(If you're reading this with a feed reader, you may be missing out on relevant images. Check out the actual post on my main blog site. — RWB)

A friend and colleague of mine, Dr. Michael S. Heiser, presented a paper on the "Jesus Ossuary" at the 2003 meeting of the Near East Archaeological Society. This is the ossuary behind the "Jesus Family Tomb" sensationalism that the biblioblogosphere is abuzz over (see Ben Witherington for a good overview).

In his paper, titled "The Jesus Ossuary: A Critical Examination", Dr. Heiser works through the inscriptions on the relevant ossuaries using L.Y. Rahmani's A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel. In case you're wondering about Dr. Heiser's skills and training to do such work, here's his CV.

Mike posted the paper on his website this afternoon. So grab it and check it out, and see reproductions of the relevant inscriptions for yourself.

Update (2007-02-26): Just received word from Mike that he and Darrell Bock will be on Coast to Coast AM tonight talking about the Jesus Family Tomb thing. I won't be able to listen, but if you are you can find a local station on the Coast to Coast AM site.

Update II (2007-02-27): The Discovery Channel website has a PDF file with material from Rahmani's book as well. The PDF also has Amos Kloner's 1996 article on the tomb and inscriptions, which include maps of the tomb.

Update III (2007-02-27): Duane Smith over at Abnormal Interests has a post dealing with the inscriptions as well. It is worth reading.

Update IV (2007-03-01): Richard Bauckham (yes, that Richard Bauckham) guest-posts on the names and the inscriptions over at Chris Tilling's Chrisendom blog. You need to read this, Bauckham is the go-to guy in onomastics.

If you've not yet caught the sure-to-envelop-us-come-easter sensationalistic rah-rah about something folks are now calling "the Jesus tomb", you do need to check out Ben Witherington's post on the matter.

It is notable to check Witherington because he provides statistics on the relevant names that he received from Richard Bauckham. Bauckham is, from all I have read, one of the go-to guys in the realm of Palestinian names in the first century. That, tied with other stats Bauckham provides on the frequency of names found on ossuaries provides some good data by which to refute the sensationalistic claims made by the filmmakers of "The Jesus Tomb". So do check it out.

My take? I think the data on names, combined with the known sensationalism-mongering of the filmmakers (thoroughly documented and debunked by Chris Heard, check it out) combined with the fact that the tomb's original finders and excavators reached entirely opposite conclusions (the tomb was found in 1980, findings released in 1996) speaks volumes against what the filmmakers are proposing.

All of this sounds like you've stepped in on the middle of a conversation? Then you probably have. So check out Witherington's post for the background and some further information on how to handle the assertion when you hear it come easter.

I mentioned awhile back that I was presenting a paper at the 2007 NW Regional ETS Meeting on the "plural to singular narrative device" as described by Richard Bauckham in his recent book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (amazon.com).

Well, the paper is done (enough). I'm not completely satisfied with it, but I'm cuttin' the cord. If you'd like to give it a look-see, it is on my Academic Papers page. Or just download the PDF directly. I'm presenting the paper on Saturday; I'll likely post an update here to let y'all know how it goes.

Update (2007-02-26): The conference was good (Darrell Bock had the keynote) and the paper went well. I received good feedback from those who heard it and was generally encouraged.

I mentioned yesterday that I'd post my translation of James 2.14-26, so here it is.

I typically translate clause-by-clause and my translations try to convey Greek word order where doing so isn't overly unweildy. And I haven't thought much about paragraph boundaries either. Anyway, here it is:

14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone claims to have faith but does not have works? Is it possible for that faith to save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and lacking in food for the day, 16 and if one from out of your number says, "Go away in peace, keep warm and stay filled with food", and does not give them their bodily needs, what good is it? 17 Faith is like this, if it does not have works it is dead by itself.

18 But someone will say: "You have faith, and I have works". Show me your faith without works, and I will show you my faith from works. 19 You believe that God is one and you do well. Even the demons believe this and tremble. 20 But do you desire to know, you empty-headed human, that faith without works is useless?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works in offering up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that faith was a co-laborer with his works and by his works faith was proven 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says: "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness", and he became a friend of God.

24 You see that from works a person is justified and not from faith alone.

25 And was not Rahab the whore in the same way justified by receiving the messengers and sending them out another way?

26 For just as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

In the past few weeks, my employer (Logos Bible Software) released an application that is basically designed to help one keep track of those blasted post-it notes that end up stuck to your monitor frame. It's called NoteScraps. Why did we do it? Well, that's laid out in a post on the Logos Blog, but the answer is that it was a small, tightly spec'd application that allowed our programmers to play with new WPF goodies and learn more before doing so inside of Logos Bible Software itself.

Why do I mention it now? Well, I've found it to be daggum handy for keeping track of those little inspirations I have for blog posts an any of the three blogs I participate in. Here's a screen capture:

See? All those post-it notes that used to adorn my monitor are now easily skimmed and managed. The app is fairly single-purpose, and the trial version allows you to keep up to 10 notes. No formatting, URLs automatically located and made active. If unlimited notes are desired, then the full version is 20 bucks. More on the NoteScraps web site.

I'm in a home group Bible study going over the book of James. So I study the week's passage for my morning study time.

Yesterday and today I read and translated James 2.14-26. Wow. Familiar text to most folks who have been around the church for awhile, I'm sure. But stop and read it again sometime soon, and focus on the context of surrounding discussion in James (particularly 1.19-2.13, which speaks of the futility of hearing and not doing).

I'm at the office now, my translation is at home. Maybe I'll post it later.

[This is part of a running series on the Didache. See the introductory post for more information — RWB]

Phrasing/Translation

¹ Πᾶς δὲ προφήτης ἀληθινὸς
But every true prophet
   θέλων καθῆσθαι
   (who) wishes to reside
      πρὸς ὑμᾶς
      among you
ἄξιός ἐστι τῆς τροφῆς αὐτοῦ.
is worthy of his food.

² ὡσαύτως διδάσκαλος ἀληθινός ἐστιν ἄξιος
In the same way a true teacher is worthy
   καὶ αὐτὸς ὥσπερ ὁ ἐργάτης
   and he, just as the worker,
   τῆς τροφῆς αὐτοῦ.
   (is worthy) of his food.

³ πᾶσαν οὖν ἀπαρχὴν γεννημάτων ληνοῦ
Therefore all of the firstfruits of the produce of the winepress
   καὶ ἅλωνος,
   and (of the produce of the) threshing floor,
   βοῶν τε καὶ προβάτων λαβὼν
   and of (the produce of) oxen and sheep take (all of the firstfruits),
      δώσεις τὴν ἀπαρχὴν τοῖς προφήταις·
      and you shall give (them) as firstfruits to the prophets:
         αὐτοὶ γάρ εἰσιν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς ὑμῶν.
         for they are your high priests.

⁴ ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἔχητε προφήτην,
And if you do not have a prophet,
   δότε τοῖς πτωχοῖς.
   give (the firstfruits) to the poor.

⁵ ἐὰν σιτίαν ποιῇς,
If you make bread,
   τὴν ἀπαρχὴν λαβὼν
   take the firstfruits
   δὸς
   and give (them)
      κατὰ τὴν ἐντολήν.
      according to the commandment.

⁶ ὡσαύτως κεράμιον οἴνου ἢ ἐλαίου ἀνοίξας,
Likewise, when you open a jar of wine or olives,
   τὴν ἀπαρχὴν λαβὼν
   take the firstfruits
      δὸς τοῖς προφήταις·
      and give (them) to the prophets.
⁷ ἀργυρίου δὲ
And of money
   καὶ ἱματισμοῦ
   and of clothing
   καὶ παντὸς κτήματος
   and of all possessions,
      λαβὼν τὴν ἀπαρχήν,
      take the firstfruits,
         ὡς ἂν σοι δόξῃ,
         however you deem worthy,
         δὸς
         and give (them)
            κατὰ τὴν ἐντολήν.
            according to the commandment.

Notes

The progression from chapter 11 to chapter 13 is clear. True teachers have been distinguished; those foreigners entering the fellowship have been tested to see if they will work for their keep. Verses 1-2 sum this up: "true" prophets and teachers (you know, the ones who jive with what's described in chaps 11-12) are "worthy" just as those who work for their food are worthy.

The "prophets" are to receive the "firstfruits". Much like Israelite society of old took care of the priests via offering of firstfruits, so the Didachist's community (communities?) are to take care of the prophets (and teachers, I'd guess) through the offering of firstfruits. Several categories are hit: produce of the winepress, threshing floor, sheep and oxen; bread, olives, wine; money clothing and "of all possessions". The approach is the same as found in the NT lists of vice and virtue; mention some of the larger items and areas intended, even overlapping (e.g. "produce of the winepress" and later "wine") and follow it up with a catch-all: "of all possessions".

Also note that communities that had no prophet were to similarly give of firstfruits, but instead were to give the produce to the poor.

Next up: Didache 14. We're in the home stretch, three chapters left. But the last one (Did 16) is a doozy!

Check this out from Wallace's Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (amazon.com): p. 79-81.

No, first you need background. I was looking at James 2.1:

Ἀδελφοί μου, μὴ ἐν προσωπολημψίαις ἔχετε τὴν πίστιν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τῆς δόξης. (NA27)

My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. (ESV)

My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ? (NRSV)

Confused about τῆς δόξης and what it modifies, I went to the Lexham Syntactic Greek New Testament.  It notes that δόξης is a "Descriptive Genitive" and cites Wallace pp. 79-81. The Lexham SGNT cleared up the modification issue for me, but it provoked a different question. What in the world is a "descriptive genitive"? (I mean, aren't all genitives descriptive?) I went to read the pages cited in Wallace. Here's what I found, which I quote verbatim. This text is really in there!

†1. Descriptive Genitive (“Aporetic” Genitive²¹) [characterized by, described by]

a. Definition

The genitive substantive describes the head noun in a loose manner. The nature of the collocation of the two nouns in this construction is usually quite ambiguous.

b. Amplification

This is the “catch-all” genitive, the “drip pan” genitive, the “black hole” of genitive categories that tries to suck many a genitive into its grasp! In some respects, all adjectival genitives are descriptive, yet no adjectival genitive is descriptive. That is to say, although all adjectival genitives are, by their nature, descriptive, very few, if any, belong only to this specific category of usage. This use truly embodies the root idea of the (adjectival) genitive. It is often the usage of the genitive when it has not been affected by other linguistic considerations-that is, when there are no contextual, lexemic, or other grammatical features that suggest a more specific nuance.²²

Frequently, however, it is close to the attributive genitive, being either other than or broader than the attributive use.²³ (See chart 7 below.) Hence, this use of the genitive should be a last resort. If one cannot find a narrower category to which a genitive belongs, this is where he or she should look for solace.²⁴

Further, some footnotes are worthy of evaluation as well:

Note 21: That is, the “I am at a loss” gen. (from the Greek word, ἀπορέω, “I am at a loss,” a tongue-in-cheek title suggested to me by J. Will Johnston). This is the category one should appeal to when another slot cannot be found. The title is descriptive not of the gen., but of the feeling one has in the pit of his/her stomach for having spent so much time on this case and coming up with nothing.

Note 24: Since there is already a plethora of gen. categories, we had to stop somewhere. The descriptive gen. covers a multitude of syntactical categories which have, as yet, to receive published sanction (though this would be a worthy project). It seems that one of the chief situations in which descriptive genitives occur is when either the head noun or the gen. noun is highly idiomatic, figurative, or informed by Semitic usage. Thus, υἱός + noungen is perhaps frequently descriptive (e.g., “son of disobedience”). To call this merely attributive (“disobedient son”) is not adequate, for “son” then does not get interpreted. (υἱός with gen. is notoriously complex; see Zerwick, Biblical Greek, 15–16 [§42–43] for summary of uses.) Also, when the head noun is figurative, such as in “root of bitterness” (ῥίζα πικρίας, Heb 12:15), the gen. can frequently be described as descriptive.
At the same time, our approach in this chapter overall is different from grammars that refuse to analyze the descriptive gen. (e.g., Young, Intermediate Greek, 23; Moule, Idiom Book, 37), because we believe that such analysis is not intuitive with most students of Greek and, further, that the additional categories have exegetical value.