Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I don't want to get too caught up in the topic as it was a passing thought I had had while thinking about Matthew. I will probably start up a new thread and talk about it more there. For me Yeshu ben Stada can be fit into the Pauline cycle in the Marcionite canon. With him we have a good candidate ...

i just don't think the church was ever that slick of an operation and spent most of their time fire fighting (what else is Irenaeus doing?) and it took centuries of grinding before they got that kind of power to do what you suggest. there's four gospels and they don't agree with each other. i think ...

that's an interesting POV and suggestion for reading Matthew - which is for sure concerned with the law.. on the other hand its tempting to suspect an undercurrent of 'spiritualising the Torah' is at work to 'spiritually fulfill it', somewhere some places in the tradition seem suggestive of that eve...

So in the Gospel of Mark there are hundreds of parallels to the Jewish scriptures, and nowhere else in Mark it is said that anything happened in order to fulfill the scriptures, even though the events of the scenes parallel the scriptures. But in Matthew, over and over again Matthew calls out these...

the only problem with that is these are the birth narratives, which are likely the later parts of these gospels. so even if you're onto something here it could then be the gospels trying to make sense of the name, a bit like we're doing here! It could be 'Nazareth' as a place is another attempt at t...

Samson? pffft. fluff to embellish Jesus's credentials maybe. or the most likely answer : Netser + Raz. Mystery keepers. Book of Daniel
na·ṣar, נָצַר
raz רָז

נָצַררָז

Gnostics were based on creating their own content and not selecting the best writings: the most popular, easy to teach, adapted to a mass audience. They lost because they had to - they wanted to prove themselves as creators, charismatic writers/speakers, they did not develop a structure. Paul's Let...

Jarek, yes the gospels were ignored in writings known to have existed after the gospels existed (eg pastorals) and so too that applies to the earlier epistles, this is the way the gospels can be seen as being the earlier writings (or at least the 'earlier gospels, and their sources, are earlier than...

Randy, I will not comment on that specific unfortunate translation but RG is always telling us "it's all about Paul guys" I don't buy it. He appears out of nowhere and suddenly he's everywhere, but earlier he's absent and no-one's ever heard of him. I think he's not there at the beginning ...

ok Ken we'll just have to wait and see, The main question here is over the Ev gospel (which I think is not automatically "Marcionite") and whether it's lurking in Luke or not. i read Kloppenborg's response to Goodacre (in this case he's only defending Q) and all this is good stuff from bot...