APPENDIX THREEJoseph has no place in Jesus, genealogy.
Our Lord's human ancestor was His mother. Consequently, having no human father, His human ancestry can only be traced through Mary. Joseph has no place in it. Luke's list is a genealogy in the true sense of the word. It is therefore:
'An account of a person's descent from an ancestor, or ancestors, by enumeration of the intermediate ancestors; lineage, pedigree, family stock, progeny.' (Oxford Dictionary.)
As such this list can only have the names of persons from whom they are directly descended. That is from the male persons in that list, for only the male has the 'seed'. No man descended from a different forefather can be named in that line of descent (or genealogy).
A woman from elsewhere can be brought into the line - but only by marriage to a man whose name is already in that list. When the line passes to a woman, and there is no male descendant, that line ceases. If such a woman marries, it is the line of her spouse that continues. Hence any offspring that is produced is his seed. In other words, the 'house' to which the woman belongs, comes to an end, and a new 'house', that of her husband, commences.
My purpose in presenting this definition and explanation is to clarify the difference between the two lists we are studying, and the positions in those lists occupied by Mary and Joseph.
Luke's list is a perfectly straightforward table of ancestors, and as Joseph's name appears in it as Heli's son, this must be his true relationship to Heli. Had Joseph come from any other line of descent, his name could not possibly he placed in that list. Therefore Joseph must he Heli's son.
As this is so, it is obvious that Joseph could not possibly be the son of Jacob, as a cursory examination of Matthew's record has led some to believe. This also makes it certain that it was Mary who was 'begotten' by Jacob. Mary was Jacob's daughter, and therefore next to him in the royal line of succession.
But what would be the position if, as many declare, Luke gives us Mary's genealogy, and Matthew shows that Joseph was the son of Jacob?
As there can be no doubt about Jacob's place in the line of succession, two things follow:
1. that Mary would not have been next in line.
2. that it was Jacob's son Joseph, who was the next in line. This in turn would rnean that one of the actual sons of Joseph and Mary, would follow Joseph as next in line. Then, as Jesus was not a son of Joseph, He would have no place in that line!