Basic HTML Version
that Lev i (Ma tthew) would have fol–
lowed him to J esus' ho use than to
his own.
Private Cleanliness
In spite of the contrary witness of
bíblica ! and secu lar his tory, sorne
few s t ill cling to the ludicrous view
that Jesus lived the life of a dirty,
grubby vagabond who a lmost never
bathed and cleaned u p.
During the account of the firs t
New Tes tame n t passove r (com–
monly called the " Lord's Supper"),
Jesus washed his disciples' fee t, set–
ting a d ee ply spiritua l example for
all Christians. (See John
13: 1-17.)
Wh en it was Peter 's turn , he pro–
tes ted at first , and then went to the
o th er extreme of wanting his whole
body to be washed. In verse lO,
Jes us sa id: " He that is washed
[bathed] needeth not save to wash
his feet , but is clean every whit. ..."
He re it is o bvio us that Jesus Chrisl
and his discip les had bathed prior lo
the ir meal, and that only lheir feet
were dirty, since they wore sandals
in that day.
W. F. A lbright's book ,
The Ar–
chaeology of Palesline,
adds this
particular piece of knowledge: " An–
other point to be remembered is
tha t the common people of an an–
cient Jewi sh v illage we re much
cleaner thao the inha bita nts of a na–
live village a generation ago. Then
people washed lheir hand s befare
eating, instead ofwaiti.ng until after–
wa rds if they washed them a t all.
[So rne of the Pharisees made a fool–
ish ritua l out of wash ing their ha nds
up to the ir elbows.] Then the prac–
tice o f taking frequent baths, or at
least of partia l ba thing, was im–
poscd by their law on a ll J ews, while
G reek habits of bathing the en tire
body mus t have pe netrated far
down through the socia l strata of
th e d ay. These are o nly illus trations
of th e relatively h igh leve! of public
and prívate cleanliness which then
existed ..." (pp.
2 15-2 16).
Jesus a Taxpayer?
Jes us not only owned a home and
was a good exam ple of persona l hy–
giene, but was also a law-abiding
laxpaye r. In Matthew
22: 15-22
C hrist pla in ly sa id it was lawful to
pay tribute (taxes) and to render
unto Caesar the things that a re Cae–
sar's (cf. Rom.
13:7).
Why would anyon e pay taxes? He
eithe r had an income, owned prop–
erty, or botb. Notice th is example:
"And when they were come to Ca–
pe rnaum, t hey that received tr ibute
mo ney [tax money] carne lo Peter.
and said, Doth not your master pay
tribute? He saith,
Yes."
(See Matt.
17:24-25.)
A Family Man
Many find it very difficu lt lo accep t
the fact tha t J esus had real bro thers
and s is ters.
lt
has seemed importan t
to the architects of religious ph iloso–
phy over the centuries tha t Ma ry
sho uld remain virginal througho ut
life - thus somehow superior to the
average woman. The Bible
prove~
th at Mary fulfi iJed the comple te role
of a wife to Joseph and that she
bore at leas t seven child ren. The
Bible exa l ts the state of marriage,
no t celibacy - for e ither sex. Salva–
tion comes as a resu lt of a spiritual
re latio nship with G od , which is lik–
ened to a
marriage contrae/
in the
Bible. Ch rist's relatio nsh ip to th e
church is said to be like that of a
close, loving marriage (Ephesians
5:2 1-33).
Thus, it in no way diminishes a
C hris tian 's !ove, admiration, and re–
spect for Mary's example - in no
manner sullies a wo nderful spiritu a l
record during her phys ical life - to
admit the clearly proven fact that
Ma ry was a total woman: a loving
and dutifu l wife and a thoroughly
competen! mother.
There is proof that Ma ry was a
complete woman in every respect.
Notice a very clear-cut scripture.
"And she [M ary] bro ught forth her
Jesus was not a broke, itineran t preacher-type who
traveled around from town to town banging on doors and
begging people to believe on him. During his ministry, he
never embarked on a "soul-winning" campaign
designed to save the world then.
30
firstborn
son ..." (Luke
2:7) .
The
hard fact tha t Jesus was
Mary'sfirst–
born
(G reek,
prototokon,
meaning
the firstborn among o ther ch ildren)
o ught to tell u s that other child ren
fo llowed. The Greek word for an
"only child" is
monogenes.
(See us–
age in Luke
7:
12;
8:42; 9:38.)
The
New Testament writers knew the
difference between a "firs tborn" and
an "only child."
T he truth is that Joseph and Mary
went on to have a large fami ly by
today's Wes tern s tandards- which
is clearly evident from Matthew
13:54-56:
"And when he [J esus] was
come in to hi s own coun try, he
taught them in their synagogue. in–
somuch that they were astonishcd,
a nd sa id .... Is not thi s the carpen–
ter's son? is not his mother ca ll ed
Ma ry? a nd
his brethren,
James, a nd
Joses, and Simon , and Judas
(J
ude]?
And his s is ters [plural]. are they no t
all with us?" So, by the ve ry least
reckoning, Ma ry gave birth to fi ve
sons a nd two daughters.
The age-old argument that Jesus'
brothers a nd sisters were rea lly his
discipl es, being his bre thren only in
the figu ra ti ve sense, is rejected out
of hand. The brothers a re
specifi–
cally named
in
the account, a nd
J esus certa in ly had no female
apostles. Search t he list of the
apostles. and you will never find one
na med Joses.
Jo hn 2: 12 is very p la in in this re–
ga rd. ' 'After this he went down to
Capernaum, he, and bis mother,
and his b re t h ren, and
his dis–
ciples.
...
" Here the biblica l account
written by Jo hn shows that his dis–
ciples a nd his "bret hren" were
lwo
different,
distinct groups of people.
Further, in Matthew
12;46-50
we
are plainly told tha t the disciples
we re inside the house while the
othe r family members were ou ts ide
(cf. Jo hn
7:3-1
O; Acts 1:
13-14).
Note the particulars: "While he
yet talked to the people, behold, his
mother a nd his brethren stood with-
The
PLAIN TRUTH October 1976
o
1
\