This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Saint Joseph article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3,
4Auto-archiving period: 92 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
I think it is wrong to call Joseph "a New Testament figure". Since all scholars agree that Jesus existed historically, he clearly had a father (independently of religious beliefs about the Virgin birth of Jesus) and scholars usually accept that his father was indeed named Joseph (Yosef was a common name in 1st century Galilee). So I suggest we edit this page in stating that he was "a 1st century man of Nazareth" similarly to the page of Mary, mother of Jesus.- Karma1998 ( talk) 00:25, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
As said in the version comment: It is unclear what this is supposed to tell the reader. Furthermore, it is also illogical: if applies to Mary and St. John as well, Joseph cannot be "the only Saint". Furthermore, there is more than one kind of relic (see for second or third class relics). As I could see from at least one of your sources: the source only says, that there seem to be no bones etc, however, your wording is "not claimed by anyone..." Medusahead ( talk) 09:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
@ 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)
@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)
[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)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Saint Joseph article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3,
4Auto-archiving period: 92 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
I think it is wrong to call Joseph "a New Testament figure". Since all scholars agree that Jesus existed historically, he clearly had a father (independently of religious beliefs about the Virgin birth of Jesus) and scholars usually accept that his father was indeed named Joseph (Yosef was a common name in 1st century Galilee). So I suggest we edit this page in stating that he was "a 1st century man of Nazareth" similarly to the page of Mary, mother of Jesus.- Karma1998 ( talk) 00:25, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
As said in the version comment: It is unclear what this is supposed to tell the reader. Furthermore, it is also illogical: if applies to Mary and St. John as well, Joseph cannot be "the only Saint". Furthermore, there is more than one kind of relic (see for second or third class relics). As I could see from at least one of your sources: the source only says, that there seem to be no bones etc, however, your wording is "not claimed by anyone..." Medusahead ( talk) 09:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
@ 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)
@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)
[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)