[quote=Tmaque]Jesus was born in Bethlehem, not in Jerusalem.
If you read the Book of Mormon carefully enough, you will find that after a couple of hundred years of Nephite history, the expression “the land of Jerusalem” begins to be used consistently in the book to refer to the whole of Palestine where their ancestors had originated from, and not just to the city of Jerusalem.
Throughout the Bible, the word “until” is not used to imply that an action occurs after a particular point in time(like modern english). It simply states that the action continued up to a particular point in time. It has no reference to the future at all. “knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn son” doesn’t necessarily mean that he knew her after the event took place.
“Until” means “to the end of the appointed period, but not after”. The context determines how the word is to be understood. In this case it is obvious enough that the context implies that he “knew her not” until she gave birth to Jesus, meaning that afterwards did. Besides, the angel had specifically commanded Joseph to “take Mary to wife,” and that is what it means to “take someone to wife”.
In ancient Hebrew biblical culture, lawful sex what not regarded as some kind of a sinful thing. Those are the connotations that it acquired later on as the Christian church apostatized form the original teachings. In traditional Christian culture (especially Catholic culture), sex is viewed as some kind of unclean or unholy thing. A celibate life is considered preferable to a married one. Well, that may be Catholic, but certainly not biblical, and definitely not “Hebrew”. The first thing that God did after creating man is to create a female companion for him, saying, “It is not good that man should be alone” (Genesis 2:18). If it was not good then that man should be alone, it can’t be good now.
Furthermore, the NT makes it quite clear that Jesus had natural brothers and sisters or siblings, who could have only been begotten through Joseph and Mary:
55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?
3 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.
These verses make it indisputably clear that Jesus was considered to have brothers and sisters who were considered to be of the same parentage as himself—i.e. Joseph and Mary.
A few examples, there are more…
For example, in 2 Samuel 6:23 we find the line “Michal the daughter of Saul had not children until the day of her death.” Does this mean that she had children after she died?
The context determines the meaning in each case. In this case, the context clearly implies to the end of her life, which means of course that she didn’t have any children in her lifetime.
In the account of the book of Genesis of the universal flood, it is said “and the raven did not return to the ark until the water had receded from the earth” (Genesis 8:6), but it did not return even after this.
I don’t know which version of the Bible you are using, but the KJV, which is an extremely literal translation, and renders it as close to the original as possible, says it like this:
6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:
7 And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
8 Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground;
This does not support your reading. You had also got the verse number wrong, so perhaps you are not quoting it accurately. In any case, if you want to look at it that way, for every one verse you can find me to support your view, I can find you a dozen verses supporting my interpretation. Here are a few:
(Continued in the next post…)