The Mattai-writer states explicitly that the girl he calls Maria in his story was already μνηστευθεισης (mnesteutheises) to Yosef when she was found to be pregnant (Mattai 1-18), and the author of Lukos uses the same Greek word twice (Lukos 1:27 and Lukos 2:5) to describe her marital status. The Mattai-writer also says that this happened before συνελθειν αυτους (sunelthein autous).

• Now what exactly does the Greek term μνηστευθεισης (mnesteutheises) mean?

The "King James's Per-Version" translates it as espoused, an archaic and long-obsolete word (later Christian Per-Versions use the more modern English term betrothed") and, when the majority of Christians are told that this is the same as saying she was engaged to him, they are perfectly content to accept it. And yet Maria and Yosef are supposed to have been Hebrews living in the Galil (Galilee) in the first century, and the modern Western concept of engagement was unknown in their culture - so this pathetic, transparent explanation simply doesn't work.

From the earliest times in Hebrew culture, brides have been brought to their husbands - in fact even before there were any Hebrews, we read in B'réshit (Genesis) 2:22 that after God had separated the primitive Adam's male and female aspects and had built the female half into an independent creature, וַיְבִאֶהָ אֶל הָאָדָם va-y'vi'eha el ha-adam (He brought her to the Adam). The cultural institution of marriage then developed and at first it was just an ad hoc situation in which a couple living together came to be considered as an item after two things happened - one public and one private; B'réshit (Genesis) 24:67 (which, coincidentally, uses the same word וַיְבִאֶה ָ va-yvi'eha and he brouh her" as 2:22 - a word that is used with that spelling nowhere else in the entire Bible) says:

In later times, a Hebrew wedding came to be celebrated in two parts. In the time of the Temple, there was an interval of several weeks, or even longer, between the two ceremonies (and this is so even today among the descendants of the few ancient communities that still survive in eretz yisrael, although nowadays the majority of Hebrews in eretz yisrael, and ALL Hebrews living in hutz la'aretz - i.e. outside eretz yisrael - combine the two ceremonies and perform one immediately after the other).

The first wedding ceremony is called in Hebrew אֵירוּשִׂין (also spelt אֵירוּסִין) eirusin (and in Rabbinic writings often קִידּוּשִׁין kiddushin). This word is usually translated as "betrothal", but only because that is the closest word that exists in English; however, that word is only a very approximate equivalent of the Hebrew word: it's clear from chapter 22 of D'varim (Deuteronomy) - which deals with the law of rape - that a girl who is מְאֹרָשָׂה לְאִישׁ m'orasah l'ish (betrothed to a husband) has the status of a legally married woman... even if the act of intercourse that formalizes her status has very exceptionally been delayed either due to her menstrual cycle or for other (e.g. medical) reasons. The eirusin (or kiddushin) ceremony has three elements which are required by Hebrew law for the "betrothal" to be legally valid; they are detailed in the opening paragraph of the Mishnah treatise Kiddushin and one of these three required elements is that sexual intercourse MUST take place.

It is therefore a logical absurdity to describe a Hebrew girl as μνηστευθεισης (mnesteutheises), or "betrothed", and then to go on to claim that she is still a virgin: if she is "betrothed" she cannot still be a virgin, and if she is still a virgin, she cannot be said to be "betrothed".

Ahh, Christians gleefully retort, but Mattai says this happened before συνελθειν αυτους (sunelthein autous), which literally means before they came together - and that (they are told) means before they first had sexual intercourse! but it doesn't mean that.

The reference in Mattai to the pair coming together does not refer to sexual intercourse (although the gentile author of that book may well have thought that it does and very likely intended it to). In the first place, a newly-married Hebrew couple is required to have intercourse immediately after their eirusin (betrothal) ceremony to complete it and make it legally valid - there is a parallel to this in modern (Western) law, under which a marriage that has not been consummated can be annulled, or declared to have been null and void, from the outset - i.e. it was never a legal marriage in the first place (annulment is very different from divorce, or the dissolving of a marriage that was originally legally valid).

The Second ceremony: I mentioned earlier that the celebration of a Hebrew wedding takes place in two parts, and I mentioned the first of the two ceremonies; but so far I have not mentioned the second ceremony. What actually happens is this. There is no period of engagement in Hebrew culture: we consider an extended interval, during which a couple have made their commitment to each other public, but are not actually married yet and are therefore restricted by cultural mores from indulging in physical intimacy (or even from being alone together), to be an unacceptable temptation for them, because the instinctive biological urge to engage in sexual activity with someone you love is so strong that few people can resist it for very long (if at all). Instead, once a couple have agreed to marry, the wedding is arranged at the earliest possible opportunity and, if at all possible, immediately, but they do not start to live together right away.

Instead the wife, although legally married to her new husband, remains in her parents' home (or in her own home if she is an adult), while her husband sets about building or buying a house or apartment for them to share, and furnishing and decorating it in readiness for the day his new wife will come to live with him. He can visit her in her parents' home whenever he wants to, and may even sleep with her (providing she consents to it!) - so it is not unusual in any way for the wife to fall pregnant during this interval and, indeed, she very often does. My own mother did!! When the new home is ready and the furnishings and decorations are to the wife's liking, a second celebration is held - there is a colorful, festive procession and the wife is brought by her whole family and all her friends to the new marital home, where the joyful שֶׁבַע בְּרָכוֹת sheva b'rachot (Seven Blessings) of נִישּׂוּאִין nissu'in are sung as she enters to take up her position as queen of the house. Nissu'in literally means being taken, or being married.

In practice, though, it is recognized that some people are wealthier than others and, sadly, some are very poor indeed. A bride should not be humiliated on her wedding day - in fact, the Rabbis taught that nobody should ever be humiliated in public (the Hebrew term they used for publicly humiliating someone is מַלְבִּין פְּנֵי חֲבֵרוֹ בָּרַבִּים mal 'bin p'nei haveiro barabbim, or literally "whitening his face" in public, and this is considered as equivalent to "shedding blood" - in a very real sense, because the blood drains from a person's face when he is humiliated and it turns white). For this reason, at a very early stage in Hebrew history (certainly in Scriptural times), the "home-bringing" procession would bring the bride to a ceremonial canopy which was usually erected in the town's market-square or in the grounds of the beit k'neset (prayer house), symbolically representing the marital home, rather than to the actual home (so that poor people should not be embarrassed and humiliated by the modest nature of their house or apartment). The bridal canopy is called in Hebrew a חֻפָּה huppah, and to this very day the Hebrew marriage ceremony is performed under a huppah. Several Scriptural references, such as that to יֵצֵא חָתָן מֵחֶדְרוֹ וְכַלָּה מֵחֻפָּתָהּ "a bridegroom emerging from his chamber and a bride from her huppah" (Yo'el 2:16) and כְּ7ָתָן יֹצֵא מֵחֻפָּתוֹ "like a bridegroom emerging from his huppah" (Tehillim 19:6), testify to how ancient this practice is.

There can be no doubt that the term συνελθειν αυτους (sunelthein autous) or coming together, used in Mattai 1-18, is in fact a reference to the traditional Hebrew huppah ceremony and does not refer to sexual intercourse at all.