Is Joseph Jesus's Father

  • Thread starter Thread starter endaman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

endaman

Guest
We teach that Mary and Joseph were married. However, if Mary remained a virgin throughout her life, then could they have been husband and wife, given that a wedding and consummation of the marriage would have been necessary to have been considered a married couple? They were betrothed but when did they actually become man and wife? Would this fact not mean that Joseph was in no way related to Jesus and therefore Jesus was not of the house of David?

I am in a debate with a Protestant and need help on this issue.

Thanks
 
endaman said:
We teach that Mary and Joseph were married. However, if Mary remained a virgin throughout her life, then could they have been husband and wife, given that a wedding and consummation of the marriage would have been necessary to have been considered a married couple? They were betrothed but when did they actually become man and wife? Would this fact not mean that Joseph was in no way related to Jesus and therefore Jesus was not of the house of David?

I am in a debate with a Protestant and need help on this issue.

Thanks
Click to expand...
I don’t think consummation was required in order for the marriage to be valid. Does your Protestant friend have a source for that claim?
 
endaman said:
We teach that Mary and Joseph were married. However, if Mary remained a virgin throughout her life, then could they have been husband and wife, given that a wedding and consummation of the marriage would have been necessary to have been considered a married couple? They were betrothed but when did they actually become man and wife? Would this fact not mean that Joseph was in no way related to Jesus and therefore Jesus was not of the house of David?

I am in a debate with a Protestant and need help on this issue.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Because Joseph assumed the parental responsibility, he was the father of the child by Jewish law, and since Jesus was part of the earthly family headed by Joseph (from the line of David), Jesus was de facto from the House of David, fulfilling prophecy.
 
Protestants unfortunately interpret the Bible using modern rules, syntax etc. They do not study the Bible in the original books, especially Greek. Nor do they have any idea of Jewish customs 2000 years ago. Joseph was the foster father of Jesus. His descent was from David.Which is why the gospel of St. Matthew began by giving us the genealogy of Jesus. He did this following the Hebrew system of disregarding women. But ib St Liuke chapter 3 we do ready the lineage of Mary.
 
PaulfromIowa said:
Read the Catechism on the Virgin Birth of Christ:

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p2.htm

Christ was the only begotten Son of God, born miraculously of a virgin. This has always been the Apostolic teaching. Your friend doesn’t sound like a Protestant, he sounds like a non-Christian.
Click to expand...
It didn’t sound like his friend was doubting the divinity of Christ, he was just trying to find how if only his divinity is considered, he is from the House of David.

Catholic teaching does not deny the humanity of Christ, we believe that Christ had two natures; human (with the exception of sinfulness) and divine, and believes the prophecy that the Messiah would rise from the House of David was realized in the incarnation.
 
v21337304 said:
Protestants unfortunately interpret the Bible using modern rules, syntax etc. They do not study the Bible in the original books, especially Greek. Nor do they have any idea of Jewish customs 2000 years ago. Joseph was the foster father of Jesus. His descent was from David.Which is why the gospel of St. Matthew began by giving us the genealogy of Jesus. He did this following the Hebrew system of disregarding women. But ib St Liuke chapter 3 we do ready the lineage of Mary.
Click to expand...
This accusation against Protestants is blatantly untrue. Their Biblical scholars most certainly do study the books in the original languages and have a great deal of knowledge of Jewish customs of 2000 years ago and long before that. No Catholic Biblical Scholar would ever accuse Protestant Biblical Scholars of that. Where do you think Dr. Scott Hahn got his extensive biblical knowledge from???

The average Bible reading Protestant does not know Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic. That is true. Neither does the average Catholic, if he even reads the Bible.

It is statements like the one above that foster ill will among Christians. We don’t like it when non-Catholics spout untruths about Catholics, neither should we expect non-Catholics to like it when untruths are spouted against them.
 
CB_Catholic said:
This accusation against Protestants is blatantly untrue. Their Biblical scholars most certainly do study the books in the original languages and have a great deal of knowledge of Jewish customs of 2000 years ago and long before that. No Catholic Biblical Scholar would ever accuse Protestant Biblical Scholars of that. Where do you think Dr. Scott Hahn got his extensive biblical knowledge from???
Click to expand...
Have you read and understood any Shakespeare lately? My first play (40 yrs. ago) was Hamlet and a teacher had to say outright that Hamlets’ soliloquy was a contemplation of suicide because it went right over my head. We need classes in high school and college to appreciate the nuances of the Bard who is only a few hundred years old and is written in English. Having the play Hamlet in hand and reading it does not equate with having a good working knowledge of the Elizabethan idiom.

English scholars through the four hundred years or so since Elizabethan England have maintained Shakespearean libraries and studies through out the world and in multiple languages. They were able to maintain the integrity of his works because the world did not go through dark ages since the 1600s. Scriptures did, and the Scriptures came through only because the monastic life of the Church preserved these documents as they had been passed down since … (Don’t pin me down on this date, even Catholic scholars can’t say how old our oldest scrolls are.). The point I’m trying to make here is only the Catholic Church has the oral tradition and oldest works that these kind of studies would require. If protestant exegists do have two thousand years of tradition and original language texts, and most do not, they are working off of the studies of other Catholic exegists.

Now about the quality of protestant exegesis: the protestant reformation took a weed wacker to the whole Bible and tried to eliminate anything against the reforms they wanted. Their first criteria was a blanket exclusion of anything removed by the third century Pharisees. Gone are the books of Maccabees (because it had nice things to say about the Romans) and Ester (the hero was a heroine) None of these reasons had to do with authenticity and Revelation, the only things that should matter.

Not just Catholic exegists, but Popes, Bishops, Catechists have such serious problems with the protestant Biblical scholarship that the Church approves Bibles for the faithful’ use and recommends in the strongest terms the use of a complete Bible.
 
I wouldn’t say friend but someone who is on another general forum and trying to put doen our Faith, so I have to defend. Thanks for all your help I have used your answers.
 
endaman said:
We teach that Mary and Joseph were married. However, if Mary remained a virgin throughout her life, then could they have been husband and wife, given that a wedding and consummation of the marriage would have been necessary to have been considered a married couple? They were betrothed but when did they actually become man and wife? Would this fact not mean that Joseph was in no way related to Jesus and therefore Jesus was not of the house of David?

I am in a debate with a Protestant and need help on this issue.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Even today consummation is not what makes a marriage valid.

Can. 1061 §1. A valid marriage between the baptized is called ratum tantum if it has not been consummated; it is called ratum et consummatum if the spouses have performed between themselves in a human fashion a conjugal act which is suitable in itself for the procreation of offspring, to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one flesh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top