The Hidden Life of Jesus?

During the 2nd century certain writings about the childhood of Jesus emerged. They had a strong influence in the minds of Christians. Mention The Gospel of James, also known as the Protoevangelium of James. Mention the Ascension of Isaiah. Mention the Apocalypse of Adam. Etc. They are considered "apocryphs", that is, they are stories of "questioned authenticity". They are not considered canonical. Yet they have influenced the mindset of many Christians. This is an interesting topic in Christology where the "historicity" of Jesus is discussed.

We cannot simply invalidate the role of imagination in representing the childhood of Jesus. Maybe the historical evidence is lacking there but imagination may contain the meaning and wisdom about Jesus. But do we really have solid historical evidence of the hidden life of Jesus?

Jesus was from Galilee. Archaeology shows that families during that time--1st century Palestine--lived in small houses with one or two rooms. In front of a house was a small court where other families would gather. In the court was a grinding wheel and a cistern shared by families. Villages had wine and olive presses. Galilee was an agricultural region. It was--and continues to be--a very green region. It is a lovely region today!

Jesus lived in Nazareth, in Galilee. The inhabitants of Nazareth were northerners--tribal people of the northern regions of Palestine. They were observing the Laws of Moses. The expectation for the coming of the Messiah was strong in the Galilee culture. But the region was also influenced by the Greek and Roman cultures. So some families had Greek names given to their infants. Remember Herod also from Galilee? His sons studied in Rome.

Now what about the family of Jesus. In Mark we read, "Is he not the carpenter, the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon?" (6/3). There is no Greek nor Roman name. The name of the father, Joseph, is from as son of the Patriarch Jacob. "Mary" was taken from the name of the sister of Moses. "James" is taken from "Jacob". "Joses" is from Joseph. Simon is, well, a Jewish name, Simon. "Judas" is from Judah. The name "Jesus" itself is so Jewish, which is Yeshua, coming from Joshua, the successor of Moses. Might we say that the family of Jesus was not so impregnated with the mode of the time--taking foreign names? Jesus may have been from a Hebraic family attached to the Jewish faith.

There is this story of Mary and Joseph needing to follow the census of Quirinius. But Quirinius was a 6th century Roman Governor of Syria. Somehow this found its way into the Luke account. The historicity is therefore not exact. But underneath, there may have been a historical fact: the family of Jesus was among the families subject to harsh Roman rules, including payment of taxes. Galilee felt the pressure and tried to reject it. The family of Jesus obeyed Roman pressure with the hope that liberation was not from political revolt but from...somewhere else.

We see this in Jesus who suggested patience (see the parable of weeds among wheat in Mt 13/24-30; see Lk 17/23; 19,11). Jesus avoided confronting the Roman authority and was taking distance from political messianic expectations  (see Mk 12/17; 35-37).

Jesus was a carpenter--a real muscled carpenter who just did not hammer, he carried heavy rocks and stones. A (touristic) visit to ancient village ruins of Galilee will convince us.  Much likely after the death of Joseph Jesus took over the workshop.

The "infancy narratives" of Jesus are not to be taken as historical evidences. They, however, presuppose something historical. Allow me to take a position: the narratives TRANSLATE the experience of HISTORICALLY encountering Jesus, an experience that led to the faith in the messianic identity of Jesus that will be in full bloom after Easter. Remember that the narratives were written way after Easter, so they "retro-spect" and narrate about the entire experience with Jesus.