Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon?

How often would someone be referred to as the son of the mother, why, when, where?

http://www.whyislam.org/comparative-rel ... n-of-mary/

It does seem to be unusual. Mark 6.3ab:


Both Matthew and Luke are more conventional here, even though Matthew 13.55-56a does at least name Mary as his mother:


Luke 4.22b sticks to the patronymic only:


Lots of scholars assume that Joseph was dead or otherwise out of the picture at this time; hence the rare matronymic expression. But there is no proof that this is the reason for it.

Matronymics do crop up in various times and places, especially in cases when the mother was famous or influential in her own right. Henry II of England was also called Henry FitzEmpress, for example; his father was a "mere" Count, but his mother was Empress Matilda.

If Mark really did use the matronymic here, then it is easy to see why Matthew and Luke changed it to something more conventional. But I have to admit that "son of Mary" sounds a bit Marian to me (I mean, a bit reminiscent of the veneration of the Virgin Mary). Yet Mark, of course, lacks a birth narrative and betrays no knowledge of the virgin birth; is it possible that "son of Mary" is a later addition to the Marcan text?

Ben.

Joseph had more then one wife. Mary was the Mother of Jesus, not one of his other wife's. Mary is also named in the genealogy to distinguish her from his other wife's. Tamar is the Mother of Judah's twin sons and not the woman he was married to.

Ben C. Smith wrote:It does seem to be unusual. Mark 6.3ab:

3ab Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?

Both Matthew and Luke are more conventional here, even though Matthew 13.55-56a does at least name Mary as his mother:

55 Is this not the son of the carpenter? Is his mother not called Mary and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56a And are not all his sisters with us?

Luke 4.22b sticks to the patronymic only:

22b Is this not a son of Joseph?

Lots of scholars assume that Joseph was dead or otherwise out of the picture at this time; hence the rare matronymic expression. But there is no proof that this is the reason for it.

Matronymics do crop up in various times and places, especially in cases when the mother was famous or influential in her own right. Henry II of England was also called Henry FitzEmpress, for example; his father was a "mere" Count, but his mother was Empress Matilda.

If Mark really did use the matronymic here, then it is easy to see why Matthew and Luke changed it to something more conventional. But I have to admit that "son of Mary" sounds a bit Marian to me (I mean, a bit reminiscent of the veneration of the Virgin Mary). Yet Mark, of course, lacks a birth narrative and betrays no knowledge of the virgin birth; is it possible that "son of Mary" is a later addition to the Marcan text?

Ben.

FWIW Mark 6:3 reads in some early witnesses (P45 vid et al) the son of the carpenter and Mary

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle wrote:

Ben C. Smith wrote:It does seem to be unusual. Mark 6.3ab:

3ab Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?

Both Matthew and Luke are more conventional here, even though Matthew 13.55-56a does at least name Mary as his mother:

55 Is this not the son of the carpenter? Is his mother not called Mary and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56a And are not all his sisters with us?

Luke 4.22b sticks to the patronymic only:

22b Is this not a son of Joseph?

Lots of scholars assume that Joseph was dead or otherwise out of the picture at this time; hence the rare matronymic expression. But there is no proof that this is the reason for it.

Matronymics do crop up in various times and places, especially in cases when the mother was famous or influential in her own right. Henry II of England was also called Henry FitzEmpress, for example; his father was a "mere" Count, but his mother was Empress Matilda.

If Mark really did use the matronymic here, then it is easy to see why Matthew and Luke changed it to something more conventional. But I have to admit that "son of Mary" sounds a bit Marian to me (I mean, a bit reminiscent of the veneration of the Virgin Mary). Yet Mark, of course, lacks a birth narrative and betrays no knowledge of the virgin birth; is it possible that "son of Mary" is a later addition to the Marcan text?

Ben.

FWIW Mark 6:3 reads in some early witnesses (P45 vid et al) the son of the carpenter and Mary

Andrew Criddle

It seems that the reading "son of Mary" fit together with Mark 3:31-35

31 And his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside they sent to him and called him. 32 And a crowd was sitting around him, and they said to him, “Your mother and your brothers are outside, seeking you.” 33 And he answered them, “Who are my mother and my brothers?” 34 And looking about at those who sat around him, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 For whoever does the will of God, he is my brother and sister and mother.”

Clive wrote:

Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon?

How often would someone be referred to as the son of the mother, why, when, where?
http://www.whyislam.org/comparative-rel ... n-of-mary/

I would like to know how nettlesome this statement for the ancients was.

I tend to think that the „Son of Mary“ in Mark 6:3 is part of the serie of Jesus-interpretations by different people in Mark's gospel (8:27 "Who do people say I am?“).

I think this whole people interpret Jesus in the light of their personal experiences and wishes (for example Mark 6:14 King Herod heard of it, for Jesus’ name had become known. Some said, “John the Baptist has been raised from the dead. That is why these miraculous powers are at work in him.” But others said, “He is Elijah.” And others said, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” But when Herod heard of it, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, has been raised.”)

Therefore the people of his hometown see him as part of his family ("rejected" by Jesus in Mark 3:31-35).

It is a bit amusing not just that but also how Matthew und Luke corrected Mark. In Mark the statement sounds like a title

ὁ υἱὸς τῆς Μαρίας
the son (of) the Mary

But Matthew und Luke seems to formulate in a manner that avoids the appearance of a title

Matthew
οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ τέκτονος υἱός
Not this is the (of) the carpenter's son?

Luke
Οὐχὶ υἱός ἐστιν Ἰωσὴφ οὗτος
Not son he is (of) Joseph, this one?

The carpenter is the demiurg, the god of the Jews. In Mcn: not the real father of Jesus.

Off topic, but I had not realised the Jeremy Clarkson phrase "some say" is a riff off GMark!