Jump to content

Talk:Saint Joseph

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wrong lineage

[edit]

@Medusahead: What you have commented out has been pointed by Jewish scholars who oppose Christianity. But Christian apologists found a way around that. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:24, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. However, in any case there should be a possibility to point out who said (claims?) that, as it begins "Christians point to Joseph's lineage…". --Medusahead (talk) 08:43, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

@IP: Christian law and Islamic law did not exist yet. So, Joseph could not be not the father of Jesus according to their laws.

Joseph could not say "I choose to obey Islamic law", since there was no such law at that time.

Joseph was the legal father of Jesus in history. That is independent of religious tradition. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

[1] Randy, as I think it was me who took that out: I wondered why this is listed as a title? Of course, "legal father of Jesus" is a way to describe Saint Joseph but in my opinion it is not a title. Maybe one should shorten this list of titles anyway – the missal only lists "spouse of the mother of God". Patron of the Universal Church seems to be another title officially used. Medusahead (talk) 07:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section is not only for religious titles but for descriptors, and 'legal father of Jesus' has been in the infobox for years. The infobox already contains 'Guardian of the Holy Family' which covers 'Guardian of Jesus'. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And, both are Biblically and historically incorrect. HarmonyA8 (talk) 06:36, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity of Saint Joseph

[edit]

It is described in Deuteronomy 26:5 that Saint Joseph is of either syrian or aramean ethnic background depending on the translation/version. Zezemachado (talk) 00:15, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gagliardi

[edit]

Are the views of Mario Gagliardi worth mentioning, even if only as a fringe theory. A lot of people's religious views might appear preposterous to adherents of different religious views. PatGallacher (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say not at this time. Gagliardi raises two hypotheses, the other being the immaculate conception of Joseph. He speaks of these as "questions that still require a long theological reflection, given that they are only hypotheses."[2] They come at the very end of the book, almost as an afterthought. It seems less of an hypothesis than mere speculation. There doesn't seem to have been a great deal of discussion in the past seven years. Manannan67 (talk) 07:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]