I'm looking for BIBLICAL evidence that the circumstances of Jesus' birth were questioned during His time on earth. Is there any text alluding to the fact He was marginalized, criticized, or otherwise questioned regarding His virgin birth? Did any, for example, consider Him a bastard?

I know what Ellen White says. I'm not asking about that. I am seeking for any evidence for this from the Bible alone. John 8:41 is as close as I've come, and it just doesn't seem direct enough to make an actual connection here. Is there something more?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

In Matthew 1:19 Joseph was thinking about and their relationship quietly until the dream he had in verse 20.

That's true. But the fact that Joseph was of a mind to put Mary away privately shows plainly that he would not have made a public spectacle of her--that was never his intent. So it would not have been public knowledge.

Was it ever known publicly, in His time, is the basic question here.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

A little math --
Mary was at least three months pregnant (that is if their wedding was immediately on her return after visiting Elizabeth) more likely she may have been even further along in her pregnancy by the time she and Joseph were married.
So the people of Nazareth would have known something happened, people have a habit of counting months.
They could have assumed that Joseph was still the father, since they were engaged when conception took place and they did get married.

Just noticed something else, in Luke 2:5
Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem to be taxed. And the text still says "his espoused wife" -- does that mean they were not yet married when Jesus was born in Bethlehem?


But there is another text that hints there were doubts on Jesus Parentage in amongst the people of Nazareth.

When Jesus came for a visit to his home town they said:
‘Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. (Mark 6:3).

The label “son of Mary” was an unambiguous insult in a society that called children by the name of their fathers, even when the fathers had died -- sons were known as the sons of their fathers —except, of course, in the case of children whose paternity was doubted.

Several points:

1) Regarding the pregnancy, Jesus was Mary's firstborn. The first pregnancy is often less visible. She may well have appeared to be only at 6-months along when she gave birth. Furthermore, she didn't give birth in Nazareth. She gave birth in Bethlehem, and remained there for some time, followed by Egypt for some time. By the time they got back to Nazareth, it would have been too long for anyone to miss three months.

2) Regarding the "son of Mary," if I'm not mistaken, Joseph had already passed away by this time, so it may have been a reference to her because she was His only living parent at that point.

Besides, you offer no proof that it should have been an insult to be called the son of one's mother.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

That is true. It is a dubious idea being perpetrated by feminists and is being increasingly echoed by women and, surprisingly men, in the church: that women were treated badly (second class citizens, etc) in Bible times. That is not true at all.

///

GC, why do ask?

I hate to give any publicity to this, actually. I chanced upon a website that made this a point of contention against Ellen White. Have no fear that I would ever doubt her writings, but I sure wish I could refute what they say on that site. To refute it, it would have to be rock solid. Perhaps this is just one of those devilish traps in which God has allowed for some hooks to remain upon which people can hang their doubts--but it won't be me doing the doubting.

The website did allege that the evidence sought for can only be found in apocryphal writings. Maybe they're right.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Yet scripture says she was GREAT with child when she left Nazareth.
So why speculate that she wasn't "showing much"?

Luke 2:4-5 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth,..To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.



Joseph was a carpenter in Nazareth (Matt 13:55)
So Jesus grew up working with Joseph learning the carpenter trade.
We don't know when Joseph died -- we only know he was still very much alive when Jesus was 12 years old, but no longer mentioned when Jesus began His ministry. It seems very probably that sometime between those years, Jesus took over Joseph's carpenter's shop in Nazareth, because in the book of Mark, the people of Nazareth call Jesus "the carpenter".

So they would have known Joseph as the carpenter, and seen Jesus take Joseph's place.


But back to how men were identified in scripture, just read Luke chapter 3.
They are all sons of their father. That's their identity.

Matthew chapter 1 does the same, every man is the son of their father, however it also mentions four women and all four have a dubious background, so scripture makes sure to make it clear who the father was.

But then, what is even more puzzling is that both those lists are Christ's linage -- yet both go to Joseph and then to Jesus -- though people assume one is actually Mary's linage.



It also becomes rather obvious that many assumed Jesus was the son of Joseph for he is called that in several places.

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph

John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

And in a different place in Galilee the people asked:
John 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

But in Nazareth, it does appear there were doubts
It is there they acknowledge that Jesus took on Joseph's trade, but He is not called the son of Joseph.


One thing you can prove from literature --
In later years Mary was portrayed as having an illegitimate son and fabricating the virgin birth story.

It's not unreasonable at all to accept this was already brewing, with whispered rumors, and disdainful glances, in the early years in Nazareth, and came to be more widespread when the gospel claimed His was a virgin birth and made it plain Joseph was not Jesus' biological father. Those who knew Jesus was man, but rejected His claims as the Son of God, would see the rumors as truth.

For the gospel writers (Matthew) to use the virgin birth as a sign of fulfilled prophecy there had to be some EVIDENCE that this was so- known by others not just Mary and the deceased Joseph, that something out of normal wedlock had occurred.

And scripture says:
"When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child"(Matt. 1:18)
It was by the Holy Spirit -- but that is outside the normal and believed by faith. Those that "found her with child" without that faith naturally assume illegitimacy.

If a website is questioning this -- saying only Mary and then Joseph knew -- not their parents, brothers and sisters, relatives, close neighbors and friends, it is they that present the more unreasonable assumptions, if it is an assumption to believe that Christ suffered accusations of illegitimacy.

Actually, scripture DOES NOT say she was "great with child." Scripture says merely that she was pregnant. The words "with child" were the polite way of saying pregnant at the time of the translation, and the word "great" was inserted. It is not in the Greek. I have some very expensive software that gives parts of speech for every single original word and shows one-to-one correspondence to words in multiple English translations. The word "great" was simply added. You can verify this, however, with some basic Bible study tools available online, such as with the Blue Letter Bible website.

http://www.blbclassic.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=great+with+child&t=KJV

Because KJV usually italicized added words, and here it doesn't, it does make it seem as if it should really be there. But it just isn't. Feel free to verify this with any source of your choosing.



We know more than that. We know Joseph died before Jesus began His ministry. See Desire of Ages, page 145.


Biblically speaking, dedication, the father's name was inclusive of his wife. See Genesis 5:2 for the precedent there.


The verse saying Mary "was found with child" is really the best text you have provided so far. Unfortunately, it comes short of saying Jesus' legitimacy was ever publicly questioned.

I guess we only have Ellen White's say-so for that.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.