Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I just put up a new article on this issue here: http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/fictional_jesus_synthesis.htm Basically, I'm saying the case that the Gospel of Mark is an entirely fictional story is much more broadly supported by serious scholarship than most people realize. In fact, dev...

We cannot say anything about the Marcionite text here. But we can reject the reading referred to as being Marcionite. From my notes this is a late correction, long after the Marcionite text - it might even reflect later corruption of the text in Adamantius: apparently read ἡμᾶς "us" suppor...

I just put up a new article on this issue here: http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/fictional_jesus_synthesis.htm Basically, I'm saying the case that the Gospel of Mark is an entirely fictional story is much more broadly supported by serious scholarship than most people realize. In fact, dev...

You shouldn't (and can't) look at 'things attributed to Megethius' alone because that would imply that the text is a verbatim recording of something which it is not. It's a made up dialogue - perhaps related to an actual historical situation - but that's very unlikely. It's a made up dialogue. The ...

Mr. Huller, I have a question. Where is this exegesis of Daniel by Marcion in Dialogue Adamantius? The only reference I find by a Marcionite champion is 1.25 were Megethius quotes Daniel 2:34-35 from the LXX (Pretty's English translation): Daniel says, " I saw, and behold, a stone was cut out o...

This is incorrect. While I agree in exegesis the Marcionites did not associate Jesus with the Daniel's "son of man", there is no question that the phrase was present in multiple places in the Marcionite Gospel: From Epiphanius: 'But that ye may know that the Son of Man hath power to forgiv...

McMacSon, "could have been written" is the operative phrase - It could also have been later (e.g., post-Diocletian). So that is the early terminus. And even so, that dating still puts it shortly after the Decian persecution of 250 CE. Typically 254 is a date thrown out for it. That was the...

Ben, My point is it's pictorial. And that is for the common people. The writers, the scribes, sure they were familiar with Ezekiel and the OT. But the pictorial imagery doesn't come from the Jewish text. And these are primarily visual images. This use of imagery is something Christianity picked up f...

Ben, Nah, the symbols for the four Gospel writers developed probably in 4th or 5th century (any church father reference --which I don't think there are-- to this would suggest a later interpolation IMO). This is long after their production, and probably after their binding into a single volume. The ...

The symbols of the four Gospel writers appear to be drawn form the Sons of Horus Matthew as Man Mark as Lion Luke as Ox (Calf) John as Eagle https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/religiousimages/F004_Evangelists_Book%20ofKells.jpg The origin is probably Ezekiel Ezekiel 1:10 Their faces looked...