Mary - Still a Virgin?

Scot McKnight comments on the "perpetual virginity" of Mary. James Darlack responds with a view from Anne Rice's work, Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt.

Rice develops the story of Mary's perpetual virginity from Joseph's standpoint rather than from some view that Mary was "holier than thou." If I can recall correctly, Joseph asks in essence, "How can I 'touch' someone who has given birth to the Son of God?" From that standpoint, I guess perpetual virginity takes on a more "human" explanation. Given that Joseph could have very well fathered Jesus 'brothers and sisters' in a previous marriage, I don't have too much of a problem with the idea. Either way, my faith does not stand or fall on the concept.

This though begs the question of whether it makes sense of the language that the gospel writers use to portray Jesus' siblings? Mark 6:3 is clear:

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?

Would this language be used of extended family? It appears, from this context, unlikely.

Richard Bauckham [Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1990)] makes the following case for the relatives of Jesus: From the NT and other reliable early sources, especially the second-century writer Hegesippus, who preserves Palestinian Jewish Christian traditions, the following relatives from the generation of Jesus’ parents onward are known:

• Jesus’ mother Mary and adoptive father Joseph.
• Joseph’s brother Clopas (Hegesippus, quoted in Eusebius Hist. Eccl. 3.11; 3.32.6; 4.22.4).
• "Mary of Clopas" (Jn 19:25) is probably his wife. He may well be the same person as Cleopas (Lk 24:18). Clopas is a Semitic name and Cleopas is a Greek name; Jews of this period frequently used both a Semitic name and a Greek name that sounded similar.
• Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, was a relative of Jesus’ mother, Mary, according to Luke 1:36 (the precise relationship is not specified).
• Jesus’ four brothers: James, Joses (or Joseph; Joses is an abbreviated form), Judas (or Jude, an English variant of the name that is sometimes used for this brother of Jesus) and Simon (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).
• Jesus’ sisters (at least two: Mt 13:56; Mk 6:3). Later sources, perhaps correctly, name them Mary and Salome (Protev. James 19.3—20.4; Gos. Phil. 59.6-11; Epiphanius Haer. 78.8.1; 78.9.6).
• Simeon (Simon) son of Clopas (Hegesippus, quoted in Eusebius Hist. Eccl. 3.11; 3.32.6; 4.22.4).
• Zoker and James, two grandsons of Jesus’ brother Jude (Hegesippus, quoted in Eusebius Hist. Eccl. 3.19.1-3.20.7; 3.32.5–6; and in Paris MS 1555A; Bodleian MS Barocc. 142).
• Abris, Abraham and his son James, three descendants of the family of Jesus. They are named in medieval chronicles, which may preserve early sources, as bishops of Ctesiphon-Seleucia in central Mesopotamia in the second century.
• Conon of Magydos, martyred in 250–51, was probably a descendant of the family of Jesus (Martyrdom of Conon 4.2).

Thus, while I can concur with Darlack's conclusion that it makes no difference to faith, the question of historical plausibility remains a serious critique of Rice's view.

UPDATE: Scot McKnight has another post which interacts with Bauckham's critique of J.P. Meier.

Quote of the day...

Naïve faith can mean a life not lived in accord with the kingdom of God.

– Chris Tilling.

Bock On Blog

Darrell Bock, author of those lovely Baker Exegetical Commentaries on Lukas has his own blog! Be sure to check it out, as he blogs through various issues surrounding Da Vinci, Missing Gospels and whatever else he feels like...

Exegesis or Authenticity

Mike Bird reviews Brant Pitre work Jesus, the Tribulation and the End of the Exile (WUNT 2.204; Tubingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 2005). I'm desperately waiting for my copy to arrive [but will have to wait till AUGUST!]. This looks like a cracking read with lots of LONG insights and LONG arguments.

Bird notes one quibble he has with the work, and it is something I have pondered lately: In discussing the various passages for his thesis, Pitre typically exegetes a passage before discussing its authenticity. That can give the impression that "authenticity" is merely an afterthought to his exegesis, and he doesn't pay as much attention as he should to the redactional activity of the Evangelists.

I note that many historians first work out if a saying is authentic, and then try and exegete the text. But in doing it this way, doesn't one assume what the text means, and then judge its authenticity? How can it not be so? Thus, I am of the view that one must first fully exegete the passage, in both its historical and literary form and then once one has determined its meaning, decide on its authenticity. Otherwise, one is doomed to assume what the text means, judge its authenticity and then possibly neglect a key piece of evidence for one's hypothesis.

Furthermore, the criteria assume one has determined the meaning of a text and thus can judge whether or not a logion or pericope is (a) embarassing; (b) coherent; (c) discontinuous. Only multiple attestation can be used without determining its meaning. And even then, I suspect that exegesis might be used to see whether or not a saying is similar to another source.

I hear what Bird is saying about authenticity being an afterthought, but can we do it any other way? We have to start with what we've got: gospel testimonies that appear to be relaying teachings and events from the life of Jesus of Nazareth. This material may have been redacted/adapted to a situation. But we must first deal with what we have, and then seek to move closer to the historical Jesus.

So how can one not first do exegesis and then judge its authenticity?

Colossians & Devotion

Thinking through Colossians recently has persuaded me that Hooker's thesis about the problems and thus the purpose of Colossians is fundamentally correct, though we may demur on specific details. Larry Hurtado has written that:

Without detracting in any way from the significance of the christological affirmations expressed in Colossians, however, the text is not in fact primarily an exercise in doctrinal development or speculative innovation. Instead it mainly represents a practical concern to motivate and reinforce the behaviour of the intended readers, both devotionally and in the wider scope of their lives, so that they should aim to “do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him” (3:17; and similarly Eph. 5:20).

[Hurdato, Lord Jesus Christ, pg. 510]

With this in view, we must contend that Colossians was written as a pastoral exhortation to a fledgling community of faith, trying to make its way in an imperial and pagan context. "Devotion" to Jesus was Paul's central concern. Either to persuade Gentiles to adopt Jesus as LORD and thus abandon all other claims to authority over their lives or to encourage those who have pledged allegiance to the King to work this out in every area of their lives. Devotion to Jesus is thus the theme of Colossians and its central concern. It is an exhortation to a theology of, a praxis for and a relationship with the Creator and Redeemer: Jesus the Messiah.

SBL Book Reviews for NT Students

Lincoln, Andrew T. The Gospel According to Saint John Reviewed by Craig Keener

Patella, Michael F. The Gospel According to Luke Reviewed by Joel Green

Riches, John and David C. Sim, eds. The Gospel of Matthew in Its Roman Imperial Context Reviewed by Markus OehlerStepp,

Perry L. Leadership Succession in the World of the Pauline Circle Reviewed by Ronald Clark

Quote of the Day

The incarnation implies that the story of Jesus is not only a possible subject for historical research, study, and criticism, but demands all of these. We need to know who the Jesus of history was, as well as the content of his message. We may not avoid the offence of the incarnation. And if one objects that we fail to apprehend the essential nature of faith if we make historical knowledge the object of faith, and that faith is in this way offered up to such dubious, subjective, and hypothetical study, we can only reply that God has offered up Himself. The incarnation is the self-offering of God, and to that we can only bow in assent.

Joachim Jeremias, ‘The Search for the Historical Jesus’, repr. in Jesus and the Message of the New Testament ed. K. C. Hanson (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002), 8.

Quote of the Day...

When Jesus said, "Love your enemies"

i think He probably meant don't kill them!

Biblical Studies Carnival VI

Ben Myers has done a fantastic job in collecting all the various posts that may be of interest to those in our various guilds. Be sure to check out the Biblical Studies Carnival VI !

An Invitation to James

Leading P R I M A L is so much fun... After lamenting my ignorance about James and his place in early Christianity my friends sent word that help was on the way... Richard Bauckham on James!

We finally decided that we would work through The Epistle of James this winter [July for those in the Southern Hemisphere]. So here's an open invitation to one and all to write a 1pg reflection on either James' life, teaching, epistle or anything else relating to James and his mission. The target audience is a group of semi-postmodern uni students. No Greek or Hebrew, unless you explain it. The guiding principle is J.I. Packers "Theology is for Doxology: That is, the praise of God and the practice of Godliness." You may email your reflections to me: primalhcc AT gmail DOT com... No attachments please, unless you arrange it with me first...

This gives you ONE month to offer a thought or meditation on this enigmatic letter. Recognition will be given to each contributor, put a little precis of yourself at the bottom of your piece. We make no money off this, so sorry but there's no profit being made here. In fact, part of their job is to re-translate their own study into a booklet that they will then use to teach in the townships - which then has to be translated into two African languages... We're almost on the cutting edge of cross-cultural ministry in South Africa!

So if you're keen, get writing. It should be fun... We only need 25 studies, so first come-first in. Unless you write something that is simply to good to leave out. Then I'll delete my contribution and make space for those who actually know something about James...

Hehehehehehee...