Odë:hgöd
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2020
- Messages
- 1,538
- Age
- 80
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
.
• Matt 1:18-20 . . Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His mother Mary
had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with
child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man, and not
wanting to disgrace her, desired to put her away secretly. But when he had considered
this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying: Joseph, son of
David, etc, etc.
That passage confirms that Joseph was related to David. Our next step won't be so
easy as it will require a bit of sleuthing; and we have to do this so that anybody can
follow it rather than only seminary professors.
««« »»»
I've compared the language of the genealogies given by Matthew and Luke in several
different Bibles-- Catholic and Protestant, and even the Jehovah's Witnesses --in every
version both genealogies are Joseph's; which is problematic because it means that
Joseph had a father leading back to Solomon, and another father leading back to
Solomon's brother Nathan.
It's been suggested-- with some merit --that Joseph was Heli's son-in-law rather than his
progeny; which would then indicate that the genealogy in Luke is actually Heli's; and
consequently that of Joseph's wife Mary.
Referring to a son-in-law as "son" is consistent with cultural mores, and seeing as how
Jesus needs a biological link to David in order to qualify as a bona fide candidate for his
throne; then Luke's genealogy becomes valuable for that purpose.
If we're to accept a straight-forward interpretation of Luke's genealogy; then I think we
have to concede the possibility that one of Joseph's fathers was via birth and one was
via adoption. Fortunately the Bible gives us two precedents for this situation, which, if
applicable, spares us the trouble of twisting Luke 3:23 to say that it's Mary's genealogy
instead of Joseph's.
It's kind of weird for kin to adopt each other's children, but Jacob did that very thing with
his two grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim in Gen 48:5-6.
Manasseh and Ephraim are one example. Another is located in the book of Ruth where
a boy ends up with two fathers: one by birth and one by adoption.
There's a law in the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God regarding men
who die leaving behind no son to perpetuate their name. The man's widow is required to
seek out the deceased husband's nearest unattached male kin to remarry. Their first
son from the union is to be reckoned her deceased husband's posterity. i.e. his heir.
Long story short, Ruth got together with a man named Boaz and they produced a little
guy named Obed. His family history is interesting because Obed is Boaz's paternal son
while Elimelech's adopted son: two fathers of the same boy.
Obed was an important kid because anon he became the father of David, from whom
came not only Joseph, but also Christ. (Rom 1:3)
FAQ: If Joseph wasn't Jesus' natural father, then how was the lad his son?
A: Same as above: via adoption. When it came time to circumcise the boy in accord
with the law of the covenant; Joseph stood with Mary to name her baby; just as he was
instructed to do (Matt 1:21-25, Luke 2:21). From that point on, Jesus was known as
Joseph's son-- not only by people who knew the family, but by his mother too. (Matt
13:55, Luke 2:41-48, John 1:45, and John 6:42)
_
• Matt 1:18-20 . . Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His mother Mary
had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with
child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man, and not
wanting to disgrace her, desired to put her away secretly. But when he had considered
this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying: Joseph, son of
David, etc, etc.
That passage confirms that Joseph was related to David. Our next step won't be so
easy as it will require a bit of sleuthing; and we have to do this so that anybody can
follow it rather than only seminary professors.
««« »»»
I've compared the language of the genealogies given by Matthew and Luke in several
different Bibles-- Catholic and Protestant, and even the Jehovah's Witnesses --in every
version both genealogies are Joseph's; which is problematic because it means that
Joseph had a father leading back to Solomon, and another father leading back to
Solomon's brother Nathan.
It's been suggested-- with some merit --that Joseph was Heli's son-in-law rather than his
progeny; which would then indicate that the genealogy in Luke is actually Heli's; and
consequently that of Joseph's wife Mary.
Referring to a son-in-law as "son" is consistent with cultural mores, and seeing as how
Jesus needs a biological link to David in order to qualify as a bona fide candidate for his
throne; then Luke's genealogy becomes valuable for that purpose.
If we're to accept a straight-forward interpretation of Luke's genealogy; then I think we
have to concede the possibility that one of Joseph's fathers was via birth and one was
via adoption. Fortunately the Bible gives us two precedents for this situation, which, if
applicable, spares us the trouble of twisting Luke 3:23 to say that it's Mary's genealogy
instead of Joseph's.
It's kind of weird for kin to adopt each other's children, but Jacob did that very thing with
his two grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim in Gen 48:5-6.
Manasseh and Ephraim are one example. Another is located in the book of Ruth where
a boy ends up with two fathers: one by birth and one by adoption.
There's a law in the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God regarding men
who die leaving behind no son to perpetuate their name. The man's widow is required to
seek out the deceased husband's nearest unattached male kin to remarry. Their first
son from the union is to be reckoned her deceased husband's posterity. i.e. his heir.
Long story short, Ruth got together with a man named Boaz and they produced a little
guy named Obed. His family history is interesting because Obed is Boaz's paternal son
while Elimelech's adopted son: two fathers of the same boy.
Obed was an important kid because anon he became the father of David, from whom
came not only Joseph, but also Christ. (Rom 1:3)
FAQ: If Joseph wasn't Jesus' natural father, then how was the lad his son?
A: Same as above: via adoption. When it came time to circumcise the boy in accord
with the law of the covenant; Joseph stood with Mary to name her baby; just as he was
instructed to do (Matt 1:21-25, Luke 2:21). From that point on, Jesus was known as
Joseph's son-- not only by people who knew the family, but by his mother too. (Matt
13:55, Luke 2:41-48, John 1:45, and John 6:42)
_
Last edited:
