but willingly has sex with another man should be put to death. Mary was potentially facing the death penalty.

Joseph’s predicament was multi-faceted. First, Joseph must have been devastated by the news. His life was crashing in before him. All the hopes and reams he had imagined with Mary being his wife were extinguished with the news of her pregnancy. Not only would there have been a feeling of betrayal but a sense of lostness likely existed. As Jospeh was preparing a place and focusing on proving his fidelity, Mary discarded Joseph’s commitment and her fidelity to him.

Second predicament was how Joseph would respond to the news. He could take one of three steps. First, he could have made an public and open display of divorce that could have resulted in her death, or at the very least would have brought immense disgrace to Mary (5). Second, according to the law, he could privately divorce Mary before two witnesses. Deuteronomy 24:1 says: “When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.” The third option does not appear to be on the table, yet. He could go on with the wedding plans with Mary because he believed her story that she was pregnant “with child of the Holy Ghost.”

He decides on the second option: (Matthew 1:19) “Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.” One of the reasons people do not get much out of the Bible or they view the Bible as dry is they are not reading the Bible with purpose. Sadly, Christians are not interested in “the aim of the author (6).” The author strategically chose the structure and words that are worth us taking our time to understand. As an example, in v.19 there are two verbs: “willing” and “minded” that are worth our attention. These two verbs give us the inner working of Joseph’s mind. First, he was “not willing” to divorce her publicly. The verb “willing” speaks of purpose. His purpose from the very beginning was not to divorce her publicly. Joseph went from purpose to being “minded.” the word “minded” means desire. It was not just his purpose to divorce her privately because it was expedient. He desired to not make her a public example or to further shame her. Even in divorce, his desire and thought process was to put Mary first. A. T. Robertson wrote: “One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed (7).” The idea is his desire (mixed with his righteousness) motivated his willingness to divorce her privately (8).

He is righteous

Matthew 1:19 “Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.” The word “just” is translated 41 times as “righteous.” Joseph was a righteous man. Jospeh is one of three people Matthew and Luke record in association with the birth of Jesus as righteous. Luke records that Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous in Luke 1:6: “And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.” After Jesus’ birth, Luke records that Simeon was “just” in Luke 2:25: “And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.”

What did it mean for Joseph, Zechariah, Elizabeth, or Simeon to be righteous? First, Joseph’s righteousness meant the Law of God meant something to him. The Law of God was more than a national relic to unite people. Or, a banner to be raised to identify you as a Jew. The Law of God was something to be pursued after, above everything else. His passion for the Law of God would have separated him from most Jews in the first century. Even the Pharisees, who were allegedly very rigid for the Law of God, were more passionate for their traditions than the Law. The Law was an idea that promoted their back-breaking traditions, which removed the Law’s authority. Jesus said to the Pharisees in Matthew 15:3: “But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?”

Tradition was not evil in and of itself, provided that the Law of God shined brightly in the backdrop of their traditions. The problem for Israel was their traditions were not the backdrop that allowed the truth of God’s word to shine; rather, God’s Law became the backdrop for sinful, over-reaching and burdensome traditions to shine. The Pharisee traditions extinguished the Light and Love of Truth. Jesus rebuked them for this in Matthew 23:1–4 “Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.”

The foundation upon which God’s Law rests upon is love: love for God and love for neighbor. This is exemplified in Matthew 22. An expert on the law had asked Jesus what was the greatest commandment of all the commands given by God. Jesus answered the question in Matthew 22:37–40 “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” The entire network of the Old Testament rest on loving God and loving your neighbor. The traditions of the Pharisees brought out self-centered love not selfless love for God and others.

I argue his love for the righteousness of God’s word is the central reason why Joseph was minded to divorce Mary quietly and privately. “His righteous love and kindness…of shaming (Mary) publicly (9).” God’s law moved him to love God and others in a way that put God’s love on display for all to see without diminishing or corrupting God’s love. This can only be done when someone comprehends the structure, significance and purpose of God’s Law.

The application for today’s righteous people is we must love the scriptures more than we love our traditions. I have seen with my own eyes and heard with my own ears Christians lift up their traditions to a higher pedestal than God’s word. I did that in my earlier years. I argued that traditions were designed to protect God’s word. However, in many situations traditions prevented people from knowing the truth that were “being” protecting by minimizing them at the expense of my Holy Grail traditions. By the way, the pendulum has swung to a more contemporary environment that opposes traditions. Many of these contemporary movements have extinguished God’s truth through their inclusivity.

It is important to note that all worship styles are traditional. Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 1:9: “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.” We label worship styles as traditional, contemporary or mix, but Solomon would assert the different worship styles are all traditional becasue there is nothing “new under the sun.” The point is whatever style a church implements in worship should compliment God’s word and erode from God’s word or the sanctity of worship.

Second, Jospeh’s righteousness meant he understood the implication of the sacrificial system. The Jewish sacrificial system was so much more than a religious event that brought Jews together. It appears the sacrifices had become a holiday or a time of celebration in the first century; perhaps, like Christmas, Easter or Thanksgiving in our time. The meaning of the sacrifices had been lost for most Jews. Joseph knew the sacrifices spoke of his sins and God’s love in extending His righteousness to sinful people. Joseph’s righteousness was not genetic, hereditary, or based on good works; rather, his acknowledgement and confession of sin, and God’s righteous covering over him. A reason most Jews rejected the message from the sacrifices, John the Baptist and Jesus was their self-righteousness. Jews in the first century and today reject original sin. They argue that original sin is not in the Torah at all (10). What is original sin? Original sin is the doctrine that teaches Adam’s sin plunged humanity into sin. The Jews believe that a person becomes a sinner through sinning, but Christians believe that a person sins becasue they are a sinner.

The Jews view on original sin has jaded their understanding of sinfulness. In the New Testament, it appears only those who have committed sin egregious sin against God or Israel, like murder, prostitution, stealing or being a tax-collector for the Roman government was classified as sinners. However, every other Jew that was striving to live for YWHY was righteous. Matthew 9:9–11 “And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him. And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?”

A “publican” was a tax collector on behalf on the Roman Government. Israel viewed him as both a traitor and thief. He sold out his Jewishness to be employed by the Roman Government, and sold out his honesty by taking more taxation than he should have from the Jews. Therefore, a tax collector was lumped in with the worst of the worst in Jewish society, and were attached to the label “sinners.” What is interesting is the religious leaders did not view themselves as “sinners” or those who followed after their teaching. However, after Jesus finished praying in the Garden of Gethsemane, He said to his disciples in Matthew 26:45 “Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.” The phrase “betrayed into the hands of sinners” was a reference to Israel’s religious leaders. A reason the religious leaders did not want Jesus was they thought of themselves as whole and healthy without any need of a Savior or Rescuer. Matthew 9:12–13 “But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Joseph knew all too well that he was a sinner in desperate need of a Deliverer to deliver him from his sins so that he can be righteous before God.

Conclusion