Jesus, ‘Son of God’ and ‘Son of David’: The ‘Adoption’ of Jesus into the Davidic Line

Yigal Levin

Journal for the Study of the New Testament · 2006 · 38 citations · 42 references

Concepts

TL;DR

The Gospels assert Jesus' divine paternity and Davidic descent, yet if he was not Joseph's biological son, scholars posit that Joseph adopted him—a practice unknown in Jewish law but familiar in Roman aristocratic custom. The study investigates the assumption that Joseph adopted Jesus and demonstrates that such adoption was not recognized in Jewish law of the period. The authors find that the Roman notion of divifilius in the Gospels suggests a Gentile rather than Jewish cultural influence.

Abstract

The authors of both the first and third Gospels, by insisting on both Jesus' divine paternity and his Davidic descent, pose a conundrum: if Jesus was not Joseph' biological son, in what sense is he the Davidic Messiah? Most modern scholars assume that Joseph must have adopted Jesus in some form or another, thus giving him Davidic status, and many even point to such adoption as a ‘Jewish custom’. This article examines this assumption and shows that adoption was unknown in Jewish law of the period. Furthermore, such adoption was well known in Roman law, especially among the aristocracy. In the case of such emperors as Augustus, whose adoptive fathers had been deified posthumously, this gave them the status of divifilius, ‘son of god’. The inclusion of such a Roman concept into the Gospels may be an indication of the Gentile, rather than Jewish, cultural backgrounds of the evangelists.

References

42