Everyone comes from somewhere. Where we grew up. When we grew up. Who our parents were. Each of these factors played a dynamic role in who we become. Jesus of Nazareth was no different. This seems so simple, so obvious, yet we pass over it too easily. My experience has taught me, most Christians find more comfort in the myth of Superman than in the reality of the Incarnation. Superman looked like us, but he had powers beyond us; he was godlike. The Incarnation is not about God being God; he already was. Rather, in the Incarnation, God became human, and provided the greatest revelation of himself and his will (Hebrews 1:1-2). Humanity, though, is messy; and so is Jesus’ humanity. His family, however, tethers Jesus to humanity. But Jesus was not a man for all people and all time. He belonged to a specific time, and to a specific people. His family gave him his identity and his faith. We usually only think of Jesus’ family during the Christmas season. This is unfortunate, for Jesus’ family played an all-important role in his life and faith, especially his father, Joseph.
Joseph is perhaps the most overlooked figure in the Gospels, yet he impacted Jesus’ faith and teaching more than any other figure in his life. Joseph does not appear within the Gospels apart from the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke. He most likely died prior to Jesus’ public ministry. Joseph evades our thinking, however, not because of his minor appearance in the Gospels, but rather because of our distance from the cultural and spiritual world of Jesus.
So, who was Joseph?
Jesus, his parents, and his brothers (Mark 6:3), bore popular Jewish names. Joseph and Jesus were some of the most common Jewish male names in the first century.[1] Jewish male names in the first century typically used biblical names. Parents, however, avoided giving their sons names of preeminent biblical heroes, such as Abraham, Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, and Elijah. Names of secondary biblical figures such as Jacob, Judah, Joseph, and Joshua (see Mark 6:3) appeared frequently. The most popular biblical names, however, were those used by the Hasmoneans, the priestly family who fought against the Syrian Seleucids and eventually won Jewish independence in the second century BC. The instigator of the Hasmonean rebellion was the priest Mattathias from Modi’in. After his death, his five sons continued to fight against the Greeks. The biblical Hasmonean names dominated male Jewish names in the first century. The most common Jewish male name being Simon (Matthew 16:17), the son of Mattathias who achieved Jewish independence from the Seleucids. Jesus’ father, Joseph (Luke 2:4), bore a biblical name of one of Mattathias’ sons (2 Maccabees 8:22). Joseph was the second most common Jewish male name of this period; a name Jesus’ father shared with the famous first century Jewish historian, Josephus.[2] Jesus, which is the common Greek form of the name Joshua in the first century, was pronounced “Yeshua,” but in the Galilee, the pronunciation of the name would have been “Yeshu.”[3]
Joseph, like his son, belonged to the house of David (Matthew 1:20; Luke 2:4). Matthew and Luke both indicate Jesus’ Davidic lineage came through his father (Matthew 1:6-16; Luke 3:23-32). Others living in this period also claimed lineage of the “House of David.”[4]
A single-chambered, rock-hewn tomb, discovered in 1971, in the neighborhood of Giv’at HaMivtar, a northern suburb of modern Jerusalem, contained sixteen ossuaries (limestone boxes used for secondary burial, after the flesh had decayed). Six of these ossuaries bore inscriptions; one of which reads, “Of the House of David” (של בידוד). The Mishnah described the special role the “House of David” had in brining wood to the Temple: “The wood-offering (see Nehemiah 7:10) of the priests and the people was brought nine times [in the year]…on the 20th of Tammuz, by the sons of David” (m. Ta’anit4:5). Families within the land of Israel in the first century identified themselves as belonging to the “House of David” and as “sons of David.”
Rabbinic sources ascribe Davidic lineage to several sages, the most prominent being Hillel the Elder (y. Ta’anit 4:2;Genesis Rabbah 98:8). So too, Eusebius, deriving his material from Hegesippus, claimed the Roman emperors Vespasian, Domitian, and Trajan sought the descendants of the line of David (Ecclesiastical History 3.12; 3.19-20; 3.32.2-4). He claimed Jesus’ family was caught up in these searches. Even if Eusebius and rabbinic tradition ascribed Davidic lineage to individuals, including the family of Jesus, for apologetic purposes, their witness suggests some identified as belonging to the “House of David.” Even apologetic ascriptions only have meaning if some identified as belonging to David’s line.
Apart from Joseph’s name and lineage, the Gospels portray him as a very pious Jewish man.
The Law of Moses (Exodus 34:20; Numbers 18:14-16) required a father to pay a redemption fee upon the birth of his firstborn son, from the thirtieth day after the boy’s birth. A father could pay the redemption fee to a priest anywhere within the land of Israel. It did not have to take place in Jerusalem or the Temple (t. Halah. 2:7-9). Some extremely devout parents, however, understood the command as referring to paying the redemption fee in the Temple in Jerusalem. Exodus 34:20 states, “All the first-born of your sons you will redeem. And none shall appear before me empty (ולא יראו פני ריקם). The phrase, “And none shall appear before me empty,” only occurs in one other place within the Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy 16:16 (see Exodus 23:15). The passage in Deuteronomy instructed the Israelites to appear before the Lord, on pilgrimage, three times a year at Passover, Pentecost, and Sukkot. The unique appearance of this phrase in these two passages would have suggested to certain pious Jews, like the pilgrimage festivals, which took place in Jerusalem and the Temple, so too the redemption of the firstborn son should take place in the Jerusalem Temple. Joseph read the biblical command in this manner and chose to perform the act at the Jerusalem Temple to show his devotion (Luke 2:23).
Luke provides further testimony to the strict devotion of Jesus’ family: “Every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the Feast of Passover” (2:41). The Torah required Jewish men to appear before the Lord three times a year (Exodus 23:17; 34:23; Deuteronomy 16:16). This commandment proved costly and time consuming for those living outside of Jerusalem in the first century. The Sages, therefore, ruled, “to appear” before the Lord did not mean at every festival or every year, but only when one made pilgrimage, he must bring an “appearance” sacrifice (see m. Hagigah 1:6). A person may only travel to Jerusalem on pilgrimage once every few years or perhaps only once in a lifetime.[5] Joseph’s annual Passover pilgrimage, taking his family to Jerusalem, (a practice Jesus seems to have continued as an adult), displays an exceptional devotion to God and his commandments on the part of Joseph.
Religious instruction took place primarily within the home in ancient Jewish society (see Deut. 6:7-9; 11:20; Philo, Embassy to Gaius 210; m. Yoma 8:4; 4 Maccabees 18:10-19; Sifre Deuteronomy on Deut. 11:19). Josephus describes the importance of religious instruction among Jews in the land of Israel in this manner: “Above all we pride ourselves on the education of our children, and regard as the most essential task in life the observance of our laws and of the pious practices, based thereupon, which we have inherited” (Against Apion 1:60). He continues, “It (the Torah) orders that they (Jewish children) shall be taught to read, and shall learn both the laws and the deeds of their forefathers (see Deut. 6:7; 11:19), in order that they may imitate the latter, and being grounded in the former, may neither transgress nor have any excuse for being ignorant of them” (Against Apion 2:204; see also 4 Maccabees 18:10-19). It fell to the father to teach his children the Scriptures and traditions of Israel (see t. Kiddushin 1:11). Joseph played a foundational role in Jesus’ faith and practice; he was his teacher.
The home also functioned as the primary place of prayer (along with the Temple in Jerusalem) in the land of Israel in the first century. The first century Jewish historian Josephus describes how most Jews recited Deuteronomy 6:4-9, the Shema, once if not twice daily in their homes. Jesus identified the command to “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and strength” (Deut. 6:5) as the “great commandment” (Matt. 22:34-40). A contemporary of Jesus’ described the reciting of the Shema as accepting “the kingdom of Heaven” upon oneself, acknowledging God’s kingship and His right to rule, as well as submitting to His rule and commands.
We can assume Joseph taught Jesus to recite this injunction every day of his life. It was his habit. When Jesus prayed on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, on the night he was arrested, he expressed, “Father…not my will, but Yours be done” (Luke 22:39-46), a prayer derived from Deuteronomy 6:4-9. Had Jesus not developed the daily habit of submitting to God’s will, in that moment, when so much hung upon his submission to his Father’s will, would he have been able to go through with it? He fell back upon his habit, the habit shaped and demonstrated by his father, Joseph, to submit his will to God’s rule and reign. And we are all the recipients of his obedience.
A father bore the obligation to his son “to teach him the Torah and to teach him a craft” (t. Kiddushin 1:11); thus, sons frequently followed in their fathers’ occupation. Matthew identified Joseph as a carpenter (τέκτων; Matthew 13:55); while Mark ascribed to Jesus the same occupation (τέκτων; Mark 6:3). Modern readers of the Gospels assume Joseph’s position as a carpenter somehow identifies him as a simple, manual workman. Yet, carpenters were artisans, regarded as particularly learned within first century society. If a difficult problem arose, people in the village would ask, “Is there a carpenter among us, or the son of a carpenter, who can solve the problem for us?”[6] Many of Israel’s Sages came from the artisan class, carpenters, farmers, potters, fishermen, even day-laborers.
A discovery at Khirbet Qana (Cana of Galilee: John 2:1-12) indicates a degree of literary training and ability among Galilean artisans, like Jesus and Joseph.[7] Jewish Sages in the first century were not professional academics. A Sage, who lived in the generation before Jesus, taught, “Love manual labor and hate mastery” (m. Avot 1:10; see Matthew 23:6-12). In this way, a Sage never lost his connection to daily life; manual labor assured he would never become an effete academic. A Sage, in the generation after Jesus, said, “If there is no bread (i.e., work), there is no Torah” (m. Avot 3:17). Work was seen as a means for attaining spiritual elevation (see Avot de Rabbi Nathan, version A, 11).
Matthew provides an important detail about Joseph’s piety and learning overlooked by most modern readers of the Gospel. When Joseph found out Mary was with child, he desired to protect her from disgrace and put her away secretly. He sought to protect her honor. Matthew described Joseph within this context as “a righteous man” (δίκαιος; dikaios: 1:19). To refer to someone as “a righteous man” within ancient Judaism meant more than merely identifying him as a “standup guy.” It spoke both to his piety and his learning. The Greek term used by Matthew parallels the Hebrew noun צדיק (tzaddik), a term often used of learned Sages (see t. Zevahim 2:17; Kallah Rabbati 6:4; and y. Shekalim 2, 46d-47a; m. Avot 1:2; Shimon the Righteous [שמעון הצדיק]).
Ancient Jewish sources often identified a particular group of Jewish pietists by the term tzaddik. This group, known as the Hasidim (חסידים),[8] were active primarily from the first century BC into the early second century AD in the Galilee. Known for their exceptional piety, they worked miracles, healed the sick, brought rain, drove out demons, and rescued people from various troubles. They emphasized a person’s relationship to another, particularly the needy, prayer, and poverty as a way of life.[9] They spoke of the value of “the one” to God. In prayer, they were known to pray for extended periods of time, waiting an hour before they prayed to ensure their hearts were directed towards God (m. Berachot 5:1). They stood on the fringes of Pharisaic Judaism, and their emphasis on the needs of the human individual above ritual purity placed them in tension and conflict with the Pharisees. Many of the story parables preserved in rabbinic literature reflect their beliefs, which indicates they likely utilized parables to communicate.[10] This group valued women and their honor, like Joseph did Mary (Matt. 1:18-19; b. Ta’anit 23a-b; 24b-25a; b. Shabbat 127b; Avot de Rabbi Nathan version A, 8).
One of the earliest pietists was a man named Honi. He received the nickname, the Circle Drawer, because of his action when he once prayed for rain. He drew a circle on the ground and refused to move from the place until God sent rain upon the land (m. Ta’anit 3:8). Josephus described Honi as a “righteous man” (δίκαιος; dikaios; Anitquities 14.22; y. Ta’anit 3, 67a).
Matthew’s description of Joseph as a “righteous man” (δίκαιος; dikaios) identified him as a learned pietist. Given the commonality within first century Judaism to designate the Hasidim by the term tzaddik, Matthew’s description of Joseph as a “righteous man” may locate him among this stream of Jewish piety. Not only do we find many similarities between Jesus and the Hasidim, both in action and faith, but so too, his brother James displays strong parallels with these pietists. The letter of James contains many similarities with the teachings of the Hasidim, which cannot be directly traced back to Jesus. This raises the question whether the common source between these two brothers was their father Joseph, the one responsible for their religious education?
Joseph had a profound impact upon Jesus’ education (see Luke 2:46-49). When we read the Gospels within the spiritual world of ancient Judaism, we find Jesus had an outstanding Jewish education. His training and education surpassed that of Paul’s.[11] Josephus mentioned Jesus’ exceptional learning in his testimony about Jesus, known as the Testimonium Flavianum. Christian scribes corrupted the Greek manuscripts of Josephus’ description of Jesus, but the original version appears in a tenth-century history of the work written in Arabic by the Christian author Agapius: “At this time there was a wise man (Greek: σοφός; sophos)[12] who was called Jesus. And his conduct (literally, way of life) was good and his learning outstanding.”[13] Underneath Jesus’ simple language in the Gospels, lays a complex current of thought connected to the highest level of academic training—training for which his father was responsible.
Everyone comes from somewhere. Jesus did too. Although the Gospels do not present Joseph as a major character, when we understand the spiritual world of ancient Judaism, the faith of Jesus, we see just how profound an impact his father had upon his faith.
[1] M. Turnage, Windows Into the Bible. Cultural and Historical Insights from the Bible for Modern Readers (Logion Press: Springfield, MO 2016), 211-213.
[2] T. Ilan, Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity. Part 1, Palestine 330 BCE-200 CE (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 91; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002), 5-8, 56.
[3] D. Flusser, Jesus (3rd ed.; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2001), 24.
[4] Turnage, Windows Into the Bible, 220-221.
[5] S. Safrai, Pilgrimage in the Days of the Second Temple (Tel Aviv: Am Hasefer, 1965), 42-87 [Hebrew].
[6] J. Levy, Wörterbuch über die Talmudim und Midraschim (vol. 3; Berlin, 1924), 338.
[7] E. Eshel, D. R. Edward, “Language and Writing in Early Roman Galilee: Social location of a potter’s abecedary from Khirbet Qana,” in Religion and Society in Roman Palestine: Old Questions, New Approaches (D. R. Edwards, ed.; New York and London: Routledge, 2004), 49-55.
[8] On the Hasidim, see m. Berachot 5:1ff; m. Ta’anit 3:8; m. Avot 3:9; t. Baba Qama 2:6; b. Niddah 38a-b; b. Nedarim 10a; b. Menahot 40b-41a; y. Terumot 8, 4.46b; Tractate Derekh Eretz Zuta, and Tanna d’be Eliyahu; and S. Safrai, “The Teaching of the Pietists in Mishnaic Literature,” Journal of Jewish Studies 16 (1965): 15-33; idem, “Jesus and the Hasidim,” Jerusalem Perspective Online; http://www.jerusalemperspective.org/default.aspx?tabid=27&ArticleID=1669; idem, “Mishnat Hasidim in Tannaitic Literature,” in Ve-Hinei Ein Yosef, A Collection in Memory of Yosef Amorai (Tel Aviv, 1973), 136-152 [Hebrew]; idem “The Pious and the Men of Deeds,” Zion 50 (1985): 133-154 [Hebrew]; idem, “Jesus as a Hasid,” in Proceedings of the Tenth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem, 1990), 1-7 [Hebrew]; idem, “The Term Derekh Erez,” Tarbiz 60 (1991): 147-162 [Hebrew]; Ch. Safrai and Z. Safrai, “Holy Men and Rabbis in Talmudic Antiquity,” in Saints and Role Models in Judaism and Christianity (eds. M. Poorthuis and J. Schwartz; Leiden: Brill, 2004), 45-58; see also G. Vermes, “Hanina ben Dosa,” Journal of Jewish Studies 23 (1972): 28-50; idem, “Hanina ben Dosa,” Journal of Jewish Studies 24 (1974): 51-64.
[9] See Turnage, “The Three Pillars of Jesus’ Faith,” Enrichment 16/4 (Fall 2011): 100-101.
[10] R. S. Notley and Z. Safrai, Parables of the Sages: Jewish Wisdom from Jesus to Rav Ashi (Jerusalem: Carta, 2011), 19-27.
[11] Flusser, “Hillel and Jesus: Two Ways of Self-Awareness,” in Hillel and Jesus: Comparisons of Two Major Religious Leaders(J. H. Charlesworth and L. L. Johns, eds.: Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997), 93.
[12] Josephus’ description of Jesus as a “wise man,” a “sophist,” parallels his description of other Jewish sages as sophists (War1:648, 650; and Antiquities 17:152). Similarly, Lucian of Samosata, a Greek author of the second century AD, referred to Jesus as “the crucified sophist” (The Passing of Peregrinus 13).
[13] S. Pines, “An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and Its Implications,” in Studies in the History of Religion: The Collected Works of Shlomo Pines, Volume IV (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1996), 37-115.
This is excellent...thank you for sharing it.
Hey, Marc. Excellent post and insight. While my perspectives on Jesus may not be identical to yours, I agree that Joseph is likely "the most important Biblical figure we've never given much thought to" because of the influence he would've had on Jesus. I hope to write a post soon exploring these ideas and so your post made my morning. What an important reminder for us all of the power we have to positively shape, influence, and empower the young people in our lives. Wishing you a Merry Christmas!!