Apologist Recommendations


Could anyone recommend an apologist(s) who specializes in Messianic Prophecy or the Old Testament, and Biblical Laws and Genealogy?

I have a certain apologetic dilemma that I can not find a clear answer to. I’ve contacted several apologists already but, like I said, cannot get a clear answer or no response at all. Specifically, the dilemma is a challenge to Jesus’ Messiahship, so if anyone knows any apologist(s) that could help me out with this, it would be much appreciated.



I am not an apologist but I know my faith. I also mite be able to help you find someone if I new more about your delema.


This is basically the argument: “If Jesus were really born of a virgin, then Joseph was not his father and he is really not a descendant of David, even according to Matthew’s genealogy. And if you claim that Luke’s genealogy is that of Mary, Jesus still doesn’t qualify, since the genealogy in Luke goes through David’s son Nathan, whereas the Messianic promises must go through David’s son Solomon. Therefore, Jesus cannot be the Messiah.”


"This man was the most prosperous of all the Sons of the East. " (Job 1 verse 3)catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=22

Just like triune faith- makes sense, as only answer-

It must be seen as child of joseph, but not neccessarially biological child (Adopted) anyhow- some answers here-

Virgin is a requirement of prophesy (Isiaih 7 verse 14)-
as to the format God use :slight_smile: ?
but Joseph would be seen as it in a sense, but it must be the son- sounds like a “word war” to me- it is absolute that it must be a virgin, but then he tricks you using another prophesy-, let us look at another use- so what, it is the seed of Abraham- notice seed (often in the bible, we refer to a spiritual descendant, with the physical as a sign, ask him if he’s a child of Abraham, etc, or see gen 19 v 12, where Lot is told to take his sons, see also gen 6 v 2, ), but is complex- because it warrants both to be true, so we try to understand it in light of both, try the spiritual descendant, and seed argument- show them the idea as shown in (P.s. does it say- he shal be called, or heis, can’t find it now, but could)

"Pope John Paul II

"And while it is important for the Church to profess the virginal conception of Jesus, it is no less important to uphold Mary’s marriage to Joseph, because juridically Joseph’s fatherhood depends on it. Thus one understands why the generations are listed according to the genealogy of Joseph:

"‘Why,’ St. Augustine asks, ‘should they not be according to Joseph? Was he not Mary’s husband? . . . Scripture states, through the authority of an angel, that he was her husband. Do not fear, says the angel, to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. Joseph was told to name the child, although not born from his seed. She will bear a son, the angel says, and you will call him Jesus. Scripture recognizes that Jesus is not born of Joseph’s seed, since in his concern about the origin of Mary’s pregnancy, Joseph is told that it is of the Holy Spirit. Nonetheless, he is not deprived of his fatherly authority from the moment that he is told to name the child. Finally, even the Virgin Mary, well aware that she has not conceived Christ as a result of conjugal relations with Joseph, still calls him Christ’s father.’

"The Son of Mary is also Joseph’s Son by virtue of the marriage bond that unites them: ‘By reason of their faithful marriage both of them deserve to be called Christ’s parents, not only his mother, but also his father, who was a parent in the same way that he was the mother’s spouse: in mind, not in the flesh.’ In this marriage none of the requisites of marriage were lacking: ‘In Christ’s parents all the goods of marriage were realized—offspring, fidelity, the sacrament: the offspring being the Lord Jesus himself; fidelity, since there was no adultery: the sacrament, since there was no divorce.’

“It is to Joseph, then, that the messenger turns, entrusting to him the responsibilities of an earthly father with regard to Mary’s Son” (Guardian of the Redeemer 3; cf. Augustine, Sermo 51, 10, 16: PL 38, 342; De nuptiis et concupiscentia I, 11, 12–13: PL 44, 421).

True Fatherhood

Fr. Larry M. Toschi, O.S.J., an expert on Joseph, concludes that “because of his true marriage to Mary, Jesus’ Mother, Joseph is truly Jesus’ father, though not in a natural, biological sense. . . . His legal fatherhood is certainly key to Matthew 1, and it must be understood that in Semitic thought it was as real as biological paternity. . . . Besides passing on a name in the line of David, Joseph also gives the faith name Jesus, meaning ‘Savior’ (cf. Matt. 1:20, 25). . . . To all appearances Jesus is known as Joseph’s ‘son,’ so much so that people have difficulty imagining anything different (cf. Matt. 13:55)” (Joseph in the New Testament, Guardian of the Redeemer Books, 38).

Despite the scandal of those who deny the Virgin Birth, we should not deny Joseph his proper place and title as Jesus’ father. It is very clear that within a proper context of Jesus’ divine origin and Virgin Birth—and by rejecting the secularism and skepticism of our current age—we can understand the phrase “Joseph the father of Jesus” as completely faithful to Scripture, Catholic Tradition, the Doctors of the Church, and Pope John Paul II.

With Mary we acknowledge Joseph as the legal father of our Lord—the father chosen by God himself. What a marvelous man he must have been; what a wonderful father he proved to be; what an example for all fathers today.


Could anyone recommend an apologist that I could contact?


Local canon lawyer could aid.

Otherwise, see a Jesuit.


In case you were unhelped:wink: :cool: :thumbsup:

here is a verse which will help win-

Deuteronomy chapter 25 verse 8-9.:

Verses 5-10

*** Douay Rheims:***:cool:

"5 When brethren dwell together, and one of them dieth without children, the wife of the deceased shall not marry to another: but his brother shall take her, and raise up seed for his brother: 6 And the first son he shall have of her he shall call by his name, that his name be not abolished out of Israel. 7 But if he will not take his brother’s wife, who by law belongeth to him, the woman shall go to the gate of the city, and call upon the ancients, and say: My husband’s brother refuseth to raise up his brother’s name in Israel: and will not take me to wife. 8 And they shall cause him to be sent for forthwith, and shall ask him. If he answer: I will not take her to wife: 9 The woman shall come to him before the ancients, and shall take off his shoe from his foot, and spit in his face, and say: So shall it be done to the man that will not build up his brother’s house: 10 And his name shall be called in Israel, the house of the unshod."

Clemintine Vulgate:cool:

"5 Quando habitaverint fratres simul, et unus ex eis absque liberis mortuus fuerit, uxor defuncti non nubet alteri: sed accipiet eam frater ejus, et suscitabit semen fratris sui: 6 et primogenitum ex ea filium nomine illius appellabit, ut non deleatur nomen ejus ex Israël. 7 Sin autem noluerit accipere uxorem fratris sui, quæ ei lege debetur, perget mulier ad portam civitatis, et interpellabit majores natu, dicetque: Non vult frater viri mei suscitare nomen fratris sui in Israël, nec me in conjugem sumere. 8 Statimque accersiri eum facient, et interrogabunt. Si responderit: Nolo eam uxorem accipere: 9 accedet mulier ad eum coram senioribus, et tollet calceamentum de pede ejus, spuetque in faciem illius, et dicet: Sic fiet homini, qui non ædificat domum fratris sui. 10 Et vocabitur nomen illius in Israël, Domus discalceati."
same site

New American Bible- Official American Usage

" 5
3 “When brothers live together and one of them dies without a son, the widow of the deceased shall not marry anyone outside the family; but her husband’s brother shall go to her and perform the duty of a brother-in-law by marrying her.
The first-born son she bears shall continue the line of the deceased brother, that his name may not be blotted out from Israel.
If, however, a man does not care to marry his brother’s wife, she shall go up to the elders at the gate and declare, 'My brother-in-law does not intend to perform his duty toward me and refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel.'
Thereupon the elders of his city shall summon him and admonish him. If he persists in saying, 'I am not willing to marry her,'
4 his sister-in-law, in the presence of the elders, shall go up to him and strip his sandal from his foot and spit in his face, saying publicly, 'This is how one should be treated who will not build up his brother’s family!'
And his lineage shall be spoken of in Israel as ‘the family of the man stripped of his sandal.’”:cool:


***New Jerusalem Bible- The Scholar’s Bible (catholic.org is badly reviewed by Catholic culture, and has some less than orthodox articles, but I find it largely useful)***:mad:

"5 'If brothers live together and one of them dies childless, the dead man’s wife may not marry a stranger outside the family. Her husband’s brother must come to her and, exercising his duty as brother, make her his wife,
6 and the first son she bears must assume the dead brother’s name; by this means his name will not be obliterated from Israel.
7 But if the man declines to take his brother’s wife, she must go to the elders at the gate and say, "I have no brother-in-law willing to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he declines to exercise his duty as brother in my favour."
8 The elders of the town must summon the man and talk to him. If, on appearing before them, he says, "I refuse to take her,"
9 then the woman to whom he owes duty as brother must go up to him in the presence of the elders, take the sandal off his foot, spit in his face, and pronounce the following words, "This is what is done to the man who refuses to restore his brother’s house,
10 and his family must henceforth be known in Israel as House of the Unshod. "


Also, the Greek Bible specifically said Virgin in Jesus Time, which shows a real belief in the necessity of no father.

Further questions may be addressed on my email on my website as seen at scripturelink.googlepages.com


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.