aa5874

It is obvious that both rhetorical questions differ, but what information is gleaned? Do these rhetorical questions have any historical value.

Can it now be said with reasonable certainty that Mary was the mother of the carpenter and the carpenter's son at the same time?

Jeffrey Gibson

Do they? In what way -- especially with respect to the subject of the question? Is not the antecedent of οὗτός in both οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τ�*κτων, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς Μαρίας καὶ ἀδελφὸς Ἰακώβου καὶ Ἰωσῆτος καὶ Ἰούδα καὶ Σίμωνος and οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ τ�*κτονος υἱός; οὐχ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ λ�*γεται Μαριὰμ καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ Ἰάκωβος καὶ Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Σίμων καὶ Ἰούδας; 56 καὶ αἱ ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ οὐχὶ πᾶσαι πρὸς ἡμᾶς εἰσιν; or, for that matter, οὐχὶ υἱός ἐστιν Ἰωσὴφ οὗτος; Jesus?

Now be said?

You seem to be assuming not only that the term "carpenter" has to have the same referent in Matthew that it does in Mark (i.e., Jesus), but that Matthew's "the son of the Carpenter" refers to someone other than Jesus. But since it doesn't, since it's Matthew's way of referring to Jesus, what's the problem?

And where's your evidence that you are the expert in 1st century Judaism that you have claimed you are?

Jeffrey

spamandham

The historical value is not in the determination of whether Jesus was a carpenter, or whether his dad was a carpenter, or whether his mother was Mary. The historical value is in understanding the motives of the author, and discering ideas that are originally his, vs. ideas he has inherited.

That's the right way to analyze a 'hero biography'. The Gospels should be analyze from the perspective of understanding the people and cultures that wrote them, not from the perspective of trying to figure out which parts are true and which parts false.

aa5874

And you don't know who wrote them!

Your post is just full of rhetoric.

spamandham

Why on earth would it be necessary to know who wrote them? You're really making no sense whatsoever in this thread.

aa5874

Don't you read your OWN post?

Why on earth would you say such a thing and then claim it is not necessary to know the PEOPLE who wrote the Gospels?

Your presentation has become very unsound and illogical.

spamandham

*sigh*

This is futile. I quit.

Amaleq13

If both Joseph and Jesus were carpenters, that is precisely what she would have been.

aa5874

But, you have no idea if what you say is true.

I mean how simple can this be.

If Mary was the mother of Joseph, then that is precisely what she would have been.

If Mary was the mother of.................then that is precisely what she would have been.

Please fill in the blank space.

Jeffrey Gibson

Please show me how in either Mk. 6:3 or Mt. 13:53 the respective authors of those texts say, or in anyway indicate, that Mary was the mother of the person whom Mathew views as the carpenter he speaks of in the phrase "the son of the carpenter",namely, Mary's husband who, as he tells us, was named Joseph.

And where's your evidence that you have some idea if what you say about first century Judaism is true.

Jeffrey