Tag Archives: Joseph

The first Christmas gift

Merry Christmas to all my readers!

The LORD bless you and keep you;
the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.
(Numbers 6:24-26)

Leave a comment

Posted by on 24/12/2012 in Gospel, Jesus


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

And the saviour of the world is … Joseph of course!

As you read through the book of Genesis, none of the patriarchs deserved God’s blessing apart from his mercy and grace. Abraham, Jacob and Joseph succeeded in their faith in God’s promise as evidenced by their (at times inconsistent and flawed) obedience to God.

They were first hand participants in the conflict between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. The serpent’s seed are tyrants of death and destruction, whereas the woman’s seed are faithful warrior priest-kings who lead their families to worship Yahweh.

When Joseph arrives he seemingly fulfils the Genesis 3:15 prophecy of the seed of woman who will bring salvation and undo Adam’s failure. As a prophet, he speaks God’s word to his brothers and suffers affliction and (a fake) death at their hands (Gen 37:26, 31-33, Acts 7:9). As a priest he serves Potiphar and resists the allure of the “daughters of men” (c.f. Gen 6:1-4 w/ 39:6-12). As a king, he brings God’s Word to the nation through diligent stewardship, marries a Gentile bride and gives an inheritance to his brothers (c.f. Gen 41:16 w/ Heb 2:10-18). [NB: The pattern of Word, Sacrament and Government.]

Following the pattern established during Creation week of Genesis 1, on Day 1 God spoke and kick started the universe, the story of Genesis is the kick-start of Israel – how it came to be and through whom. As the sun sets on this “Day 1” of the Bible story,  God has spoken, initiated his covenant and created his nation of priests, who are led by Joseph. He is a light and saviour to the nations as he manages the food distribution during a wide-spread famine.

The separation of light from dark is illustrated in the conflict, between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman, which reaches a climax as Joseph, seed of Abraham (c.f. Gal 3:16) defeats the serpent and effects a salvation of the known world. Not altogether like his anti-type, another bloke with a name starting with “J” (Heb 2:14, 1 John 3:8, Rev 12:4-5, 20:10).

Leave a comment

Posted by on 03/05/2012 in Bible, Hermenutics, Theology


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Social Network Christmas

If the very first Christmas had taken place in 2010…

Leave a comment

Posted by on 18/12/2010 in General


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Was Joseph an Adoptive Dad AND Adoptee

When reading the genealogy accounts of Jesus in Matthew and Luke of the New Testament, an apparent contradiction surfaces. Each list uses a different perspective, one starts with Joseph and goes back to Abraham and then to Adam and the other starts with Abraham and then goes down to Joseph. There are also differences in the list of names in-between David and Joseph. The name of Joseph’s most immediate forbear is of particular interest. Matthew says Joseph is the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16). In Luke’s account he is the son of Heli (Luke 3:23).

Robert L. Redmond provides the following explanation in the ‘Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible‘:

A widely held explanation is that Matthew gives Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph and that Luke gives his ancestry through Mary.

… many scholars prefer to regard Luke’s genealogy as that of Joseph rather than Mary, since it is to Joseph’s ancestry that Luke calls the reader’s attention (1:27; 2:4). Furthermore, nowhere in Scripture is Mary said to be of Davidic descent. …

A major difficulty for the view that regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is related to Joseph’s two fathers. One solution is that Matthew gives the legal descendants of David, but Luke gives the actual descendants of David in the line to which Joseph belonged. This would mean that Heli was Joseph’s [biological] father and that Jacob was his legal foster father.

… One other major objection to the view that regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is that, because of the virgin birth of Jesus, one may in no sense speak of Jesus as being literally the seed of David, a proposition that Scripture seems to insist upon. This objection has been adequately countered:

  1. because of the realistic manner in which the Jews looked upon adoptive fatherhood; and
  2. because the relationship in which Jesus stood to Joseph was much closer than a case of ordinary adoption, there being no earthly father to dispute Joseph’s paternal relation to Jesus.

Jesus could and would have been regarded as Joseph’s son and heir with complete propriety, satisfying every scriptural demand that he be the “seed of David.” ~ (Elwell, W. A., & Beitzel, B. J. 1988. Baker encyclopedia of the Bible (850–851). Baker Book House: Grand Rapids, Mich.)

This understanding of Joseph as an adoptee was also advocated by Augustine in his Reply to Faustus and The Harmony of the Gospels.

Any one can see as well as you that Joseph has one father in Matthew and another in Luke, and so with the grandfather and with all the rest up to David. … the practice of adoption is common among our fathers, and in Scripture, … frequently in human life one man may have two fathers, one of whose flesh he is born, and another of whose will he is afterwards made a son by adoption … Careful students of sacred Scripture easily saw, from a little consideration, how, in the different genealogies of the two evangelists, Joseph had two fathers, and consequently two lists of ancestors.~ (Augustine Reply to Faustus 3.3 in Schaff, P. 1997. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Vol. IV (159-160). Logos Research Systems: Oak Harbor)

Joseph may have had two fathers,—namely, one by whom he was begotten, and a second by whom he may have been adopted. For it was an ancient custom also among that people to adopt children with the view of making sons for themselves of those whom they had not begotten.

… here is nothing absurd in saying that a person has begotten, not after the flesh, it may be, but in love, one whom he has adopted as a son. … It would be no departure from the truth, therefore, even had Luke said that Joseph was begotten by the person by whom he was really adopted. Even in that way he did in fact beget him, not indeed to be a man, but certainly to be a son ~ (Augustine De Consens Ev. 2.3.5-7 in Schaff, P. 1997. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Vol. VI (103-104). Logos Research Systems: Oak Harbor)

We can’t be too dogmatic about this. However it does reconcile the differences between Matthew and Luke and provides some insight into the character of Joseph. Perhaps this is why he was willing and ready to accept and adopt the unborn Jesus as his son and give them protection and care when Jesus’ life was threatened by Herod. It would also explain the power and significance of his influence on his other son, James, who would later describe authentic faith and Christianity as caring for widows and orphans. The formation of Joseph as a man came from first hand experience with adoption and care of children, both as an adoptee and an adoptive father. He passed this legacy to his sons and continues to give us a challenge and example to champion the cause of the defenseless.


Leave a comment

Posted by on 13/11/2010 in Apologetics, church, Culture, Family


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 688 other followers

%d bloggers like this: