Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is Joseph the father of Jesus ?

  1. Jun 3, 2003 #1
    Joseph did not sleep with Mary when she got the first pregnancy of Jesus. Joseph did not contribute anything into the body of Mary to make her pregnant. But he married her just after she got pregnant by the holy spirit , according to bible.
    But Jesus was born into his family, and he must have called him father/papa since young. Anyway, Joseph is not the fleshy father of Jesus, not like our fathers to us.

    In this way, we may say Jesus is the adopted son of Joseph, but born by his wife - strange!
    Eventually, who is the earthly father of Jesus? Nobody , right?
    Is this a shame in ancient jewish society? Yes!
    What can best be done to cover this shame? You guess ?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 3, 2003 #2
    assuming Joseph is the DNA-decendent of king David, so, he has royal blood.
    and, jesus is not the fleshy son of joseph, then, how can the gospel authors claim that jesus is the decendent of king David, shall inherit the throne?

    as an illegitimate son, it is natural to cover his shame by claiming he is son of king, and that's not enough, he claimed he is son of god.
  4. Jun 3, 2003 #3
    I found my mind's logic totally screwed up by christian's faith.
    Believing the entire story of bible, is equivalent to believe the myth of Chinese that there are men on the moon.
  5. Jun 3, 2003 #4
    If Jesus' DNA-father is not Joseph, how can he be a Jews ?

    Christians, please answer this simple question.
  6. Jun 3, 2003 #5

    Mary could be descended from David.

    However, this is probably just another example of a contradiction in the bible.
  7. Jun 3, 2003 #6
    i don't see how you come to the conclusion that the logical move would be to call yourself the son of god... the logical move would be to just say joseph was his father, nobody else would know unless it was brought up by mary or jesus. if jesus wasn't born of god i have no doubt mary would have been stoned (or at least not get married to joseph), however there isn't historical proof that jesus actually lived (although i should mention jesus skeptics just refer to every mention in antiquities as interpolations -- seemingly without a very good reason).

    as for the davidic ancestory. note in those times jesus would be mostly known as "jesus the son of joseph" and joseph was said to be a decendant of david. also if you read some of the verses saying the messiah will be from davids family you'll notice the verses are very vague (ie. jeremiah 33:15 - In those days and at that time
    I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David's line;
    he will do what is just and right in the land.). now ask yourself, when a adopted child recieves his adoptive parents last name, is he considered a part of the family?

    and how can he be a jew? please, it's not that hard to figure out...
  8. Nov 8, 2003 #7
    How was Jesus a Jew?

    What????? That doesn't even make sense that one could ask that. Apparently someone doesn't understand that Jewish is not a RACE. It is a religion and a heritage. NOT A RACE!!!! If you're asking about Jesus's race in today's terms, well, he would be determined to be white. If we use the term "Arab" to denote anyone with middle eastern genealogy, then Jesus was an Arab because he lived in an Arab country. NOT A MUSLIM country, an ARAB country. The definitions of what is arab, white, jew, muslim, etc.. has been so smudge in the last few years, that it's no wonder so many people get confused.
    If Jesus was not Joseph's biological son, and I don't know if he was, I wasn't there, then Jesus cannot be a decendant of David. He could be an Heir, but not a Decendant. In order for him to be a decendant of David, He would have had to have been the biological son of Joseph. But, that Mary had concieved Jesus out of wedlock, and in a way that no one would have believed if they told them(without having physical intercourse), had to be hidden. To concieve a child out of wedlock would have made them all criminals. Social outcasts. Do you seriously believe that anyone would have believed them if they had told people, "oh, yeah, the Holy Spirit came upon me and got me pregnant." They would have looked at her cockeyed, and stoned her to death. HOWEVER, it is TODAYS Revised English versions that say specifically that Mary had never had sex with anyone, including Joseph, until after Jesus was born. Original, 17th century and earlier versions of the Bible do not even elude to this. Not even by the furthest stretch of interpretation of King James, Elizabethan, and earlier English. They only state that Mary was a virgin when she concieved Jesus. It does not say that she remained a virgin after she concieved him. So, that could be interpereted as she was a 14 year old girl who had never had sex before, and got pregnant the first time she had sex.
    To say that Mary remained a Virgin and therefore sinless after the birth of Christ, is to say that sex within a marriage is a sin. Joseph could have very well been Jesus true biological father. That God chose to not condemn her for being pregnant out of wedlock would single her out as special to Him, would it not?
  9. Nov 9, 2003 #8


    User Avatar

    mary can also be shown to be from the Davidic lineage. Mary's lineage would be shown in Luke. Just a FYI.
  10. Nov 10, 2003 #9

    Yes, her lineage is found there. However, Decendancy in those days was not traced down female lines, it was the pedigree. There are several contradictions throughtout the Bible. But does this mean that one rules out the other? Surely, one version has to be the truer over the other. The only other possiblility is that neither is true. I, as a Christian, personally do not think that it is for US to decide which is true and which is not. And, as a Christian, we will never know, until judgement, what is fact and what is not. That is not what faith is. Faith is not about fact and proof. Faith is believing DESPITE fact and proof. Would Joseph being Jesus' biological father change that he was the Messiah? No. No where can you find the definition of "Messiah" to mean that person has to have been concieved without a physical father. Personally, I do believe that there is a Possibility that his un-earthly conception was embelished for the purpose of making it seem more LIKELY and more BELIEVEABLE, a sort of Proof that Jesus was the Messiah. If his birth was a miracle that trancended all miracles, then how could any say He wasn't the Messiah? God does not require that we believe that Jesus had not a physical biological father in order for us to believe Jesus was the Messiah, and therefore be Christians. Only that we believe that he was the Messiah.
    Just to make one point here. If we are to accept that Jesus' biological decendancy to David is valid because his Mother was a decendant of David, then we must also apply that to Islam and Muhammed, who is the decendant of Ishmael, whose two daughters married Esau. Ismael's decendants were the inheritants of Edom. Most Christians are not open to this idea, because they do not know what Islam's claim to Abraham and later to King David is. Or they chose to ignore it because to acknowledge this, would not serve the Christian purpose. This fact, however, does not invalidate Christianity, or Islam, or Judiasm. Abraham was promised that from his sons would come great nationS(plural). Not A great Nation. Which brings me back to the Point of Joseph being Jesus' biological father. Even Islam accepts that Jesus was concieved by the Holy Spirit and did not have a physical biological father. That would seem to, in the least, SUPPORT our Christian claim to that point. Generally, when you have two people telling the same story, especailly when those two people are not in Kahoots with each other, the story then must be true. In the end, I think we all have to agree that WE do not know. The only people who ever KNEW for sure if Joseph was his father, were God, Mary, and Joseph. And the only people who KNEW for sure if Jesus even had a biological father were Mary and God. It is Not for us to KNOW these things. These things are trivial to whether or not Jesus was God's Chosen Messiah. And that point is a matter of opinion, and not a matter of Right or Wrong, Good versus Evil.
  11. Nov 10, 2003 #10
    Here is an interesting project.

    Get yourself a genealogy family tree program, such as Personal Ancestral File (free from FamilySearch.org)

    Then, take out your Bible, and book by book, chapter by chapter, enter the names given. When you have finished, check the relationship of everyone to everyone else. I think you'll find something that at first will confuse you. But as you study this family tree more closely, it will become more clear. It might even change your understanding of your own Faith and what you have been taught.
  12. Nov 13, 2003 #11


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    According to scripture, Jesus was a man like us in all things but sin. So in particular he had a full set of genes. Every normal set of human genes has paired alleles from the father and the mother, except in the Y chromosome. Where did Jesus get his "father" alleles?

    Why they must have been created by the Holy Spirit, right? And whose genes do you suppose the Holy Spirit miraculously copied? "Joseph was his earthly father".
  13. Nov 15, 2003 #12


    User Avatar

    It's true that the lineage was always traced by the male, but there were also ways to trace the women's lineage through their fathers. When reviewing the genealogies in Mathew and Luke you will note several differences. Luke follows strict Jewish rules for lineage, whereas Mathew omits and mentions women. We'll leave the reasons for that for another thread. In regards to Mary there are a few important things to remember. The rules followed for marriage were outlined in numbers 36. The laws and practices of the time include laws against intermarriage between tribes by women who might have an inheritance, the inheritance was to be kept in the tribe.
    In regards to Luke, we can tell by the missing definative article (the) in front of joseph that what we are actually reading is the genealogy of Mary (miriam) through her father Heli. This can also be seen in the Hagigah 2:4 where Heli is shown to be the father of Miriam.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook