Christian Texts and History • Was Matk the first who introduced Joseph as putative father of Jesus?

Obviously there is no explicit mention of Joseph. But I think that Mark wanted that the reader realized that implicitly "Joseph" is the name of the putative father of Jesus.


Afterall, one of the first things made by one who hates Marcion is giving a name to the father of Jesus (giving a name to the father of the "son of the unknown father" == Bar-Abbas). As to the divine father of Jesus, in Mark there are no doubts at all: the divine father is YHWH.


As to the human putative father of Jesus, the implicit answer is: Joseph.

Why?

Because of Joseph of Arimathea, essentially, since he works as a father who buries his own son therefore:

• He is a mirror of the real putative father;

• or he is himself the putative father.

In the first case, Joseph of Arimathea and the putative father work both as subtle allusions to Jesus being the suffering Messiah ben Joseph. A messiah in line with Jewish tradition. Pace Marcion.


In the second case the implication may be that none knew the putative father of Jesus because he was a disciple of Jesus in secret.

Statistics: Posted by Giuseppe — Thu Oct 31, 2024 10:23 pm

---