Joseph the Carpenter

[Cruxis117]

A Protestant who I know that has been reading Hebrew has expressed that Joseph, Jesus’s adoptive Father, was not a carpenter-tradesman in the common sense of the word, but is a Rabbi, due to the Hebrew phrasing of the word Carpenter. Or some such thing. What do you guys think about this? Have you heard of this before? I don’t think this is correct, but anything you guys can pull up on this would be awesome.

 

[patrick457]

A Protestant who I know that has been reading Hebrew has expressed that Joseph, Jesus’s adoptive Father, was not a carpenter-tradesman in the common sense of the word, but is a Rabbi, due to the Hebrew phrasing of the word Carpenter. Or some such thing. What do you guys think about this? Have you heard of this before? I don’t think this is correct, but anything you guys can pull up on this would be awesome.

The Greek word tekton does have a broader meaning than the traditional translation ‘carpenter’: it just means ‘someone who works with his hands’, i.e. a craftsman or an artisan. You have to add qualifiers to make the term more specific: something like ‘a tekton who works with wood’ for a woodworker or ‘a tekton who works with stone’ for a stonemason. Granted, the idea of Jesus (and Joseph) being a woodworker is an ancient one, dating from the early Christian period, but the term itself is not as specific as the English implies.

Now yes, there have been theories that because Jesus is called ‘rabbi’ in the Gospels, He must have been a rabbi as we think of it today: an officially-ordained teacher. By extension Joseph is also thought to be a rabbi himself: if I remember correctly this is how he was described in Ben-Hur (the novel, not the movie/s).

 

[jschutzm]

A Protestant who I know that has been reading Hebrew has expressed that Joseph, Jesus’s adoptive Father, was not a carpenter-tradesman in the common sense of the word, but is a Rabbi, due to the Hebrew phrasing of the word Carpenter. Or some such thing. What do you guys think about this? Have you heard of this before? I don’t think this is correct, but anything you guys can pull up on this would be awesome.

Protestants are keen on “re-interpreting” the bible over and over again… often specifically to find NEW meanings, but also, occassionally to try and justify something they personally believe.
OFTEN, they do this without a full appreciation of the original Koine Greek that most of the New Testament was written in. So they are re-interpreting for themselves (and others) based solely on the english and with a modern interpretation no doubt.

I’m making a generality here, of course, but this has been my experience.

Some MAY have very good knowledge of Greek, and take into account Cultural idioms, expressions, etc. But not often.

The Catholic approach is to look not just at the words themselves, but at the events of that time, the idioms or expressions of the time, how words were used back then as opposed to now, what the authors original intent was and last but not least… Consistency with how Christians throughout history, especially those closest to the actual events (33AD-200AD) understood things.

A much more comprehensive way of going about it.

But even taking all things into consideration, from a purely linguistic perspective, sometimes 1 word can have multiple meanings or connotations, just like today.

That’s why using ‘consistency’ aka history as the tie breaker often makes sense. By looking back at how previous generations understood things… you can sometimes settle on an interpretation when there are 2 equally applicable definitions for a single word.

See where I’m going with this?

Christians have always understood Joseph to be a carpenter. I see no compelling reason to take a different approach. Other then to reinvent the wheel.

 

[bmonk]

I’d agree with the prior comments, and add that this seems another example of Tradition outside the Bible. The Greek word used does mean “artisan”, but the tradition of the Church from early days interpreted it as carpenter. A memory not in the Scriptures as such? Probably. (And it really doesn’t matter if he was a carpenter, or a stoneworker or cobbler anyway. So I accept the carpenter, without worrying about the literal meaning of the text too much.)

 

[JRRTFAN]

The Greek word tekton does have a broader meaning than the traditional translation ‘carpenter’: it just means ‘someone who works with his hands’, i.e. a craftsman or an artisan. You have to add qualifiers to make the term more specific: something like ‘a tekton who works with wood’ for a woodworker or ‘a tekton who works with stone’ for a stonemason. Granted, the idea of Jesus (and Joseph) being a woodworker is an ancient one, dating from the early Christian period, but the term itself is not as specific as the English implies.

Now yes, there have been theories that because Jesus is called ‘rabbi’ in the Gospels, He must have been a rabbi as we think of it today: an officially-ordained teacher. By extension Joseph is also thought to be a rabbi himself: if I remember correctly this is how he was described in Ben-Hur (the novel, not the movie/s).

One of my favorite teachers is Fr. Benedict Groeschel who I once heard mention this “tekton” = laborer concept. It was he, I think, who talked about a major Roman construction project near Nazareth (a wall as I recall) on which Joseph and Jesus may well have labored.

 

[patrick457]

I’d agree with the prior comments, and add that this seems another example of Tradition outside the Bible. The Greek word used does mean “artisan”, but the tradition of the Church from early days interpreted it as carpenter. A memory not in the Scriptures as such? Probably. (And it really doesn’t matter if he was a carpenter, or a stoneworker or cobbler anyway. So I accept the carpenter, without worrying about the literal meaning of the text too much.)

The belief as recorded by sources such as Justin Martyr and the author of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas was that Jesus was a woodworker who made ploughs and yokes. The identification of Jesus - and by extension Joseph - as a woodworker may have become popular because of the connection between wood and the Cross. (To this I could add: crossbeam = yoke?)

 

[patrick457]

One of my favorite teachers is Fr. Benedict Groeschel who I once heard mention this “tekton” = laborer concept. It was he, I think, who talked about a major Roman construction project near Nazareth (a wall as I recall) on which Joseph and Jesus may well have labored.

Well, the city of Sepphoris was close enough to Nazareth. And building projects were aplenty there.

High-quality lumber was an imported commodity in the Galilee and thus, would have been unlikely to surface in a small hamlet like Nazareth. At best, one could only make rudimentary implements like yokes out of the wood that grew in the area. Stonemasonry or housebuilding had more demand and thus, were better paying jobs.

 

[patrick457]

And the term is, as mentioned, not as specific as the English would lead us to believe. Foster-father and Son could conceivably have been BOTH woodworkers AND stonemasons AND builders AND what-have-you, artisans skilled in a number of trades and manual labor.

As for the ‘rabbi’ part: well it is not really impossible for Joseph and Jesus to be actual lay teachers, considering that the two famous sages of the period, Hillel and Shammai, were of pretty much the same background as they are (woodcutter and building contractor respectively in their spare time). The literate could after all read the Scriptures, and even the illiterate could at least hear it being read and keep it to memory, so all Jews, even the humblest layperson, had the potential to be knowledgeable about the Law, their social status and level of education notwithstanding.

I must note however that the term ‘rabbi’ has a looser definition back then, unlike today. Nowadays, the term is an official title of sorts usually reserved for men who have attained semicha (a rabbinic ‘ordination’ - note however that rabbis are not the equivalent of priests, then and now) after years of study. In the 1st century however the term was apparently a general and unofficial honorific which could be applied to any teacher, or perhaps even to any superior. Kind of like ‘guru’ or ‘sensei’.