Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 06-27-2010, 07:15 PM

There are ONLY two versions of the Jesus story in the NT Canon that mentioned "carpenter" and these are gMatthew and gMark.

The author of gMatthew implied that Jesus was the son of a carpenter but did not say the occupation of Jesus but in gMark that author did imply that Jesus was himself a carpenter and also was the son of Mary.

Matthew 13:55 -

Quote:

Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Mark 6:3 -

Quote:

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

Now, when "Against Celsus' by Origen is examined the writer referred to Joseph the supposed husband of Mary as a carpenter many times.

Against Celsus 2.32

Quote:

...And he thinks that he makes a notable charge when he adds, that "the carpenters wife could not have been ignorant of the fact, had she been of such illustrious descent."

Against Celsus 5.52

Quote:

...there came an angel to the carpenter, and once more another angel, in order that they might take up the young Child and flee away (into Egypt).

See "Against Celsus' 6.16

Quote:

.....on hearing that Jesus, who was born and brought up among the Jews, and was supposed to be the son of Joseph the carpenter.....

So, according to Origen Joseph the supposed husband of Mary was a carpenter by trade.

But, Origen made a STARTLING admission. In the Churches Jesus was NOT known to be a carpenter as IMPLIED by gMark.

Up to the 3rd century Origen was completely UNAWARE of Mark 6.3.

'Against Celsus' 6. 36

Quote:

Celsus, moreover, has often mocked at the subject of a resurrection,— a doctrine which he did not comprehend....... He next scoffs at the "tree," assailing it on two grounds, and saying, "For this reason is the tree introduced, either because our teacher was nailed to a cross, or because he was a carpenter by trade," not observing that the tree of life is mentioned in the Mosaic writings, and being blind also to this, that in none of the Gospels current in the Churches is Jesus Himself ever described as being a carpenter.

Mark 6.3 was written after the "Against Celsus" or sometime after the early 3rd century.

Newton's Cat · 06-27-2010, 09:15 PM

Is not this the young boy, the son of Mary .... ? (i.e. he was a young child when he was last there)

Tektwn, "carpenter"

Teknon, "young child"

Assuming the original word was teknon the context is that of Jesus returning to his home town for the first time as an adult.

mountainman · 06-27-2010, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, Origen made a STARTLING admission. In the Churches Jesus was NOT known to be a carpenter as IMPLIED by gMark.

Up to the 3rd century Origen was completely UNAWARE of Mark 6.3.

'Against Celsus' 6. 36

Quote:

Celsus, moreover, has often mocked at the subject of a resurrection,— a doctrine which he did not comprehend....... He next scoffs at the "tree," assailing it on two grounds, and saying, "For this reason is the tree introduced, either because our teacher was nailed to a cross, or because he was a carpenter by trade," not observing that the tree of life is mentioned in the Mosaic writings, and being blind also to this, that in none of the Gospels current in the Churches is Jesus Himself ever described as being a carpenter.

Mark 6.3 was written after the "Against Celsus" or sometime after the early 3rd century.

Well done aa5874. Another integrity exception.

The Christian Origen may have fallen asleep at Mark 6.2. He could have had a big day in the scriptorium being worked over by Eusebius. Origen the Platonist, who is a distinct and different person than Origen the Christian, may or may not be relevant at this stage. Have you looked to see in which of the "Gnostic Gospels and Acts" (apparently authored sporadically between the 2nd and the 4th century) jesus is presented as a carpenter?

aa5874 · 06-27-2010, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton's Cat

Is not this the young boy, the son of Mary .... ? (i.e. he was a young child when he was last there)

Tektwn, "carpenter"

Teknon, "young child"

Assuming the original word was teknon the context is that of Jesus returning to his home town for the first time as an adult.

And if we assume it was NOT Teknon, "young child" but Tektwn, "carpenter" just as it is found? What next?

Origen had no problem with "carpenter" in gMatthew.

Origen has destroyed Mark 6.3.

GakuseiDon · 06-27-2010, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The Christian Origen may have fallen asleep at Mark 6.2. He could have had a big day in the scriptorium being worked over by Eusebius.

Don't you believe that Eusebius wrote both the "Christian Origen"'s works, and Mark as well? So that means that it was Eusebius asleep at the wheel or who must have forgotten?

mountainman · 06-27-2010, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The Christian Origen may have fallen asleep at Mark 6.2. He could have had a big day in the scriptorium being worked over by Eusebius.

Don't you believe that Eusebius wrote both the "Christian Origen"'s works, and Mark as well? So that means that it was Eusebius asleep at the wheel or who must have forgotten?

Well you're certainly awake at the wheel GD.

I am neither alone or the first to suggest this ....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwin Johnson

"[the fourth century was] the great age of literary forgery,
the extent of which has yet to be exposed"

...[and]...

"not until the mass of inventions
labelled 'Eusebius' shall be exposed,
can the pretended references to Christians
in Pagan writers of the first three centuries
be recognized for the forgeries they are."

--- Edwin Johnson, "Antiqua Mater: A Study of Christian Origins"

GakuseiDon · 06-28-2010, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Don't you believe that Eusebius wrote both the "Christian Origen"'s works, and Mark as well? So that means that it was Eusebius asleep at the wheel or who must have forgotten?

Well you're certainly awake at the wheel GD.

I am neither alone or the first to suggest this ....

I can't see why it matters whether you were the first to suggest this or not. If Eusebius wrote both Origen and Mark, why do you think there was that discrepancy?

dog-on · 06-28-2010, 01:46 AM

Doesn't this just imply that the text of Mark was still in flux during the third century?

2-J · 06-28-2010, 02:53 AM

Does Origen refer to Mark elsewhere in Against Celsus? (I've read it suggested that Mark despite being the earlier gospel, was not as widely circulated and reproduced as the other canonical gospels).

andrewcriddle · 06-28-2010, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Doesn't this just imply that the text of Mark was still in flux during the third century?

Yes

The so-called Caesarean text of Mark which is represented by a few surviving manuscripts reads here

Quote:

the son of the carpenter and of Mary

During the latter part of Origen's career while settled in Caesarea he seems to have used this type of text.

Andrew Criddle

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-27-2010, 09:15 PM	#2
Newton's Cat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 3,181	Is not this the young boy, the son of Mary .... ? (i.e. he was a young child when he was last there) Tektwn, "carpenter" Teknon, "young child" Assuming the original word was teknon the context is that of Jesus returning to his home town for the first time as an adult.

06-28-2010, 01:46 AM	#8
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	Doesn't this just imply that the text of Mark was still in flux during the third century?

06-28-2010, 02:53 AM	#9
2-J Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: UK Posts: 179	Does Origen refer to Mark elsewhere in Against Celsus? (I've read it suggested that Mark despite being the earlier gospel, was not as widely circulated and reproduced as the other canonical gospels).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.