Rachel Hachlili’s Statement
“A short additional statement:
The East Talpiyot tomb could not be identified with a tomb of Jesus of Nazareth for a significant reason: In all references in the New Testament Jesus is named only Yeshua with no patrononymic (i.e., “son of”). Why then would the name ‘Yeshua son of Yehosef’ be inscribed on an ossuary of a person known only as Yeshua? More likely an inscription on the ossuary of Jesus would have been ‘Yeshua from Nazareth’ or ‘Yeshua son of Mariame’.”
Prof. Rachel Hachlili
Zinman Institute of Archaeology
University of Haifa
- Blog feed
This is not quite the case. Jesus is called “Jesus son of Joseph” in John 6:42, etc. I am thinking that in Mark, our earliest witness, we have “son of Mary,” which reflects the lack of a named father, but since Joseph took Mary and the child as his own he could have the legal designation “Jesus son of Joseph.”
Comment by James Tabor — January 24, 2008 @ 2:04 am
…snip…
Now, for this comment. Hachlili clearly meant that in the church’s own tradition, no one designated Jesus as the “son of Joseph”. The author of the gospel is echoing an anti-Christian polemic that the Jews naturally would have developed to counter Christian claims. We can see this in the Gospel of Matthew where it is was said that the Jewish authorities felt the disciples had stolen the body, thus explaining away the resurrection. So, Hachlili’s point was correct, if taken in the proper context.
A final note about hypocricy. Academics, such as Tabor, have long since disregarded the Gospels as trustworthy sources of Jesus’ life (a consequence of their materialism), especially John’s, which could have been written up to a hundred years after Christ’s death and almost universally accepted as the furthest from the historic truth. Yet, when they have a pet theory, they select a verse here or there that seems to fit their own biased opinions, such as from the Gospel of John. Then, they pawn these opinions off as “scholarship”. If Tabor and Jacobovici are the best we have today in this field, then poor old Avalos was right, bible scholarship is a waste of time.
That is, unless you want to make a quick buck or see your name the cover of a book.
Comment by injil — January 24, 2008 @ 4:42 pm
[...] Vermes statement), Israel Knohl, André Lemaire, James Tabor, Chris Rollston, Jane Schaberg, and Rachel Hachlili; Stephen has also included his own statement in both long and short formats. April DeConick was [...]
Pingback by biblicalia » Blog Archive » Biblical Studies Carnival XXVI — February 1, 2008 @ 1:04 am