Joseph's Genealogy

[WebersHome]

.
• 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 clearly informs us 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 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.

If we're to accept both genealogies as true, inspired, and reliable; 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.

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 just 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)
_

[jimtatertayte]

Jesus was not ever adopted and God was His only Father.
In fact your theology is contrary to His own words.(You need to forsake your theology it is full of errors)

Matthew 12:50
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven,
the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.


Matthew 23:9
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

[WebersHome]

Jesus was not ever adopted

It was essential that Joseph's name be given David's virgin-conceived grandson because the throne has always passed down to successors via men; never women.

The royal line of Davidic kings began with Solomon; so it's neither coincidence nor accident that he's in one of Joseph's genealogies. (Matt 1:6)

God was His only Father.

Mustn't omit Jesus' father David. (Luke 1:32 and Rom 1:3)
_

[jimtatertayte]

Jesus was not ever adopted

It was essential that Joseph's name be given David's virgin-conceived grandson because the throne has always passed down to successors via men; never women.

The royal line of Davidic kings began with Solomon; so it's neither coincidence nor accident that he's in one of Joseph's genealogies. (Matt 1:6)

God was His only Father.

Mustn't omit Jesus' father David. (Luke 1:32 and Rom 1:3)
_

David was not the father of Jesus. In fact there is no throne of David anymore
I am not going to argue with you over it. All this you have stated is full of errors.
I will leave you like I found you. I just wanted it on the record
or I would not have bothered with you in the first place.

[jimtatertayte]

It was essential that Joseph's name be given David's virgin-conceived grandson because the throne has always passed down to successors via men; never women.

I have changed my mind, I will debate you after all.

There is no throne of David, God destroyed it. Nor is Jesus the son of David,
for it is written that even Jesus stated to the Jews that He was not the son of David.

So I put forth the same question to you as Jesus did to them:

Matthew
Chapter 22

42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David.
43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?