What? No Josephology?!?!?

LivingWordUnity · Jul 3, 2007

prodromos said:
LWU, I ask this sincerely.

prodromos said:
Did you come up with this idea on your own, did you learn of it from the EWTN article, or was it something you were taught?

What idea, that Jesus is both man and God at the same time?

Prodromos, did you come up with Christianity on your own?

prodromos · Jul 3, 2007

LivingWordUnity said:
What idea, that Jesus is both man and God at the same time?

no, the idea that you have been arguing all this time, that Joseph was secretly the king.

LivingWordUnity · Jul 3, 2007

prodromos said:

prodromos said:
no, the idea that you have been arguing all this time, that Joseph was secretly the king.

If Jesus was secretly the King of Judah, why wouldn't his father Joseph have been secretly a king as well?

I understand that the kingship of Jesus is a Heavenly one, but does that mean that King David, King Solomon, and all the other kings after were not earthly kings?

All I am saying is that they were all earthly kings including Joseph and that Jesus inherited that kingship, but the kingship of Jesus is the superior one that lasts forever.

Just because Jesus showed a different model of what it means to be a king does not mean that his kingship was not of the line of David and at the same time a Heavenly Kingship.

Uphill Battle · Jul 3, 2007

LWU, you're arguing the very words of Christ on this one.

prodromos · Jul 3, 2007

LivingWordUnity said:
If Jesus was secretly the King of Judah, why wouldn't his father Joseph have been secretly a king as well?

I understand that the kingship of Jesus is a Heavenly one, but does that mean that King David, King Solomon, and all the other kings after were not earthly kings?

All I am saying is that they were all earthly kings including Joseph and that Jesus inherited that kingship, but the kingship of Jesus is the superior one that lasts forever.

Just because Jesus showed a different model of what it means to be a king does not mean that his kingship was not of the line of David and at the same time a Heavenly Kingship.

Not only have you not answered the question I asked of you, you persist in your belief even though scripture plainly states that no descendant of Jechoniah would sit upon the throne. Matthew traces Joseph's descent through Jechoniah therefore Joseph cannot secretly be king. Now there is something unique about Joseph but I'm not posting any more on this until you concede that your argument as it stands is unscriptural.

Rick Otto · Jul 3, 2007

Don't attend every argument you're invited to.

There was no "secret kingship" of Jesus.
He certainly made no secret of it even without explicitly spelling it out in public on a regular basis until He was ready to end His ministry. He knew what the response would be.

(drum roll)... He predestined it!
Sorry, cheap shot, I know.
I mean, He was savvy, not just nerdy intelligent.
He had a perfect sense of timing.

"Secret King" has a Quaballa - like ring to it.
It is all beside the point of his being totaly sovereign as Creator, The King of Glory.
THAT is what the secret was... what He was realy king of, not just of the Jews.

LivingWordUnity · Jul 3, 2007

prodromos said:

prodromos said:
Not only have you not answered the question I asked of you, you persist in your belief even though scripture plainly states that no descendant of Jechoniah would sit upon the throne. Matthew traces Joseph's descent through Jechoniah therefore Joseph cannot secretly be king. Now there is something unique about Joseph but I'm not posting any more on this until you concede that your argument as it stands is unscriptural.

Read chapter 13 in "Reasons to Believe" By Dr. Scott Hahn. After reading that, decide for yourself if what he says makes sense.

prodromos · Jul 3, 2007

Nevermind. What I wanted to say is that Joseph is unique in that he can trace his lineage to David through two lines. He is physically at descendant of David through Solomon (and Jechoniah, thus unable to occupy the throne) but he is legally a descendant of David through Nathan. This is because his physical father Jacob rose up seed for his stepbrother Eli who had married but died before producing an heir. Jacob and Eli shared the same mother who was first married to Matthat and then later to Matthan after becoming widowed. Since Joseph's legal parentage takes precedence over his physical, he is no longer affected by the curse in Jeremiah 36:30

This is written of by Julius Africanus (d. A.D. 240)

prodromos · Jul 3, 2007

LivingWordUnity said:
Read chapter 13 in "Reasons to Believe" By Dr. Scott Hahn. After reading that, decide for yourself if what he says makes sense.

Whatever Dr. Scott Hahn's argument is it is moot, because as a physical descendant of Jechoniah, Joseph cannot be secretly king. It is a fatal flaw in whatever Dr. Hahn argues.

prodromos · Jul 3, 2007

LivingWordUnity said:
Read chapter 13 in "Reasons to Believe" By Dr. Scott Hahn.

Are you offering to send me a copy

kepha31 · Jul 3, 2007

Jeremiah 36:30 proves that Matthew cannot be showing Joseph to be the rightful heir to the throne since no one from Jechoniah onwards would sit upon the throne.

That does not eliminate the throne itself.

prodromos · Jul 3, 2007

kepha31 said:
That does not eliminate the throne itself.

Have I ever argued that it did? I get the feeling that people are reading way too much into what we've been discussing.

Jesus is a descendant of David. As such He is a legitimate heir to the throne. We've been stating this from the beginning.

Pennelope · Jul 8, 2007

Good heavens. When I think about how Joseph or Mary for that matter, would react to people duking it out over which of them gets more attention -- well, I don't know if they would laugh or weep.

Each of them was content with a hidden life centered on Jesus. Seems to me a waste of time to be caught up with, "My humble saint has been unfairly overlooked by the people who like your humble saint!"

I mean, really!

By the way, I love each of them deeply. And I'm so glad their different.

Rick Otto · Jul 10, 2007

except the duking is about secret kingship & how many contenders for their throne there was. Not about comparative attention, which I'm sure you'll agree, Mary gets more veneration, just countin' the paraphanalia like statues in the yards, "Hail Mary" recitations, titles & extraordinary attributes, etc... you get my drift.

And actualy, not to be contentious, but it isn't realy about fairness either. It's about the inordinate amount Mary gets. My idea in starting this thread was to make that obvious by comparison, not to claim unfairness.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Let us now return to the regular portion of our program.

What? No Josephology?!?!?

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic

Senior Veteran

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

The Dude Abides

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

The Dude Abides

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency