Talk:Joses

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Not in the CathEn

I find no entry for Joses in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Before mentioning this fact in the entry, can anyone find an entry for the Joses, brother of Jesus, who is mentioned in Mark 6:3, Matthew 13:55 and Mark 15:40. Perhaps he's just not that important to the RC Church. Wetman 22:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No objections. Entered. --Wetman 10:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wetman's revert

So Wetman reverted back to the previous version, once again claiming that he is reverting surpressing:

  • First of all he is reverting a POV tag (which I placed and which was met by my edits) without any explanation.
  • He reverts to version that creates redundancy by recounting the same stuff twice (Mark and Matthew)
  • He reintroduces the wrong meaning of Joses as "He that forgives" when it is indeed "The Lord will increase"
  • Above can be seen his observation that Jose has no distinct article in the CathEn. He might have overseen that Joses is mentioned, albeit with the statement that nothing is known of him (which is quite accurate), but his inclusion of a non-information (by linking to a ToC) is beyond me. This clearly serves to imply a certain view.
  • Connected to that his extremely POV statement that "The primary meaning of the text would be clear and sufficient, were it not for the dogma of the perpetual virginity of Mary, not directly attested in the New Testament, which developed during the 2nd century and later became dogma of the Roman Catholic Church." In other words, Catholics got it wrong and without them everything would be fine. That it wouldn't be fine is indicated by the fact that Joses in Mark is a "brother of the Lord" and the son of a different (!) Mary. Now, I am not about pushing either view as fact, but Wetman and the previous version did exactly that: assert one view as fact and ridicule opposing views (and not only here).
  • Eisenman overkill. If we want to state his view than we should do this and first provide a lenghty introduction from his POV. Eisenman identifies Joses and Joseph Barsabbas and we will and shall state that. Then we can explain about Barsabbas or link to him.
  • Finally, a bogus genealogy without attributing it to an author, clearly assering that Jesus is the son of Joseph. Wetman you may think so, everyone may think so but one thing it is not is NPOV.

Therefore I am compelled to revert his undoing of my recent efforts. Str1977 (smile back) 23:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV and accuracy tags

I note that the only two references to the article deal with content which seems to have been added by a party who has since been brought to arbitration for his similar conduct elsewhere. I wonder whether that party's conflation of information to present an opinion which was observed elsewhere is also present here. John Carter 15:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

John, I took the tags off since the content dispute is old news. Ovadyah (talk) 23:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mary of Clopas

Some modern writers, such as Robert Eisenman[1] or James Tabor,[2] however claim that Mary of Clopas actually refers to Jesus' mother as well.

I moved content about Mary of Clopas to talk in case anyone wants to discuss the changes. Ovadyah (talk) 23:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Mary, the mother of James and Joses, is identified with Mary of Clopas mentioned in John 19:25. Therefore, some traditions, first visible in the writings of Papias and later prevalent among Roman Catholics, have identified the sons of Mary of Clopas with the brothers of Jesus.

There is nothing in the Gospel of John supporting a link between Joses and Mary of Clopas/Cleophas. This is a leap of transitive logic. Ovadyah (talk) 00:17, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Primary Sources

The Gospel of Matthew closely mirrors these two passages in Matthew 13:55-57 and Matthew 27:56 but uses Joseph instead of Joses.

The KJV says Joses for both of these verses. Is Joseph a modern NKJV translation error? I'll check some Greek sources to see which is right. Ovadyah (talk) 00:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The verdict is in - it is both Joseph and Joses. For Mt 13:55, the Alexandrian and Western witnesses read Joseph (01C1, B, C, N, Q, f1, 33, 892, pc, Lat, Sy-S, Sy-C, Or, mae-1+2), while the Byzantine witnesses read Joses (K, L, W, Delta, Pi, 0106, 1582mg, f13, 22, 565, 1241, Maj-part, k, qC, sa, Basil(4th CE)) or Jose (SC, 118, 157, 700, 1071, pc, bo). [1] Ovadyah (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Barsabbas

The identification of Joses as Joseph Barsabbas makes sense. He is also referred to as Justus in Acts 1:23. Justus was third in the hereditary line of succession of the Desposyni after James the Just and Simeon of Jerusalem as Bishops_of_Jerusalem. Ovadyah (talk) 00:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

To make matters even more interesting, Acts 15:22 identifies a Judas Barsabbas that accompanies Paul and Barnabas to Antioch. Does this mean Joses and Judas are the Barsabbas brothers? Would that make Barsabbas Jesus' family name? Ovadyah (talk) 00:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, this tidbit from the apocryphal Acts of Paul about a Barsabbas Justus, the flatfoot, witnessing to Christianity in Rome in the time of Nero. [2] Interesting stuff. Ovadyah (talk) 01:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible origins of Barsabbas are Bar Tseba' (Aramaic) (son of His will) [3] or Bar Tsaba' (Hebrew) (son of battle, son of the host (of angels), or son of military service). [4] I think the first is more likely. Some encyclopedic sources also have "son of an oath" and "son of conversion" without explanation. [5] al-Sabbah is a common Middle-Eastern name. Ovadyah (talk) 04:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)