Re: [XTalk] Siblings of Jesus?
- Bob Schacht wrote on Thursday, October 31, 2002:
> At 04:18 PM 10/31/2002 -0600, Ted Weeden wrote:we
> >Mark Goodacre wrote Thursday, October 31, 2002 :
> >3:22 PM
> >Subject: Re: [XTalk] Fortunately James and not Jesus
> > > On 31 Oct 2002 at 6:40, Ted Weeden wrote:
> > >
> > > > In the end, whether the "James" ossuary and its inscription is
> > > > authentic or not contributes nothing to either the fact or fiction
> > > > do not already know about the historical Jesus and his family. Atantecedents
> > > > most what is at stake in the final decision for or against
> > > > authenticity is the piety of those who believe in the perpetual
> > > > virginity of Mary.
> > >
> > > I'm not even sure if this is true, is it? Those who believe in the
> > > perpetual virginity of Mary know that the NT refers several times to
> > > brothers of Jesus, and twice to sisters.
> >But Mark, don't they do mental gymnastics and their pietistic eyes see
> >cousins when the NT text states brothers and sisters?
> It is necessary in this circumstance to take a look not just at the words
> and their translations but also the kinship system of the people involved,
> and the fact that kinship terminology in Greek may mask Aramaic
> that have a different semantic range.refer
> Furthermore, one must reckon with figurative uses of the term amply
> demonstrated. But let's stick to non-figurative usage.
> It was and is a fairly common practice for terms like "brother" and
> "sister" to have collateral referents in addition to what we think of.
> So, for example, in OT Hebrew, 'ben (son) could refer to any male
> descendant in the same lineage, and 'ah (brother) could refer to any male
> member of the same clan (mishpah --sorry for liberties taken with
> orthography due to lack of diacritics), according to C.J.H. Wright
> ("Family," Anchor Bible Dictionary). So it is simple ethnocentrism to
> to kinship terminologies other than our own as requiring "mentalmore
> gymnastics" requiring "pietistic eyes," not to mention gratuitous insults
> towards people of faith.
> I do not mean the above to be definitive-- I know there are better and
> precise studies of Aramaic kinship terminology in First Century Palestine,Fair enough, Bob! I apologize for any gratuitous insults with regard to
> but the point is that before we assume "brother" and "sister" to mean the
> same to them as to us, let's have a look at how they actually used the
> terms, without making ethnocentric assumptions.
piety. I consider myself a person of piety and know that from the
perspective of piety I would like often to claim more in faith than my
rational, empirical mind per se will allow. So I, too, see things with