So, yesterday in my Greek Exegesis class we were discussing participles which express cause.
Look at these two verses.
Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly.
I will spare you all the details of the discussion, but the portion I will highlight is in the second sentence where Matthew states "being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame." "Being" and "unwilling" are the participles.
The discussion was surrounding Matthew's usage of the term "just" or another possible rendering, "righteous." The professor said that Matthew was eluding to the fact that Joseph's "being just" or "being righteous" was imported from beyond Joseph himself.
One of my fellow students raised his hand and asked how a conclusion like that could be drawn; was it not simply possible for Joseph to be a "good guy?"
My professor replied by stating that it would not have been unrighteous or unjust for Joseph to divorce Mary publicly, which at the worst would have left Mary to be stoned and at the best would have meant she could never marry. This would not have made Joseph a "bad guy." According to the law it was the just thing to do. So this means that Matthew indicates something different when he writes about Joseph "being a just man."
Joseph's righteousness consisted of more elements than just following the law; it included grace and forgiveness focused at an individual.
Something to think about...
