Theological Topic -- Sex

[Pete Vecchi]

Now that I got people's attention with that title, let me post the question I have.

Perhaps it's more about Bible History than about theology, but the question I have is this:

Is there anything we know regarding the social issues of the time and geographic setting of the birth of Jesus regarding whether or not it was socially acceptable for bethrothed (pledged to be married) couples to have sexual relations?

Arguments that it was NOT socially acceptable are that Mary was still a virgin even though she was already pledged to be married to Joseph, and that betrothed couples did not inhabit the same homes.

Arguments that is WAS socially acceptable are that a divorce was required to break a bethrothal, and that Joseph would have been able to keep Mary from being exposed to public disgrace by divorcing her quietly (if sexual relations during betrothal was not socially acceptable, once the pregnancy became obvious, Mary would have been publicly disgraced anyway).

I don't see where the Bible really gives us direct answers, so I'm assuming that we have to look at extra-Biblical sources.

One source that I have read is by Jim Bishop in the book "The Day Christ Died." He said (paraphrasing here, because I don't have the book in front of me to quote) that throughout most of Jewish society at that time, sexual relations during betrothal were socially acceptable, but specifically in the region of Gallilee, where Mary and Joseph lived, it was NOT socially acceptable.

On what Bishop bases that thought, he did not say.

But does anyone have any ideas and/or resources on this issue?

[Ian Gentles]

Well sex for betrothed couples was way frowned upon, and Joseph had a problem till angel spoke to him. My question would be about their age, have always seen Mary as very young?

[Bruce Carriker]

Interesting questions, Pete. Since the betrothed woman went home to live with her family until the wedding, I'm assuming...and that's all it is, an assumption...that sexual relations between the betrothed were probably not accepted practice.

But you raise a good point when you say that once her pregnancy was obvious, Mary would have been disgraced. However, maybe there's more going on there than JUST the "visible pregnancy" issue. Maybe Joseph is thinking that the pregnancy never need become public knowledge. If Joseph divorces Mary publically, he has to declare the reason(s) why. If he does it quietly, then the betrothal simply ends, Mary goes away to have her baby, someone married woman takes the child to raise as her own, Mary comes home. (You know, like we used to do it in this country.)

Ian...your suggestion that Joseph having a problem till the angel spoke to him is proof that sex for betrothed couples was unacceptable overlooks a far more obvious issue for Joseph: Mary, his betrothed, is pregnant. And he's absolutely, positively sure it's not his child. If your fiancee is cheating on you BEFORE you're married, what are the odds she'll be faithful to you AFTER?

As for Mary's age, it was not uncommon for girls to be married by the time they were young teenagers. It was simply how things were in the first century.

[Barb Bouldrey]

I have always wondered why Mary went with Joseph to Bethlehem (besides fulfilling scripture). It makes me wonder that possibly she has already been shunned by her family and community for being pregnant and not yet married. Why would Joseph take her with him if she was so close to delivery unless he did it for her protection and provision.

Barb

[Bruce Carriker]

By that time he'd already been told by the angel that he was to go ahead and marry Mary. So I'm guessing that he was simply willing to deal with whatever scorn or disapproval came his way, based on his conversation with the angel.

[Pete Vecchi]

Two thoughts on the comments thus far, and one on a major omission on my part...

Matthew says that right after Joseph had his dream, he took Mary home to be his wife. If the timeline is such that Mary returned from seeing Elizabeth 3 months after Gabriel visited Mary, then, in my opinion, it makes sense that Mary didn't tell Joseph about her pregnancy until after she got back from visiting Elizabeth. At this time, Mary probably wasn't noticably "showing", but she probably had to tell Joseph. I find it entirely plausible that Joseph was told right after Mary's return, and that he figured she'd gotten pregnant while visiting Elizabeth. Matthew says that Joseph had a vision in a dream, and took Mary home to be his wife "when he woke up" (NIV). This seems to indicate an immediacy. That would be one reason to me why there was no "disgrace" -- they were already married. And for those people who were undobtedly in Bethlehem who would have counted the months from Mary and Joseph's wedding to the time of the birth, it could easily be that, IF sexual realations during betrothal were not uncommon, it would not really be a disgrace.

I would think that it would be somewhat natural for the husband and wife to go to Bethlehem together. My understanding is that the decree may have more or less mandated that entire families report for the census. On the other hand, Barb makes a good point that perhaps Mary went with Joseph just so the stigma wouldn't remain in their hometown. But at the same time, I see no clear indication that Joseph and Mary left Nazareth with plans to stay away. Rather, Matthew indicates that after the visit of the Magi, the family went to Egypt for a while, and then returned to Nazareth. Luke simply indicates the return to Nazareth without mentioning Egypt. This, by the way, doesn't mean that there is an error; it's most likely that Luke just chose not to mention that detail, because it wasn't all that important to his predominantly gentile audience. Mathhew mentioned it because he was writing his account to a primarily Jewish audience, and was tying the trip to Egypt into the Old Testament prophecy which said "Out of Egypt I called my son."

Now, as to the omission on my part...

One of the biggest arguments saying that having sexual relations during the betrothal period was NOT accepted practice is because the Bible is clear that Joseph and Mary did not have sexual relations during that time.

[Mark Metcalfe]

Correct me, but wasn't proof of the consumation (a showing sheet after the wedding)
an important part of the culture? You'll need some historians to dig that one out.