Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk]

Expand Messages
  • LARRY SWAIN
    ... It seems to me that anyone writing after the very populat Protoevangelium of James knew who James father was, and Irenaeus and Tatian were certainly
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 4, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Dr. Eisenman states:

      > This inscription seems pointed not at an ancient
      > audience, who would have
      > known who James (or Jacob, his Hebrew/Aramaic name)
      > was, but at a modern
      > one. If this box had simply said "Jacob the son of
      > Joseph," it might pass
      > muster. But ancient sources are not clear on who
      > this Jacob's father really
      > was. If the inscription had said "James the son of
      > Cleophas," "Clopas or
      > even "Alphaeus" (all three probably being
      > interchangeable), I would have
      > jumped for joy. But Joseph? This is what a modern
      > audience, schooled in the
      > Gospels, would expect, not an ancient one.

      It seems to me that anyone writing after the very
      populat Protoevangelium of James knew who James'
      father was, and
      Irenaeus and Tatian were certainly intimate with the
      contents of the gospels. I don't think we need poswit
      a "modern" audience. It would also seem to me that
      the popular Protoevangelium is reporting an even
      earlier tradition about James' parentage that would
      take us back into the first century. We haven't even
      considered the popularity of Matthew and Luke in
      naming Joseph, and the natural assumption that
      "brother" means of the same parentage-usually father.
      So I don't think that we eed to think of a "modern"
      audience as the target, or even necessarily a post
      first century one on these grounds.

      Larry Swain
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.