The Simple Answers… To Life’s Most Important Questions.
Bible Study Course Lesson 9 – 14
Why is this a dirty word? What is there about illegitimacy that makes this worthy of four-letter-word status? For that matter what, Biblically, IS a bastard? Obviously, the definition in Hebrews 12:8 says that being without correction makes you a bastard.
But if that were true, then literally every person whom I don’t correct is my bastard; which, as you will see before the end of this lesson, isn’t (quite) as absurd as it seems. But we’ll come back to that. First, let’s get back to the point; what makes someone a bastard?
The most common answer would probably be “being born out of wedlock”. And that’s a fine answer; but it begs another question: where is wedlock in the Bible? There is no wedding ceremony as such mentioned in the Bible; there is no certificate where, upon completion, a marriage is recognized – there is a certificate of divorcement, but not of marriage (Deuteronomy 24:1).
So if a bastard isn’t one born out of wedlock, what is he, exactly? He is one born out of his father’s house (Judges 11:1-3). See, when a baby comes out of a woman, no one can really question that he is her child. However, the inheritance – and thus, the name of the house – does not pass through the woman, but through the man.
So knowing who your mom is, while obviously meaningful, is not nearly so important as knowing, with confidence, who your father is. Because without that, you don’t know what your last name is; you have no right to an inheritance. No one to live up to, and to earn approval from.
And yet, that’s much more difficult to know for sure; because conception and birth happen nine months apart, and a lot can happen in those months. And who is to really say what man, or how many men, your mother knew around that time?
So at the end of the day, you have only your mother’s word for it – and she has many potential reasons to lie. We all instinctively know this; the subconscious awareness of your mother’s potential sluttiness – and thus, your potential bastardship – is the basis for “yo mama” jokes everywhere. It is the fear that there may be a kernel of truth to such jokes that provokes such a strong reaction to them.
Hence the value of marriage; or, more precisely, the value of a woman being a formal part of a man’s house by covenant. For knowing how jealous your dad is, if your mom was in his house at the time of your conception, you can be reasonably confident that you are, indeed, his child – because he would have chased off any other men.
ONE WITNESS
Being presumed legitimate requires only that you be born in your father’s house, where your mother has dwelt for at least nine months. While it’s always possible that something happened between your mother and the pool boy, it’s still a good bet that you are your father’s real child if you’re born in his house.
Thus, when it comes time to pass out the inheritance, no one is likely to question who your father is. You will know who he is, and thus, who you are. Not because you were born in “wedlock”, whatever that means. But because you were born in your father’s house.
As with many other things about the house, this was quite obvious to everyone just a few centuries ago, and needed no explanation; for thousands of years things have been done the same way, and only in modern times have social conventions changed so drastically as to forget the natural order of things.
Consider a medieval fief; a castle on a hill, somewhere in 13th century France, where the lord of the land dwells. Marriages were often done to seal treaties, or to create blue-blooded heirs well connected to other powerful kingdoms; and yet often these marriages were unsatisfying, for the simple reason that the lord didn’t like the lady very much, and vice versa; it was a marriage of power, not a marriage of love or even of attraction.
And thus, dalliances outside of marriage were common; which is not to say, that this was condoned; it just… happened. Men are driven by instinct to spread their seed as far and as wide as possible; and since men are beasts, that means the occasional child is going to be had by a servant girl, a harlot, or just some random girl at a bar.
And so what is to be done about the child? He has no formal father. He is, by definition, a bastard; because his mother got pregnant while not in a house, thus no one will ever know, for sure, who his father is. Thus, he is not legally his son – since we have only his mother’s word for it. Hence, he is illegitimate, from a French word meaning “not according to law”.
An illegitimate child has no reason to expect an inheritance; and yet, he is truly the son of his father; which is why the son of the harlot said to his brethren “remember also that I am your bone and your flesh” (Judges 9:2).
Thus bastard children have a claim on the title – literally, the name – of their father. They are entitled to an inheritance by blood, if only they could prove their heritage! So why can’t they? Because they only have one witness to their ancestry: the mother. And one witness isn’t enough! Deuteronomy 19:15.
In order for the child to ever be legitimate, the only other person with certain knowledge of this event must come forward… his father. He must be acknowledged by his father because there is no other way to conclusively establish his ancestry.
When the tavern wench says “John is his father”, that’s one witness. But when John says “yes, this is my son”… that’s a second witness, and thus legalizes the relationship. Now the father, for various reasons of his own, often prefers not to do this.
First, the public knowledge of his indiscretion is embarrassing; he may not have the money or time to raise another child; and the reaction of his wife is certain to bring negative consequences at home. And his legal heirs are certain to resent his diluting their inheritance with this stranger – as happened with Jephthah.
And yet sometimes the father is so impressed by this son, and/or so disgusted by his other, legitimate heirs, that he acknowledges him anyway. It is this hope that motivates most bastards to find their father, and earn his respect and love… or failing that, to kill him and his heirs and take the throne by force (half the stories in history involve this plotline).
A legitimate child, born in his father’s house, can expect his inheritance; he has nothing to fear, but also nothing to work towards. But the bastard must work for it; first, to learn who his father is; and then, to strive to earn his father’s love so that he will acknowledge him.
Now obviously, no one sets out to have an illegitimate child. It just happens when lust and opportunity collide in a tavern; or when occupying a distant village during a crusade; or, far more commonly… with maidservants who are around the castle all the time doing their job.
Think about that: a maidservant who had her lord’s child. And that’s why this is so interesting. Because technically, by all Biblical and legal definitions… Jesus was a bastard.
NOW THE BIRTH OF JESUS WAS ON THIS WISE…
Was Mary in God’s house? Hardly; she was in Joseph’s house (and not even that yet, technically – Matthew 1:18. Now had God had Jesus by, say, Anna, you could argue Jesus’ legitimacy that way (Luke 2:36-37). But Jesus was not born in the house of God; He was born in a barn, in a house of beasts.
In a different sense, He was born into the house of Joseph, or that of David; but still, not the house of God! Remember: the whole POINT of legitimacy is so that the average person can say “look! The son of Joseph!” Luke 4:22.
And yet… the Father of her child was not her husband! Everyone else assumed that, as any of us would have, but it simply wasn’t true (Luke 3:23). Was Mary the wife of God? I think not. So what was her relationship to the Baby’s Father? Ask her! Luke 1:38, 48.
Mary was God’s servant girl! How then, could her son be God’s legitimate heir? No medieval king would have acknowledged the child of the girl who did his laundry; he might have taken pity on her, and given her money to disappear; but he would not have acknowledged the child as his without a compelling reason.
So then why did God anoint Jesus as His heir above, say, the Pharisees? The Son of Mary, child of God or not, had no right to inherit above them, according to the law (Deuteronomy 21:15-17). And this verse spoke of dividing the inheritance between the sons of two wives; how much less right had the firstborn of a servant girl to the firstborn’s inheritance?
When Jesus was born, it was under, as has been said, suspiciously sinful circumstances (John 8:41, Matthew 1:18-20). Sure, Mary knew what had happened with her… but if you were Joseph, would you have believed her? Is “divine conception” really more plausible than “slut”?
It was far easier for Joseph to believe that Mary had been a little too, well, merry before their betrothal. So the true Father had to specifically acknowledge Jesus to Joseph, lest his step-father think Him a bastard (verse 20). This, plus Mary’s story, made Jesus legitimate to Joseph – two witnesses, remember!
But these were two witnesses to Joseph. They couldn’t make Him legitimate to everyone else, since Joseph’s knowledge was hearsay – sketchy hearsay at that (dreams aren’t admissible in court). So to the Pharisees and everyone else, Jesus was still a bastard.
Remember, the things in Luke 2:15-18 were widely publicized. And most people, following Occam’s razor, naturally concluded that Mary was just another fun-loving skank who made up a wild story after smoking too much hay in that manger. Can you really blame them? Would you have drawn a different conclusion in their place? Really?
And this is exactly why bastards are illegitimate; because no one witness is enough to legalize a child… a mother has too many reasons to lie, and the consequences of “believe all women” are too grave. So without the Father’s admission – not the stepfather, but the Father – a child is a bastard.
Which is why the Pharisees drew the obvious conclusion in John 8:41. This statement carries the implicit accusation “like you were”, because to them He was still a bastard under the law! Because He Himself claimed to be the son of someone (God) who wasn’t the head of the house of His mother! And without God affirming this, Jesus was by His own admission a bastard! (Psalms 116:13-16).
Which is why Jesus pointed them back to the witness of John the Baptist (John 5:31-35); and He pointed them to the witness of Moses, their father; and the witness of the Father who did the works through Him, thus approving of Him openly (John 5:34 -37).
And yet John, too, had no certain knowledge; he could only relay what a dove had told him! (John 1:32-34). So John’s evidence, while persuasive, Jesus acknowledged was inconclusive; and Moses could have been talking about anyone; and the works… well, smoke and mirrors had been done before. There was always a way to doubt, if you really wanted to find one.
THRICE A BASTARD
But it gets worse. As has been said, Mary was not God’s wife, but His servant girl; but Israel was God’s wife (Jeremiah 31:32). Which means that the children of that union were thus automatically legitimate heirs (Acts 13:46, Romans 3:1-2). The Jews, literally, were the children of the physical Kingdom of God (Matthew 8:11-12).
And yet… legitimacy doesn’t guarantee you an inheritance (Matthew 3:9-10). Because just as the legitimacy is assumed by being born in the house, so also the child’s responsibilities to his house are assumed; if he doesn’t live up to those implied obligations, the father has no obligation to give him the implied inheritance.
But by the same token, just the fact that you are a wife, doesn’t guarantee your children are automatically heirs… in particular, if you, yourself, play the harlot with other gods (Jeremiah 3:1-8), which casts doubt on the parentage of all future children.
For this, God divorced her… and the whole POINT of divorcing a woman is to signify to everyone that she and her children are no longer part of your house! (Hosea 2:2-4). So God divorced Israel, making all future children “not my people” – bastards!
Thus, Jesus, born to a rebellious Israel, was twice a bastard – the Son of a servant girl, and the Son of a divorced adulteress! But it gets worse! For the Being who became Jesus was Melchizedek; and who was Melchizedek’s father? Hebrews 7:3.
The OT Lord, the Word, had no Father and thus was, by definition, not the legitimate heir of the Father! He was simply “in the beginning WITH God” (John 1:1-3). And a friend or neighbor has no right to bear your name or inherit your goods, nor you his!
The name Melchizedek means “my king is the righteous one”. Melchizedek was the priest of the most high God; the servant of El. Not His Son! Because at that time, Melchizedek had not yet been born of God, and thus was still just a servant of God who had never HAD a father!
So you see… Jesus’ beast was a bastard; Jesus’ herd made His spirit a bastard; and Jesus’ soul, the soul of Melchizedek, was a bastard! Because none of these Beings had a legitimate Father, thus EACH ONE of them in particular had to be acknowledged in order for Him to inherit all things! (John 13:3).
LEGITIMIZING JESUS
The Father acknowledged Jesus privately, to Joseph, while He was an unborn child; a child who had not yet acquired statutes in His spirit, who had not yet had a chance to exercise His soul. So this was the acknowledgment of Jesus’ beast, when He had as yet done neither good nor evil! (Romans 9:11-13).
Naturally, as Jesus grew up, He was told the truth by His parents; and like every orphan or bastard ever, He spent His teens wondering what His real Dad was like, and seeking His approval; which is exactly what He was looking for in Luke 2:42-52!
He spent His whole life searching to show Himself approved, a workman who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), and proving that He did indeed love righteousness MORE than His fellows (Hebrews 1:9).
And after 30 years the Father finally gave Him that approval and acknowledged His spirit, saying “this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17). But read that verse carefully; what does it say? Or more importantly, what does it not say? Compare it to Matthew 17:5.
The Father deals in fact, not faith. And even at 30, Jesus had not proven, beyond all doubt, reasonable or otherwise, that He could indeed lead many sons to glory! He had only proven that He WAS like the Father, not that He could successfully teach others to ALSO be like His Father!
So at His baptism, the Father acknowledged Jesus’ ability to have a perfect spirit… His ability to please His Father… but Jesus’ soul had not yet proved itself in ruling over men! And so the Father could not yet say “hear ye Him”!
This is why at conception, God never used the word “beloved”. Because at the time, He couldn’t be sure He would be beloved! This is why at baptism, God never used the phrase “hear ye Him”; because He couldn’t be sure He WOULD be worthy of their obedience!
But by the time Matthew 17 rolled around 3-4 years later, Jesus had proved He was a fit leader, ruling in the fear of God (2 Samuel 23:3). And that’s why the third and final Earthly acknowledgement of Jesus’ ancestry was necessary; by a voice from heaven, in the presence of His disciples, which approved of Him for the third time…
Affirming that not only His beast, not only His spirit, but His soul was a worthy heir of the Father’s glory and name, and now the Father could without reservation tell all nations “this is my beloved son” (beast), “in whom I am well pleased” (spirit), “hear ye Him!” (soul).
INHERITING ABOVE YOUR ELDERS
This was a brutal disappointment to those in line to inherit them before Jesus came along (Luke 13:25-30). To be fair, they had been warned but they didn’t really believe it was possible (Matthew 3:9, to say nothing of hundreds of verses in the OT).
They didn’t understand the olive trees they themselves pruned; if they had, they’d have known that branches can be pruned; and by the same token, wild branches can be grafted in… branches from trees outside the main tree (Romans 10-11).
Branches sown by, to use a modern euphemism, the wild oats of the tree (John 10:16), which could replace the natural branches. Because legal heir or not, a father can disinherit any child who is unworthy; this is why Judah, though fourth-born, inherited above Reuben, Levi, and Simeon (Genesis 49:3-7).
When you think about it, if your own children are all nincompoops, and you have no nephews or cousins that could do any better… then rather than let any of these losers inherit your house… you’d be better off giving it all to the bastard son of a stranger… if he loves your house.
And so, if a man’s legitimate sons prove themselves to be evil, he is perfectly within his rights to disinherit every single one of them and make the son of no man, the son of a divorced harlot, and the son of a servant girl, his heir (Matthew 20:15).
Which is why Jesus, who was all of those things, obtained an inheritance above the rest of the Jews; above even the archangels (Hebrews 1:2-9). Jesus had not been born a legitimate child of God; His ancestry, in every sense, was extremely questionable. Every single one of His brethren had been born with a NAME which was BETTER than His! (Hebrews 2:7-9).
And yet because He loved righteousness more than His fellows, He was exalted above His OLDER, more LEGITIMATE, brethren – human and spirit alike! His Father legitimized Him, and by this inheritance He obtained a more excellent name than they had!
Remember, Adam was also a child of God; and a legitimate one, at that – for both of the Gods were witnesses to his creation (Genesis 1:26-28), and he was created in the Garden of Eden, a type of God’s house, and given rule over the whole Earth. There is no better proof of his legitimacy (Luke 3:38).
Yet Adam did not prove worthy to inherit above the angels, so the Father cast him out of His house, making him a bastard, despite being born legitimate! (Genesis 3:17-24). Note the specific curse: he would have to earn his own living! He would not inherit his Father’s wealth!
Because a father’s first duty is to the house. And what will become of the house, if he appoints a spoiled brat the heir? Better to exalt the fruit of a servant girl, the spawn of a harlot, even a neighbor who loves his name, than the children of his wife who care for nothing but themselves (Proverbs 17:2).
BASTARDS OF GOD
Like Jesus, we were born bastards. Whether Gentile or not, it no longer makes any difference (Galatians 3:28). We are now, all of mankind who has sinned, aliens from the Kingdom of God; strangers from the covenant of promise (Ephesians 2:11-13), castaways from Eden and thus, bastards.
God may or may not be our Father (John 8:44); but even if He were, we could not prove it. For if we knew our Father, He would have rejected us for our sins; and if our church was a whore, then we never really knew Him at all (Revelation 17:5).
So it doesn’t matter whether we, at one point, held a feeble claim to His Name; it doesn’t matter whether we had, at one time, an inheritance; we gambled it away as surely as did the prodigal son (Lamentations 5:16-22). And so far, most of us have given Him no reason to admit that we are, indeed, His children.
But those who have their name written in His book are, by definition, a legitimate part of His house no matter the circumstances of their birth! (Luke 10:20) For those written in the book are, specifically, the firstborn sons of God (Hebrews 12:23). That book makes you legitimate!
Everyone else… remains a bastard (Revelation 20:15). And make no mistake, being a bastard is a problem; one that persists for ten generations (Deuteronomy 23:2). Yet the bastard in this verse wasn’t merely born out of wedlock, he died unacknowledged by his father.
Yes, he wasn’t born in his Father’s house, which wasn’t his fault; but he also died without earning the approval of his Father, which very much was his fault! So even though this bastard calls himself a Christian, Jesus will say to him “I never knew you, depart from me” (Matthew 7:21-23).
Because they sought God their way, not His! (Romans 10:1-3). They demanded that He approve of them, but they never tried to BE the kind of children He WOULD approve of! Which is why the sons of strangers will inherit above them… sons who are of the house of the original Bastard-Turned-Firstborn-Son (Romans 9:30-33).
BASTARD HAS FOUR LETTERS
Since all of us are in the same boat, at least as far as God is concerned, then why is “bastard” such a dirty word today? Because the definition of bastard, today, is someone born without a marriage certificate. And who, in this world, has taken responsibility for presiding over marriage? The Church!
There is not a single case of the priesthood ever presiding over marriage in Bible. Not a single example where they involved themselves in the act of creating or legitimizing a marriage in any way. Yet what Christian, today, could imagine getting married without a representative of God to officiate it? Exactly.
This means that the Church – the OC-at-best, Great-Whore-at-worst Church – has taken it upon herself to decide which of God’s children are legitimate and which are not. But no mother in history has had the ability to make her children legitimate on her own!
Obviously, the Great Whore and her offspring don’t care about that. In her eyes, if you deny her authority, you deny God’s. If you are not part of a Church, you have no mother and thus you can have no father.
Thus the stigma of being called a bastard invariably supports the Mother Church’s claim be to the mediatrix of God on Earth. So there is no reason to bear a stigma for it; simply accept the unarguable fact: you’re a bastard. Which is why Lamentations 5:1-3 sums up this lesson nicely.
A bastard should not be a curse word, for it is simply a description of someone without a legal father; a child with no claim on an inheritance, with no right to bear the name of his father. I have no claim on your inheritance, nor do you have any right to correct me; thus, in a sense, I am your bastard (Hebrews 12:8 again).
The word simply means, in Hebrew, “to alienate”. So why would I care that I’m an alien to your inheritance – because I’m not your son and I don’t want or need what you have! (Ephesians 2:12). So there is absolutely nothing wrong with being an orphan nor a bastard, nor with calling Jesus one since that’s plainly what He was.
Because the word simply means that whatever you do have, you did all by yourself (Isaiah 63:5). It means Jesus had to build up His name from the beginning, from absolutely nothing. And if you can go from the gutter to the head of an empire, then you – and only you – will have made your name great.
Others the world over will envy you, and study you, and want to know how you achieved this greatness. Your name will be synonymous with success and greatness (Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.). So bastard or not, if you find yourself without a name that matters… make your name matter!
AN ADOPTED NAME
But what if there is no way you could ever do that? What if you realized that you simply don’t have what it takes to make your own name great? If you find yourself a bastard without a past or a future, you can also achieve greatness by convincing someone greater than you could ever be to adopt you – as Melchizedek did with the Father (Mark 10:18).
Adoption, to be more than a legal formality, means becoming like your foster parent – learning from them, being corrected by them, and literally changing into them! And to do that, you’d need to find a way to stop being a stranger, and become a son. But for that to have any meaning, you’d have to be remade in your father-figure’s image… or at least, in his likeness. Because that’s what a son IS! (Genesis 5:3).
Once you start to behave like me, see the world like me, act like my children would act… then you could plausibly argue that you were “flesh of my flesh, bone of my bone” – or at least, “spirit of my spirit, heart of my heart”. And then you would have a claim on my name and my inheritance!
Now Melchizedek was the Father’s “neighbor” according to John 1:1-3. He was specifically not the Father’s Son, according to Hebrews 7:3. Thus, He was a bastard – yet what was so wrong about that? Nothing, until the false Church began using it to control people.
But Melchizedek’s name was, by His very name, the name of a servant: “my king is the righteous one”. So Melchizedek’s house wasn’t as great as El’s. Thus, Melchizedek did not stand to have the glory in His own house that He could have in someone else’s house.
Which is why it matters that Melchizedek literally died and remade Himself in the image and likeness of the Father! (Philippians 2:6-10). Because to inherit the Father’s house, He had to BECOME His Son!
If the definition of bastard is simply a man with no father, no name, then it’s not really such a big problem; if a man finds himself without a name, he simply has to go out and make his name mean something (Isaiah 59:16-19).
Sadly, it’s too late for any of us to make the name for ourselves “Savior, the Anointed One” (Jesus the Christ); not only because it has already been done, but because we have already sinned, so our lives must go to pay for our own sins; they can’ t be applied to anyone else’s.
Which means that no matter the physical or spiritual legitimacy you might have been born with in this world, as you are now, God owes you nothing. There’s not a man alive who has a legitimate claim on the inheritance of the Father… on his own merits.
Yet the same idea applies as above; make your name mean something, make your Father proud of the man you’ve become, and He will be eager to acknowledge you as His son. So remake yourself into God’s image; learn to seek righteousness His way, not your own.
Because until you manage your fractions as He would, and learn to love righteousness above your fellows, He’ll have no interest in acknowledging you. And you’ll forever remain a bastard until He says to you “this is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him”.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
And yet how are we to know if He’s said that or not, if He doesn’t talk to us aloud? The Catholic Church has visible signs of her alleged marriage; huge cathedrals with God’s name on them, tens of thousands of beatified saints, billions of believers that testify to her holiness. But where is our proof?
Like Jesus, we cannot conclusively prove our heritage, and so the world believes us to be bastards, churchless orphans without even a mother! And it’s true, we have no mother that men can see… but that doesn’t mean we don’t have one (Hebrews 12:18-24).
Nor does this mean we don’t have proof of our heritage (John 13:35). Because the ekklesia is not a Church. We are a house. And unlike them, we are approved of by signs from our Father – not our mother! (2 Corinthians 12:12).
Now those signs don’t always take the form of fire from heaven, for understanding alone is a sign (Matthew 16:17), as is conduct (Exodus 31:13) and even statutes (Deuteronomy 4:5-8). And whether or not a Church believes and approves of these signs has no bearing, whatsoever, on our legitimacy.
The only thing that matters is does God acknowledge you? Mark 16:17. And how would you know if He did? I’ve already given you this answer, in about 87 different ways, in the preceding lessons; it involves becoming His disciple, His minister, His servant, His apprentice, His refugee, His… well, you get the idea.
Which leads us to the second “one verse” for this lesson – Isaiah 56:1-7. Bastards, strangers, sinners, it doesn’t matter. For even the bastard son of a stranger, if he joins himself to the Lord will have a name BETTER than the name of Sons and Daughters.
But only if you TAKE HOLD of His covenant; only if you JOIN HIS HOUSE, keeping His Sabbaths with Him in that house. Only if you are formally acknowledged by God, by Jesus, or by someone in His house with authority to acknowledge you.
Only if you become SERVANTS of the Lord in that house; then you will be brought, in time, to the holy government of the Lord. For after you have been raised in a house, God Himself will accept your burnt offerings and sacrifices in person; for His house shall be called a house of prayer for ALL people.
Yet how many millions of people quote this in Church every Sunday, yet fail to see that it teaches that everything about Church is wrong… including keeping Sunday? For this verse tells us that unless you are part of a House of God, and not a Church, you’re just a bastard.
The reason you’ve taken this long to find the true Father is that your mother, your Church, the one who thinks she is that “house of prayer”, has been lying to you about who He is. Thus, she is an evil worker, and so fitting of the symbol of a dog (Philippians 3:2, Matthew 7:6).
Which means the sad fact is… not only are you a bastard…
You’re also a son of a bitch.