Yeshua Was the Son (As Properly Reckoned) of Joseph...of David...of Adam...of God
by Shmuel Playfair
[edited for easier reading]
In Luke 3:23 we read that *Joseph* [not Mary] was [the son] of Heli [Elee]. All of the genealogies found in the Jewish scriptures were exclusively patrilineal (never matrilineal). When Luke writes, "Yeshua (Jesus) was the son AS WAS SUPPOSED of Joseph..." many falsely conclude that this means that Yeshua was *not* really the biological descendant (i.e. son) of Joseph. This weak English translation of the Greek here is thought to imply that Yeshua was only supposedly (but not really) the son of Joseph. But this interpretation makes the whole rest of the genealogy a waste of ink, because it was only "supposed" that he was Joseph's son when actually he was not really his son.
The false claim that the genealogy here is for Mary has no textual support. Also, this contrived notion has no basis in the cultural context of Jewish genealogies. Giving the patrilineal genealogy of someone's mother is completely without precedence in the context of Jewish scriptures and tradition. The principle is stated in the Talmud Bavelee where we read, "The family of the [biological] FATHER is regarded as the proper family, but the family of the [biological] MOTHER IS NOT regarded as proper family". [Baba Bathra, 109b] In Israelite and Jewish tradition the lineage of the *biological* father [never the mother] determines the children's tribal affiliation and genealogical line even for one who is adopted.
In the Greek text we read, "....being son 'hos enomizeto' (ὡς ἐνομίζετο) of Joseph...of David....of Adam...of God". The Greek word used here, "enomizeto", is closely related to "nomos" (law; rule; principle; or *norm*). This could very well be translated, "...he was the son of Joseph 'according to accepted [Jewish] tradition, custom or norm' ", or "...he was the male descendant of Joseph...of David...'as was generally thought' or 'as was legally considered' or 'as was normally reckoned' by all". The popular translation "...being the son as was supposed of Joseph" works only in the sense that this generally accepted supposition proves to be the case as we find in the book of Acts. Here we read, "And on the day of the Sabbath we went forth outside the gate by a river where we supposed (enomizomen / ἐνομίζομεν) [i.e. as we expected to find and did in fact find] a place of prayer to be, and sitting down there we spoke...". [16:13] IOW, what is "supposed" by everyone to be true is in fact actually the case.
The Greek language has words to express *not* really the son of Joseph as was thought, if that was what the author intended say in opposition to what he actually wrote, "being son (as properly reckoned = as legally thought = as is actually the case) of Joseph...of David..." The words "ὡς ἐνομίζετο" (i.e. "according to normative custom and natural reckoning") indicated that this natural patrilineal genetic line was rightly assumed to be the case. There is no hint given by this genealogical record that this son of Adam was "adopted" by Joseph. If the Greek author had wanted to say that Yeshua was "adopted", he would have been able to say that in Greek. But, Luke's genealogy claims that Yeshua is Yoseph's natural heir and not simply his adopted heir. There is nothing in the "Greek grammar" that indicates that Joseph was declared to be either the falsely assumed father or the adoptive father of Yeshua. On the contrary, Yeshua was plainly declared to be the natural biological descendant (according to the patrilineal norm) of Joseph who was the patrilineal son of David. IOW, what was "supposed" by all to be was in fact the case. Both Yeshua and Yoseph were naturally and rightly [not wrongly] considered to be the biological descendants (i.e. sons) of David and of Abraham and of Adam.
Luke's declaration that this Joshua was "the son of God" (through Joseph, Elee....and Adam) is the climax of the whole genealogical chain. This chain begins with Yeshua, the first-born son of Joseph, his natural human father. It moves on to his second human "father" (or more precisely in English to his "grandfather"), Elee. And finally, the chain ends with "(the son) of Adam, (the son) of God", Who is the ultimate father or creator. So Adam was naturally considered to be the first human father (ancestor) of Yeshua the son of Joseph.
by Shmuel Playfair
[edited for easier reading]
In Luke 3:23 we read that *Joseph* [not Mary] was [the son] of Heli [Elee]. All of the genealogies found in the Jewish scriptures were exclusively patrilineal (never matrilineal). When Luke writes, "Yeshua (Jesus) was the son AS WAS SUPPOSED of Joseph..." many falsely conclude that this means that Yeshua was *not* really the biological descendant (i.e. son) of Joseph. This weak English translation of the Greek here is thought to imply that Yeshua was only supposedly (but not really) the son of Joseph. But this interpretation makes the whole rest of the genealogy a waste of ink, because it was only "supposed" that he was Joseph's son when actually he was not really his son.
The false claim that the genealogy here is for Mary has no textual support. Also, this contrived notion has no basis in the cultural context of Jewish genealogies. Giving the patrilineal genealogy of someone's mother is completely without precedence in the context of Jewish scriptures and tradition. The principle is stated in the Talmud Bavelee where we read, "The family of the [biological] FATHER is regarded as the proper family, but the family of the [biological] MOTHER IS NOT regarded as proper family". [Baba Bathra, 109b] In Israelite and Jewish tradition the lineage of the *biological* father [never the mother] determines the children's tribal affiliation and genealogical line even for one who is adopted.
In the Greek text we read, "....being son 'hos enomizeto' (ὡς ἐνομίζετο) of Joseph...of David....of Adam...of God". The Greek word used here, "enomizeto", is closely related to "nomos" (law; rule; principle; or *norm*). This could very well be translated, "...he was the son of Joseph 'according to accepted [Jewish] tradition, custom or norm' ", or "...he was the male descendant of Joseph...of David...'as was generally thought' or 'as was legally considered' or 'as was normally reckoned' by all". The popular translation "...being the son as was supposed of Joseph" works only in the sense that this generally accepted supposition proves to be the case as we find in the book of Acts. Here we read, "And on the day of the Sabbath we went forth outside the gate by a river where we supposed (enomizomen / ἐνομίζομεν) [i.e. as we expected to find and did in fact find] a place of prayer to be, and sitting down there we spoke...". [16:13] IOW, what is "supposed" by everyone to be true is in fact actually the case.
The Greek language has words to express *not* really the son of Joseph as was thought, if that was what the author intended say in opposition to what he actually wrote, "being son (as properly reckoned = as legally thought = as is actually the case) of Joseph...of David..." The words "ὡς ἐνομίζετο" (i.e. "according to normative custom and natural reckoning") indicated that this natural patrilineal genetic line was rightly assumed to be the case. There is no hint given by this genealogical record that this son of Adam was "adopted" by Joseph. If the Greek author had wanted to say that Yeshua was "adopted", he would have been able to say that in Greek. But, Luke's genealogy claims that Yeshua is Yoseph's natural heir and not simply his adopted heir. There is nothing in the "Greek grammar" that indicates that Joseph was declared to be either the falsely assumed father or the adoptive father of Yeshua. On the contrary, Yeshua was plainly declared to be the natural biological descendant (according to the patrilineal norm) of Joseph who was the patrilineal son of David. IOW, what was "supposed" by all to be was in fact the case. Both Yeshua and Yoseph were naturally and rightly [not wrongly] considered to be the biological descendants (i.e. sons) of David and of Abraham and of Adam.
Luke's declaration that this Joshua was "the son of God" (through Joseph, Elee....and Adam) is the climax of the whole genealogical chain. This chain begins with Yeshua, the first-born son of Joseph, his natural human father. It moves on to his second human "father" (or more precisely in English to his "grandfather"), Elee. And finally, the chain ends with "(the son) of Adam, (the son) of God", Who is the ultimate father or creator. So Adam was naturally considered to be the first human father (ancestor) of Yeshua the son of Joseph.
