Why doesn't Joseph get celebrated like Mary?
- Thread starter jsupop33
- Start date
bluedog
"Leader of Kings"
Nah that has absolutely nothing to do with going on now. You're talking about something that happen thousands of years ago....are you serious?
The devalue of fatherhood came with parsing the word of God to fit a sexist agenda while at the same time making it Look like they aren't sexist.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 2
jsupop33
Loyalty & Respect
I should have added some space in my original post. I was trying to say that was Joseph did was honorable. He raised a kid that technically was not his after finding out his wife to be was pregnant.
I think the reason that we don't celebrate Joseph is related to the devaluation of fatherhood.
dacontinent
Preacher
I guess it depends on which circles you travel in. Every teacher that I have ever heard has commended Joseph. Now, the discrepancy between how much honor is given to Mary usually boils down to nothing being said about Joseph after he and Mary return to Jerusalem to find Jesus in discussions in doing the Father's business. Mary we see later with her children, at the cross, and in the upper room at Pentecost.
JayRob
TigaPaw
Hahaha, Joseph should be celebrated?! I think just the opposite. The man lived a lie. He was not the sperm donor, yet he gave the impression to the community that he was the actual "father". He lived a lie.
He had no ties to Jesus except in providing food and shelter. There were NO blood ties whatsoever. He was basically forced to be the father of a child he KNEW wasn't his.
As far as fatherhood is concerned, that goes back to the impact of slavery. The slave master basically neutered the male and placed the female as the head of the house.
The economy also plays a major role.
In addition to that, the U.S. government supported the breakdown of the family in the Black community by stating that if a woman wanted to receive government assistance, SHE COULD NOT HAVE A MAN IN THE HOME, even if he was the father or guess what would happen? She and her children would get evicted and cut off from food stamps, WIC, etc.
Instead of the government doing just the opposite, it mandated that the man NOT be in the home. That's been going on for at least the past 40 years.
With all that said, this still doesn't excuse the man from doing his utmost to provide for his family and/or children. Unfortunately, many fathers have failed and ARE failing at this.
He had no ties to Jesus except in providing food and shelter. There were NO blood ties whatsoever. He was basically forced to be the father of a child he KNEW wasn't his.
As far as fatherhood is concerned, that goes back to the impact of slavery. The slave master basically neutered the male and placed the female as the head of the house.
The economy also plays a major role.
In addition to that, the U.S. government supported the breakdown of the family in the Black community by stating that if a woman wanted to receive government assistance, SHE COULD NOT HAVE A MAN IN THE HOME, even if he was the father or guess what would happen? She and her children would get evicted and cut off from food stamps, WIC, etc.
Instead of the government doing just the opposite, it mandated that the man NOT be in the home. That's been going on for at least the past 40 years.
With all that said, this still doesn't excuse the man from doing his utmost to provide for his family and/or children. Unfortunately, many fathers have failed and ARE failing at this.
96lioness
QUEEN LIONESS!!!
Exactly! Or I'd put it this way, it all depends on what denomination a person is. Catholics "celebrate" Joseph like they "celebrate" Mary. Scripture tells us (in the Old Testament) long before Jesus was born that the Saviour would come from the House of David (family and descendants of King David). Joseph and his family were the descendants of King David, which could possibly be a reason why he (Joseph) is "celebrated". Joseph is considered by Christians and Believers to have come from a noble lineage and noble house.
Last edited:
96lioness
QUEEN LIONESS!!!
With all due respect, your posts make it seem as if Mary went out and slept with some random man. She didn' just end up "pregnant by someone else"; it was the Holy Spirit (God) that came upon her; the child she carried was God's, not some ordinary man. And this was prophesied in the book of Isaiah before Jesus came to Earth that The Messiah would be born of a virgin woman. As for Joseph, you have to remember that when learned of Mary's pregnancy, which wasn't a secret, he thought her to be dishonorable and didn't want to marry her. His thought process was like yours (woman pregnant before marriage by someone else), which is a natural human response. It was the Lord who had to reveal to him (Joseph) the true Origin of Mary's pregnancy. Joseph did love Mary, and he loved God and was obedient in taking her to be his wife, which is why "he raised a kid that technically was not his". It had nothing to do with being commendable or honorable, more like being faithful and obedient.
Has nothing to do with fatherhood or how society has chosen to value or devalue fatherhood.
jsupop33
Loyalty & Respect
Don't take it like that. I am giving Joseph praise. Yes, he trusted in God when most men would have bolted. I am not saying Mary is bad either. I am saying, it is a tough pill to swallow if your fiance turns up pregnant during your engagement. Yet, I have not heard Joseph mentioned in church nearly as much as I have heard Mary's name mentioned.
JagHammer
Senior Troll
He not mentioned much at all in the Bible in general. An idea that I have is how does Jesus fall in with the line of David, if Joseph is not his biological father?
96lioness
QUEEN LIONESS!!!
Not really, considering (again) this was no ordinary pregnancy and the baby was no ordinary baby. If you take into consideration that Joseph was informed of how Mary conceived and how Joseph was a man of faith, it's really not that difficult to imagine. Also, if you (again) take into consideration that Mary never slept with any man before Jesus was born, that isn't such "a hard pill to swallow". You have to look at this from a transformed and renewed mind and remember that Scripture foretold of Jesus' conception.
As far as Joseph being mentioned in church, he (Joseph) is not mentioned after the birth of Jesus except (as Dacon stated) when Mary stated to Jesus (as a boy) that "your father and I"....after they had been searching for Jesus when they returned for the Passover Feast. Mary is mentioned in the Bible because she was present at the wedding at Cana and present at the time of Jesus' death on the Cross. Joseph is also given a reference in the Gospels when Jesus (fully grown) returned to his home to preach in the synagouges (the crowd referred to him as "the carepenter's son"); it strongly suggested by these scriptures that Joseph died before Jesus' adulthood because 1) during those times, a wife seldom travelled to occasions (such as a wedding) unless accompanied by her husband, 2) when He returned to His home, Jesus is referred to as "Mary's son"; in those times, children (especially sons) were recognized as their father's son, and 3) at Calvary, before His death, Jesus took the responsibility of making sure Mary would have someone to take care of her (naming John as her son now) since He was the eldest of His siblings. This is more than likely why Joseph is not mentioned after the birth and age of accountability of Jesus.
JayRob
TigaPaw
The two geneologies in Matthew and Luke clearly contradict each other. Joseph supposedly had two fathers.
Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.
Hmmm....
Dr H..
Active Member
JR
How did Joseph live a lie, that's stupid. I am sure he is not the first or the last to take / adopt a child. The bible talks about God adopting individuals, are you calling God stupid also.
I am 100% sure that somewhere in your family history, there is a "Joseph" It could have been a cousin, an uncle or someone a female relative married - because of her husband may have been killed, or in the case of Joseph rearing a child that was not "by sex" was his.
Please explain how his life in the community was a lie - he was doing what any "Father" would do - teaching and providing. Other than those two items, he was the Spiritual Leader of the home.
You are controlling what you think, are you not?
How did Joseph live a lie, that's stupid. I am sure he is not the first or the last to take / adopt a child. The bible talks about God adopting individuals, are you calling God stupid also.
I am 100% sure that somewhere in your family history, there is a "Joseph" It could have been a cousin, an uncle or someone a female relative married - because of her husband may have been killed, or in the case of Joseph rearing a child that was not "by sex" was his.
Please explain how his life in the community was a lie - he was doing what any "Father" would do - teaching and providing. Other than those two items, he was the Spiritual Leader of the home.
You are controlling what you think, are you not?
JayRob
TigaPaw
Dr H.. [QUOTE said:
You believe such a story but I'm the stupid one? Telling indeed.
Where is the word "adopted" mentioned in the bible? You brought up the word "adopted", but the Jesus character never did.
According to the bible, Joseph wasn't the father.
At age 12, Jesus didn't ask, but he TOLD Joseph and Mary that "I must be about my father's business"? He didn't seem to even respect Joseph as being his father because he came and went as he pleased. Isn't that breaking the fifth commandment?
He even said to Joseph the following:
Luke 2:49. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my father's business?
In addition to that, Joseph didn't even know who his father was. There's confusion in the geneologies as to who Joseph's father was, so it's not surprising that there's confusion regarding who his son was or wasn't.
When did Jesus ever claim that Joseph was his father? He didn't.
Simple. If you believe the bible, then the biblical god was the father, not Joseph.
In the bible, when Jesus said, "in my father's house are many mansions", was he referring to Joseph or the biblical god?
Jesus never claimed Joseph as his father.
When I'm asleep, I'm not controlling all of my thoughts because I'm unconscious. How many times must this be said?
Dr H..
Active Member
Christians Adoption, the Gospel teaches plainly that we are all the adopted sons and daughters of Abraham by faith
Ephesians 1:5
He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will
Romans 8:14-16 -
For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. So you have not received a spirit that makes you fearful slaves. Instead, you received God's Spirit when he adopted you as his own children. Now we call him, "Abba, Father."For his Spirit joins with our spirit to affirm that we are God's children.
Geneology: Jesus adopted by Joseph
Study your bible, before commenting / debating. The Old Testament scripture teach that the Messiah (Jesus) will come King David’s family geneology. Mary, was Jesus’ only biological tie, she was not in the bloodline of David. Her husband, Joseph was, that's why Joseph's geneology is mentioned.
As prophosied, Jesus becamethe Messiah, through adoption via his father Joseph, who was from the line of David.
This is simple and easy to understand.
Jesus, like "us" have two fathers, well speaking for myself -
A Spiritual Father = God
A Earthly Father / Natural = Mc Kinley
There are those that may have three:
Spiritual, Natural and a "Step Father"
Ephesians 1:5
He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will
Romans 8:14-16 -
For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. So you have not received a spirit that makes you fearful slaves. Instead, you received God's Spirit when he adopted you as his own children. Now we call him, "Abba, Father."For his Spirit joins with our spirit to affirm that we are God's children.
Geneology: Jesus adopted by Joseph
Study your bible, before commenting / debating. The Old Testament scripture teach that the Messiah (Jesus) will come King David’s family geneology. Mary, was Jesus’ only biological tie, she was not in the bloodline of David. Her husband, Joseph was, that's why Joseph's geneology is mentioned.
As prophosied, Jesus becamethe Messiah, through adoption via his father Joseph, who was from the line of David.
This is simple and easy to understand.
Jesus, like "us" have two fathers, well speaking for myself -
A Spiritual Father = God
A Earthly Father / Natural = Mc Kinley
There are those that may have three:
Spiritual, Natural and a "Step Father"
JayRob
TigaPaw
Dr. H, you can make up stories and excuses if that helps your conscience.
Joseph didn't even know who his father was. The bible said that he had TWO physical fathers, Heli and Jacob? PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT.
When it comes to fiction, you can make anything work just like you can in cartoons and soap operas.
Anyone can call an imaginary friend a father. You've never seen, heard, felt or hugged this other sky father you speak of. You just label him your father because it's in the bible. That's your right as a person, no matter how much evidence you don't have to prove it.
The following comment you made is not logical except when it comes to fiction.
You said:
Dr. H, not bragging at all, but I'd run circles around you because I have studied the bible for years and years.
You stated that Mary is the ONLY biological tie to the Jesus character and that she was NOT in the bloodline of David. This alone disqualifies him as the messiah, but let's go on.
Jesus had NO physical ties to Joseph, so how is Jesus PHYSICALLY tied to the bloodlines? That's it, he's NOT. The New Testament writers had to try and mix and match the geneologies just so they could at the least say Jesus had some ties to David, but they still came up short.
It's clear as day that Jesus had NO ties to David, none at all. This also disqualifies him from being the Messiah.
An adopted person cannot fit into the gene pool if they weren't born BY BLOOD. The Jesus figure was NOT born by blood of Joseph, therefore he wasn't OF THE LINE OF DAVID. It's just that simple. No gene pool connection, no hereditary connection and NO bloodline connection equals no messiah connection. Most Jews know this and they are right.
Now you go study a bit more.
Here's a prime example in the bible of a begotten and only son and the qualifications needed to become such a son.
John 3:16. "For god so loved the world that he gave his ONLY "begotten" son."
The biblical god calls the Jesus character his ONLY begotten son eventhough many who came before the Jesus character had the holy spirit like Abraham, David, Jeremiah and others. He didn't call them "begotten sons". He only called the Jesus character, "begotten son". Why didn't he call them "begotten" sons? Because they were not born OF him at birth. Ding, ding, ding.
In the same manner, Jesus was NOT the begotten son of Joseph because he was not born OF Joseph AT birth and he had no hereditary ties to David, thus he couldn't be the promised messiah.
This is why most Jews don't even consider him as any messiah. They're still looking for him to show up, which he never will, but in their minds he will.
As I've mentioned time and time again, when something like a religion is man-made, it will have many flaws and contradictions. The bible is no different and the man-made stories are no different.
The men gave Joseph two sons, they can't connect the Jesus character to David in any form or fashion, so they had to come up with not one, but TWO bogused geneologies that contradict each other.
No all-knowing, all omnipotent, all-powerful god would make such obvious blunders but they're here for all who are willing, to see. Those are just two of hundreds of biblical blunders and contradictions. The bible is man-made.
Joseph didn't even know who his father was. The bible said that he had TWO physical fathers, Heli and Jacob? PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT.
When it comes to fiction, you can make anything work just like you can in cartoons and soap operas.
Anyone can call an imaginary friend a father. You've never seen, heard, felt or hugged this other sky father you speak of. You just label him your father because it's in the bible. That's your right as a person, no matter how much evidence you don't have to prove it.
The following comment you made is not logical except when it comes to fiction.
You said:
Dr. H, not bragging at all, but I'd run circles around you because I have studied the bible for years and years.
You stated that Mary is the ONLY biological tie to the Jesus character and that she was NOT in the bloodline of David. This alone disqualifies him as the messiah, but let's go on.
Jesus had NO physical ties to Joseph, so how is Jesus PHYSICALLY tied to the bloodlines? That's it, he's NOT. The New Testament writers had to try and mix and match the geneologies just so they could at the least say Jesus had some ties to David, but they still came up short.
It's clear as day that Jesus had NO ties to David, none at all. This also disqualifies him from being the Messiah.
An adopted person cannot fit into the gene pool if they weren't born BY BLOOD. The Jesus figure was NOT born by blood of Joseph, therefore he wasn't OF THE LINE OF DAVID. It's just that simple. No gene pool connection, no hereditary connection and NO bloodline connection equals no messiah connection. Most Jews know this and they are right.
Now you go study a bit more.
Here's a prime example in the bible of a begotten and only son and the qualifications needed to become such a son.
John 3:16. "For god so loved the world that he gave his ONLY "begotten" son."
The biblical god calls the Jesus character his ONLY begotten son eventhough many who came before the Jesus character had the holy spirit like Abraham, David, Jeremiah and others. He didn't call them "begotten sons". He only called the Jesus character, "begotten son". Why didn't he call them "begotten" sons? Because they were not born OF him at birth. Ding, ding, ding.
In the same manner, Jesus was NOT the begotten son of Joseph because he was not born OF Joseph AT birth and he had no hereditary ties to David, thus he couldn't be the promised messiah.
This is why most Jews don't even consider him as any messiah. They're still looking for him to show up, which he never will, but in their minds he will.
As I've mentioned time and time again, when something like a religion is man-made, it will have many flaws and contradictions. The bible is no different and the man-made stories are no different.
The men gave Joseph two sons, they can't connect the Jesus character to David in any form or fashion, so they had to come up with not one, but TWO bogused geneologies that contradict each other.
No all-knowing, all omnipotent, all-powerful god would make such obvious blunders but they're here for all who are willing, to see. Those are just two of hundreds of biblical blunders and contradictions. The bible is man-made.
Last edited:
dacontinent
Preacher
:smh:
JayRob
TigaPaw
Well, how did Joseph get two fathers?:noidea:
dacontinent
Preacher
Just curious ... Did it ever occur to you in all of your study of the Bible and Hebrew history that (H)Eli and Jacob could be the same person? Like Simon and Peter? Like Jacob and Israel?
Just curious.
JagHammer
Senior Troll
Joseph's father did not have the transitional phase where his name was changed (Jacob into Israel), or use in conjunction with his name (Simon Peter). Therefore, Matthew and Luke may have been out of sync, given they were written at different times. It could also be a Hellenistic name for Jacob (Heli), but that is not stated, and therefore I will not infer that happened.
dacontinent
Preacher
At least you ^^^^^ are reading, researching, and thinking ... and quite well at that.
JayRob
TigaPaw
So that means Jeremiah could mean Isaiah or Isaac could mean John. There's not a shred of evidence to support your theory. Heli and Jacob are two different people. Let's not try and rewrite the bible because of it's errors. Come on and be honest about it.
JayRob
TigaPaw
What is up with some of you? When a fellow-Christian of yours wants to talk about the bible, you guys are so quick to intervene and tell him to stop. What are you guys afraid of? On any other thread, you freely express yourselves, but when it comes to religion and the bible, you guys shut down. LOL!
Last edited:
JayRob
TigaPaw
So you're inferring that I'm not? LOL! I've done enough research to know that there's no evidence to support your theory that the men, Jacob and Eli, could be one and the same.
Heck, the geneologies aren't the same either, but that's another debacle of a story for another time.
Face it dacon, it is what it is.