How Can Jesus Be a Descendant of Joseph?

On the Bible Answer Man broadcast, Hank Hanegraaff answers the question: How can Jesus be listed as a descendant of Joseph the husband of Mary?

-------------------------------------------------
Connect with the Christian Research Institute (CRI):

#hankhanegraaff #bibleanswerman #bibledifficulties

[anamariarodriguez]

I barely found out last night that Hank Hanegraaff is healing miraculously ! Praise God! Thank you Jesus for our brother in Christ that helps us study the Scriptures. More love and prayers coming your way Hank. God bless you.

[caseykaelin]

If the Jews are correct, and I believe they are, the right to sit on the throne of David goes from father to son. Not father to daughter to her son. Matthew lays out the genealogy of Joseph, Mary's husband. When he is done it is clear that Jesus is a descendant of David. Then Matthew throws a wrench into his explanation by saying he is God's son. You can not have it both ways. Jesus is either a descendant of David as required by Old Testament prophets or he is the son of God. I think that is what your caller was driving at.

[mainathuo]

Jesus was not the "Son of David" Read John 12:32, John 1:17, Daniel 7:13, Micah 5:2. Those calling Jesus Son of David had a misconception of Jesus as a Messiah. Read Malawi 3:1 about three messengers: John the Baptist was the first Messenger, Jesus was the second messenger, the third messenger will be the son of David also mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:18. Genealogy of Jesus in Mathew and Luke indicates that Jesus was not in the bloodline of David

[lanabowers]

Matthew & Luke's genealogies do not contradict or conflict. They are of 2 people, Mary & Joseph. The genealogical list in Matthew from David to Jacob-Heli (spanning about 1000 years), contains 27 generations of 40 years each, so as to comply with the 40 year royal generational standard. Luke, on the other hand, gives 40 generations of a more comprehensible 25 years each. Hence, Luke places Jesus in the 20th generation from Zerubbabel, whereas Matthew places him in the 11th generation from Zerubbabel. SUMMARY: Matthew-27 generations of 40 years from Solomon. Patriarchal--Zerubbabel's father's line. Luke-40 generations of 25 years from Nathan. Matriarchal--Zerubbabel's mother's line. Both Solomon and Nathan are sons of David. Their lines converge at Zerubbabel, then diverge. Zerubbabel had 2 sons, Abiud and Rhesa. Matthew goes from Abiud, Mary's line. Luke goes from Rhesa, Joseph's line. Also, Mary and Joseph were related. Joseph was Mary's great-aunt Gadat's son.Mary's mother is Hannah. Her father is Joachim (Yonakhir), the Elias Patriarch. Joseph's mother was Gadat. His father was Heli, the Jacob Patriarch. His community distinction was 'Jacob'. 'Jacob' was a title, so he would be called Jacob-Heli. Joachim's mother was Sabrath (Sabartia). His father was Matthat the Zadok. Heli's father was Matthan (descended from Mattathias (Tobias) the Temple governor.///In Matthew's version, Mary was found with child by the 'Holy Spirit' (pneuma hagion), a title of Joseph in the celibate state, during his betrothal period. If Joseph followed the stricter rule, he would break off the betrothal, leaving the child to be brought up as one of the orphans adopted by Essenes. Simeon, the Abiathar Gabriel priest, advised him to take the intermediate way, to marry Mary, leaving both of them in an honorable state, but to treat the child as the son of Mary, not his. Joseph went through with a wedding ceremony, combining both weddings of the Essenes, the 1st one allowing sex, (the beginning of the 3 year trial period), the 2d one when the woman was 3 months pregnant (the binding one). Since there was a rule that there must be no intercourse during pregnancy, 'he knew her not' after the wedding.

[wtpiep]

I was always under the impression the lineage is passed down from the man, so if Joseph wasn’t the father then Immanuel could not be of the David lineage.
Although to be born of a virgin as the Son of God does sound very Greek to me which makes you ponder 💭

[michaelmacias]

I find it interesting how this guy just makes up stuff. The truth of the matter is Yosef is Yahshua’s biological father.

[aws]

What non-sense explanation.

What a step father has anything to do with geneology of anyone?

Moreover the bible considers the geneology only through male ancestors/descendants. Not through female and there is nothing in the bible to deduce that Mary was from the lineage of David nor she is related to Joseph, the carpenter.
On the contrary it says Mary is the relative of Elizebeth who was a descendant of Aaron, a Levite. That makes Mary and Jesus a Levites, not the descendant of David.

Since Jesus has no human father and his mother Mary was not descended from David, Jesus has nothing to do with David.

Even the number of people in both Matthew and Luke genealogies differed. Therefore the number 14 means nothing.

Pls don't try to make story on anything and everything just to exalt Jesus more than what he was.


*“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know"*
- Acts 2:22

And the same Jesus said. (John 17:3) that *"The Father is the only true God. ..."*

*"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one"*.
- Deuteronomy 6:4

[dantristan]

Wrong! Joseph and Mary both were of David’s line.

[mainathuo]

Continued: Exploration of Paul as false apostle


Jeremiah 8:8 (NIV) states:

“How can you say, ‘We are wise, for we have the law of the Lord, ’ when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”

This verse is often cited to address the dangers of spiritual deception, particularly when leaders or writers distort God’s law.

Paul's teachings contradict the Torah and he is a false apostle or impostor who undermined the eternal commandments of God.

Jeremiah 8:8 warning calls out the religious leaders and scribes of his time for corrupting God’s truth. The scribes—entrusted with copying and teaching God’s Word—were accused of mishandling it for personal gain or false teaching. This verse foreshadows figures like Paul, who distorted God’s law to introduce new doctrines.

The phrase "lying pen of the scribes" resonates with the facts that Paul used his letters to create a theology that diverged from the Torah’s eternal truths.


Unlike the original twelve apostles chosen directly by Jesus, Paul declared himself an apostle (Galatians 1:1). He based his authority on a vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus, an event that lacked corroborating witnesses (Acts 9:3-9).

Paul's apostleship was not endorsed by Jesus during His earthly ministry, raising doubts about his legitimacy.


Jesus affirmed the permanence of the Torah, stating in Matthew 5:17-19: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

Jesus warned that anyone who sets aside the least of the commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven.

Paul, however, contradicts the teachings of Jesus. For example:

Romans 7:6: "But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law."
Galatians 3:24-25: "The law was our guardian until Christ came... Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."

These statements in Paul's teachings aimed to nullify the Torah, creating tension between Jesus’ teachings and Paul’s writings.


Paul’s message was at odds with the original apostles, chosen by Jesus himself. Acts 21:20-24 reveals that James and the elders in Jerusalem were concerned about Paul’s reputation for teaching Jews to abandon the Torah. They instructed him to publicly demonstrate his adherence to the law to counter these accusations.

The bulk of Christian theology is derived from Paul’s epistles, not from the teachings of Jesus or the other apostles. His writings introduced concepts such as salvation by grace apart from works of the law (Ephesians 2:8-9), which some believe contradicts the Torah’s emphasis on obedience.

Paul’s teachings have been used historically to justify antinomianism—the belief that God’s laws are no longer binding—which directly opposes the Torah’s eternal nature (Deuteronomy 4:2, Psalm 119:89).

Jeremiah 8:8 is seen as a prophetic warning against figures like Paul, who twisted the Scriptures to fit their own theology. Just as the scribes in Jeremiah’s time corrupted the law, Paul redefined God’s commandments so as to align them with Hellenistic and Roman philosophies. His teachings on grace, faith, and the law’s "abolishment" are a departure from the Hebraic understanding of covenantal obedience.

Jeremiah 8:8 serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of distorting God’s law. Paul's teachings represent a departure from the eternal commandments of God, aligning him with the “lying pen” Jeremiah condemns.

[ptah]

Nice cross this old man's got swag

[mainathuo]

Continued reflections on paul as a false apostle

Paul is widely credited with shaping Christianity as we know it, but was he truly an inspired messenger of God, or was he a conman who hijacked the teachings of Jesus for his own gain?

A close examination of his actions, contradictions, and self-promotion raises serious doubts about his legitimacy.

Before becoming a Christian leader, Paul (then Saul) was a zealous persecutor of Christians. He claimed he saw Jesus in a vision on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:3-6). Unlike the original apostles, who walked with Jesus and witnessed His teachings firsthand, Paul’s authority rested solely on this unverifiable event.

Galatians 1:11-12 (NIV)
"I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."

Here, Paul insists that his teachings come from personal revelation rather than Jesus' direct disciples. This conveniently removes any accountability, allowing him to introduce doctrines that sometimes contradict Jesus’ own words.

One of the biggest red flags in Paul’s ministry is how his teachings often contradict those of Jesus.

Matthew 5:17-19 (NIV)
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them... anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven."

Yet Paul preached against the necessity of following the Law:

Romans 3:28 (NIV)
"For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law."

By dismissing the Law, Paul made Christianity more appealing to Gentiles, which expanded his influence and power. This shift suggests an opportunistic approach rather than a faithful adherence to Jesus' teachings.

Paul frequently emphasized his own importance and authority rather than humbling himself like Jesus did.

2 Corinthians 11:5 (NIV)
"I do not think I am in the least inferior to those ‘super-apostles.’"

Why would a true servant of Christ compare himself to other apostles in such a way? His letters often contain aggressive defenses of his authority, suggesting insecurity and a need to maintain control over his followers.

Furthermore, Paul demanded absolute obedience:

1 Corinthians 14:37 (NIV)
"If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command."

Rather than encouraging independent thought and spiritual discernment, Paul insisted that his words carried divine authority. This pattern of behavior is consistent with that of a manipulative leader rather than a true servant of God.

Paul also displayed behaviors typical of religious conmen, including collecting money from his followers while promoting a message of sacrifice.

1 Corinthians 9:11 (NIV)
"If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?"

While Jesus sent His disciples out without money (Matthew 10:9-10), Paul justified receiving financial support, further suggesting that he had a self-serving agenda.

Paul’s unverifiable conversion, contradictions with Jesus’ teachings, self-promotion, and financial motivations paint a troubling picture. His influence on Christianity is undeniable, but was it divinely inspired or the work of a skilled manipulator? The evidence suggests that Paul may have been more of a religious opportunist than a true apostle of Christ.

[jasonh.]

Of course if Mary was a virgin, Joseph could not be Jesus' biological father.

[Acontinuist]

I tend to think that, The Holy Spirit impregnated Mary with the seed of Joseph. Reason being, that Jesus was the perfect lamb of God, conceived in perfection. Even though marrage is lawful, the act of union cannot be entered into without lust.

[Ibrahimm-qm]

The purpose is to create lies.. 😊 According to the writer of Luke,  Mary was a relative of Elizabeth, wife of the priest Zechariah of the priestly division of Abijah, who was herself part of the lineage of Aaron and so of the Tribe of Levi.

[mainathuo]

Continued reflections on paul as a false apostle

Paul is widely credited with shaping Christianity as we know it, but was he truly an inspired messenger of God, or was he a conman who hijacked the teachings of Jesus for his own gain?

A close examination of his actions, contradictions, and self-promotion raises serious doubts about his legitimacy.

Before becoming a Christian leader, Paul (then Saul) was a zealous persecutor of Christians. He claimed he saw Jesus in a vision on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:3-6). Unlike the original apostles, who walked with Jesus and witnessed His teachings firsthand, Paul’s authority rested solely on this unverifiable event.

Galatians 1:11-12 (NIV)
"I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."

Here, Paul insists that his teachings come from personal revelation rather than Jesus' direct disciples. This conveniently removes any accountability, allowing him to introduce doctrines that sometimes contradict Jesus’ own words.

One of the biggest red flags in Paul’s ministry is how his teachings often contradict those of Jesus.

Matthew 5:17-19 (NIV)
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them... anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven."

Yet Paul preached against the necessity of following the Law:

Romans 3:28 (NIV)
"For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law."

By dismissing the Law, Paul made Christianity more appealing to Gentiles, which expanded his influence and power. This shift suggests an opportunistic approach rather than a faithful adherence to Jesus' teachings.

Paul frequently emphasized his own importance and authority rather than humbling himself like Jesus did.

2 Corinthians 11:5 (NIV)
"I do not think I am in the least inferior to those ‘super-apostles.’"

Why would a true servant of Christ compare himself to other apostles in such a way? His letters often contain aggressive defenses of his authority, suggesting insecurity and a need to maintain control over his followers.

Furthermore, Paul demanded absolute obedience:

1 Corinthians 14:37 (NIV)
"If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command."

Rather than encouraging independent thought and spiritual discernment, Paul insisted that his words carried divine authority. This pattern of behavior is consistent with that of a manipulative leader rather than a true servant of God.

Paul also displayed behaviors typical of religious conmen, including collecting money from his followers while promoting a message of sacrifice.

1 Corinthians 9:11 (NIV)
"If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?"

While Jesus sent His disciples out without money (Matthew 10:9-10), Paul justified receiving financial support, further suggesting that he had a self-serving agenda.

Paul’s unverifiable conversion, contradictions with Jesus’ teachings, self-promotion, and financial motivations paint a troubling picture. His influence on Christianity is undeniable, but was it divinely inspired or the work of a skilled manipulator? The evidence suggests that Paul may have been more of a religious opportunist than a true apostle of Christ.