English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 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.

2006-11-20 01:11:25 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

10 answers

His own father and Mary's (his wife) father would be considered his fathers.

2006-11-20 01:13:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Jacob and Heli are one in the same person. Here is what my Bible dicionary says about it..

Heli-(He'li) Hebrew personal name meaning "high". The son of matthat and father of Joseph, Jesus earthly father (Luke 3:23-24) His relationship to jesus is variously explalined by bible students in light of Matt. 1:16, which makes Joseph';s father to be jacob. He has been seen as the father of Joseph, a more remote anscestor of Joseph, or an anscestor of Mary. Either Jacob or Heli are variant names of the same person ("son of" means "decendant of " as in other genealogies), or Luke precerved the genalogy of Mary rather than of Joseph. A totally satisfactory answer to the question has not been found. The name probably represents a Greek form of the Hebrew Eli.

Eli-From H5927; lofty; Eli, an Israelitish high priest: - Eli.

Heli-Of Hebrew origin [H5941]; Heli (that is, Eli), an Israelite: - Heli.

2006-11-20 01:39:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The oldest one, ascribed to Julius Africanus[2], uses the concept of Levirate marriage, and suggests that Matthan (grandfather of Joseph according to Matthew), and Matthat (grandfather of Joseph according to Luke), were brothers, married to the same woman one after another - this would mean that Matthan's son (Jacob) could be Joseph's biological father, and Matthat's son (Heli), was his legal father.
That Luke's genealogy is of Mary, with Heli being her father, while Matthew's describes the genealogy of Joseph.
That Matthew records the passing on of kingship, while Luke records biological parentage, though this fails to explain why kings that were not father to the next have been excluded from Matthew's list. Similarly, that Luke gives the actual genealogy while Matthew presents a "ceremonial" one, for example, Neri being Shealtiel's natural father, but Jeconiah being the prior leader of the Jewish people.

2006-11-20 01:16:32 · answer #3 · answered by Damian 5 · 0 0

even as the list is study intently it turns into obtrusive that one line is the line of the stepfather, Joseph even as the different is the mum's line, Mary's. The giveaway is the following in Luke: "being the son, because the opinion replaced into" Luke 3:23 23 besides, Jesus himself, even as he began [his artwork], replaced into about thirty years previous, being the son, because the opinion replaced into, of Joseph, [son] of Heli, even as the account in Matthew is study, verse 16 exhibits this to be Joseph's line: Matthew a million:16 Jacob grew to grow to be father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus replaced into born, who's termed Christ. this way someone searching for the reality may actual locate it. even as those attempting to sentence the Bible have their say and their judgment and damnation. enable everybody do as their hearts call for. there is a good number of fabrics contained in the Bible that the combatants bounce upon and aspect palms at. besides the undeniable fact that, that is because it may nicely be. enable the chaff be noted with the intention to burn it more convenient. The committed locate that such seeming contradictions are purely that -- in visual attraction purely.

2016-11-29 07:31:03 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Jacob. But this isn't the same one that is the father of the 12 tribes.

2006-11-20 01:18:51 · answer #5 · answered by RB 7 · 0 0

JOSEPH was the Son of Joseph and Rachael.

2006-11-20 01:21:06 · answer #6 · answered by Conrey 5 · 0 0

Two explanations exist - both reasonings seem plausible to me - and both were discussed ad nauseum in my seminary classes on the Gospels...

a) St. Matthew's genealogy is that of St. Joseph; St. Luke's, that of the Blessed Virgin. This contention implies that St. Luke's genealogy only seemingly includes the name of Joseph. It is based on the received Greek text, on (os enomizeto ouios Ioseph) tou Heli, "being the son (as it was supposed, of Joseph, but really) of Heli". This parenthesis really eliminates the name of Joseph from St. Luke's genealogy, and makes Christ, by means of the Blessed Virgin, directly a son of Heli. This view is supported by a tradition which names the father of the Blessed Virgin "Joachim", a variant form of Eliacim or its abbreviation Eli, a variant of Heli, which latter is the form found in the Third Evangelist's genealogy. But these two consideration, viz. the received text and the traditional name of the father of Mary, which favour the view that St. Luke gives the genealogy of the Blessed Virgin, are offset by two similar considerations, which make St. Luke's list terminate with the name of Joseph. First, the Greek text preferred by the textual critics reads, on ouios, hos enomizeto, Ioseph tou Heli, "being the son, as it was supposed, of Joseph, son of Heli", so that the above parenthesis is rendered less probable. Secondly, according to Patrizi, the view that St. Luke gives the genealogy of Mary began to be advocated only towards the end of the fifteenth century by Annius of Viterbo, and acquired adherents in the sixteenth. St. Hilary mentions the opinion as adopted by many, but he himself rejects it (Mai, "Nov. Bibl, Patr.", t. I, 477). It may be safely said that patristic tradition does not regard St. Luke's list as representing the genealogy of the Blessed Virgin.

(b) Both St. Matthew and St. Luke give the genealogy of St. Joseph, the one through the lineage of Solomon, the other through that of Nathan. But how can the lines converge in St. Joseph? St. Augustine suggested that Joseph, the son of Jacob and the descendant of David through Solomon, might have been adopted by Heli, thus becoming the adoptive descendant of David through Nathan. But Augustine was the first to abandon this theory after learning the explanation offered by Julius Africanus. According to the latter, Estha married Mathan, a descendant of David through Solomon, and became the mother of Jacob; after Mathan's death she took for her second husband Mathat, a descendent of David through Nathan, and by him became the mother of Heli. Jacob and Heli were, therefore, uterine brothers. Heli married, but died without offspring; his widow, therefore, became the levirate wife of Jacob, and gave birth to Joseph, who was the carnal son of Jacob, but the legal son of Heli, thus combining in his person two lineages of David's descendants.

2006-11-20 01:17:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Jacob and he is not mary's husband!

2006-11-20 01:13:49 · answer #8 · answered by Cinderella 3 · 0 0

Sorry, i'm not speak inglish.
voce fala portugues?
ablas español?
capitche italiano?
sonhg fog japan?

2006-11-20 01:16:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What do you not understand about what you have written. Its all there pal.><>

2006-11-20 01:17:02 · answer #10 · answered by CEM 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers