<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Angels with Bolt Cutters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/</link>
	<description>Husband, Father, Author, Speaker and child of God</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:07:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnneLangBundy</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3451</link>
		<dc:creator>AnneLangBundy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 18:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3451</guid>
		<description>I really should be doing other things, but just can&#039;t resist ...

Whether it was general knowledge or not before Mary lived with Joseph, it would be plenty evident at some point that pregnancy occurred before it should have.

In Jewish culture, it would have been almost unthinkable for Joseph to assume paternity for a child that wasn&#039;t his, absent some type of bribery. So once he took Mary home, everyone would believe Jesus to be his son. (Interesting ramnifications for his own firstborn son. But I digress.) Noteworthy is that the Jews repeatedly insinuate in John 8 that Jesus was of illegitimate birth. So I would guess some rumors persisted of question over Jesus&#039; paternity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really should be doing other things, but just can&#039;t resist &#8230;</p>
<p>Whether it was general knowledge or not before Mary lived with Joseph, it would be plenty evident at some point that pregnancy occurred before it should have.</p>
<p>In Jewish culture, it would have been almost unthinkable for Joseph to assume paternity for a child that wasn&#039;t his, absent some type of bribery. So once he took Mary home, everyone would believe Jesus to be his son. (Interesting ramnifications for his own firstborn son. But I digress.) Noteworthy is that the Jews repeatedly insinuate in John 8 that Jesus was of illegitimate birth. So I would guess some rumors persisted of question over Jesus&#039; paternity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter_P</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3450</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter_P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3450</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re welcome!

Merry Christmas!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#039;re welcome!</p>
<p>Merry Christmas!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter_P</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3449</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter_P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:31:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3449</guid>
		<description>The bible narrative doesn&#039;t explicitly suggest that it was general knowledge that she was pregnant before he &quot;took her into his home as his wife&quot;. It says she was &quot;found to be pregnant&quot; (NIV) but that doesn&#039;t necessarily mean that everyone knew.

Once she was in his home &quot;as his wife&quot; intimacy would have been expected. WE know that there was no intimacy, but nothing in the narrative suggests that anyone else knew they weren&#039;t doing the deed.

The fact that it doesn&#039;t seem that everyone knew she was pregnant before she moved in as his wife and the fact that he probably kept it quiet that they weren&#039;t being intimate led me to think that his friends would have had no reason to think that the child was anything but his.

I&#039;m happy to be wrong though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The bible narrative doesn&#039;t explicitly suggest that it was general knowledge that she was pregnant before he &quot;took her into his home as his wife&quot;. It says she was &quot;found to be pregnant&quot; (NIV) but that doesn&#039;t necessarily mean that everyone knew.</p>
<p>Once she was in his home &quot;as his wife&quot; intimacy would have been expected. WE know that there was no intimacy, but nothing in the narrative suggests that anyone else knew they weren&#039;t doing the deed.</p>
<p>The fact that it doesn&#039;t seem that everyone knew she was pregnant before she moved in as his wife and the fact that he probably kept it quiet that they weren&#039;t being intimate led me to think that his friends would have had no reason to think that the child was anything but his.</p>
<p>I&#039;m happy to be wrong though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter_P</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3442</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter_P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3442</guid>
		<description>You just never know, Helen.... :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You just never know, Helen&#8230;. <img src='http://peterpollock.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: katdish</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3448</link>
		<dc:creator>katdish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:28:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3448</guid>
		<description>Blasphemy! Snort! Just kidding. That was fun. Thanks, Peter and Merry Christmas!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blasphemy! Snort! Just kidding. That was fun. Thanks, Peter and Merry Christmas!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnneLangBundy</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3447</link>
		<dc:creator>AnneLangBundy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 23:17:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3447</guid>
		<description>Betrothals lasted a year or more. There was no physical intimacy during the betrothal period. Three explainations for pregnancy during betrothal were Mary&#039;s infidelity, rape, or Joseph had failed to behave honorably. The latter two were a smear to Joseph.

If there had been a wedding before the pregnancy became known, then Joseph would have been intimate with Mary. Scripture is clear that there was no intimacy until after Jesus&#039; birth. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born, in fulfillment of Scripture.

A little known detail of the wedding ceremony was that the celebration did not begin until the groom announced to the guests that the marriage had been physically consummated. (No pressure on the bride, eh?) Also, AFTER the angel spoke with him, Joseph took Mary into his home. There might have been a wedding at that point, but it was after knowledge of the pregnancy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Betrothals lasted a year or more. There was no physical intimacy during the betrothal period. Three explainations for pregnancy during betrothal were Mary&#039;s infidelity, rape, or Joseph had failed to behave honorably. The latter two were a smear to Joseph.</p>
<p>If there had been a wedding before the pregnancy became known, then Joseph would have been intimate with Mary. Scripture is clear that there was no intimacy until after Jesus&#039; birth. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born, in fulfillment of Scripture.</p>
<p>A little known detail of the wedding ceremony was that the celebration did not begin until the groom announced to the guests that the marriage had been physically consummated. (No pressure on the bride, eh?) Also, AFTER the angel spoke with him, Joseph took Mary into his home. There might have been a wedding at that point, but it was after knowledge of the pregnancy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter_P</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3446</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter_P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:54:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3446</guid>
		<description>Do you think she let everyone else know she was pregnant right away?

She wouldn&#039;t have begun to show for a few months, plenty of time for the wedding to happen and people not question the timing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you think she let everyone else know she was pregnant right away?</p>
<p>She wouldn&#039;t have begun to show for a few months, plenty of time for the wedding to happen and people not question the timing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnneLangBundy</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3445</link>
		<dc:creator>AnneLangBundy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:23:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3445</guid>
		<description>Ah, Peter. You wrote one awesome tale there. Had me smiling right from start to finish.

However, I also caught that you say Mary was discovered pregnant &quot;after&quot; the wedding? Huh? She was discovered pregnant after the betrothal, BEFORE the wedding. There was certainly no joking going on.

I can&#039;t help mention this because Joseph is one of the Bible heroes I most admire. He not only sought to protect Mary when he thought her unfaithful to him, but he then brought her home immediately without being intimate with her. How many men are capable of either?

Not that I mention this to take anything away from Gabriel. I look forward to meeting both heroes. You too, for that matter. :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, Peter. You wrote one awesome tale there. Had me smiling right from start to finish.</p>
<p>However, I also caught that you say Mary was discovered pregnant &quot;after&quot; the wedding? Huh? She was discovered pregnant after the betrothal, BEFORE the wedding. There was certainly no joking going on.</p>
<p>I can&#039;t help mention this because Joseph is one of the Bible heroes I most admire. He not only sought to protect Mary when he thought her unfaithful to him, but he then brought her home immediately without being intimate with her. How many men are capable of either?</p>
<p>Not that I mention this to take anything away from Gabriel. I look forward to meeting both heroes. You too, for that matter. <img src='http://peterpollock.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter_P</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3444</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter_P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 20:20:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3444</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve not read this Max Lucado book you guys are talking about... in fact I may have only read one Lucado book in my life!

It makes me want to read it though!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve not read this Max Lucado book you guys are talking about&#8230; in fact I may have only read one Lucado book in my life!</p>
<p>It makes me want to read it though!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jojoagot</title>
		<link>http://peterpollock.com/2009/12/angels-with-bolt-cutters/comment-page-1/#comment-3443</link>
		<dc:creator>jojoagot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 19:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.hafchurch.org/peter/?p=1846#comment-3443</guid>
		<description>I was wondering why the way you narrated the story sounded familiar until Doug mentioned Max Lucado. I agree with him. Great post Peter, I was smiling when I read it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was wondering why the way you narrated the story sounded familiar until Doug mentioned Max Lucado. I agree with him. Great post Peter, I was smiling when I read it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

