Bauckham's Blog - March 1

Darrell L. Bock's picture

This blog is now up at http://www.christilling.de/blog/2007/03/guest-post-by-richard-bauckham.html This covers some issues about the names. Matthew cannot be outside the family. Only three names overlap. This is a big family, too big for Jesus' remaining family, the name of mariamenoumara cannot be linked to Mary Magdalene. He walks one through all the details of this, a step at a time. So take a look.

Comments

Dr.Bock,
First issue: It seems from Dr.Tabor's blog, he has an answer for the "missing" 10th ossuary, but we'll have to wait to after the show! Since you'll be there after the show, I thought I might give you a possible head's up. Dr.Tabor's way out may be as follows: It seems obvious from Dr.Zias comments (Dr.Witerington's blog) that the 10th ossuary was plain, and uninscribed (thus not the "James" ossuary). One way Dr.Tabor and others might get around this difficulty has to do with something Dr.Bauckham has observed. In Dr.Bauckham's blog excerpt, he thought the Talipot tomb was rather large and could hold up to 35 ossuaries. Up to now, it seems Dr.Tabor has argued that the 10th ossuary in Klon and Rahmani's report is the "James" ossuary. In Dr.Klon's original report (I believe) he records the fact that the Talipot tomb had been disturbed/lotted in antiquity (something Dr.Crossan wanted to investigate). Could Dr.Tabor argue that the other ossuarries (11 to possibly 35) were stolen at that time, and thus also the "James" ossuary was stolen? He could possibly confirm this theory by "patented" patina "finger printing" which supposes matches the "James" ossuary with the Talipot tomb.
Second Issue: My Hebrew is a little weak (it's been a few months), and my Aramaic is even weaker, but both Rahmani's report and Klon's report state that the first name inscribed on the "Jesus" ossuary is unclear. Dr.Klon records that the inscription "Jude Bar Yeshua" confims the reading "Yeshua." But doesn't this assume an "immediate" family tomb? If Dr.Bauckham is correct that the tomb was large and good for possibly 4 to 5 generations and maybe does not include immediate family. Could not the first name of the supposed "Jesus" ossuary be the son of the other Joseph in the tomb, ie. "Yose" who is argued to not be "Joseph" the supposed father of Jesus? Thus, "Jude Bar Yeshua" may be the son of another "Yeshua," possibly an unknown brother of Joseph. I hope this is not to complicated.

Thanks for your hard work,
David Beatty M.Div.,Th.M.-NT (TEDS)

Blog Category: