Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Ben wrote: What is it about this account from Hegesippus that leads you to take it as historically accurate (especially with regard to reporting what James said)? I thought I'd expand on this a bit because I was focused on the part of the question that is in parentheses (I was at the library earlier...

Ben wrote: What is it about this account from Hegesippus that leads you to take it as historically accurate (especially with regard to reporting what James said)? I wouldn't necessarily call it historically accurate (but neither would I call the speeches in Josephus and Acts historically accurate). ...

If the Lord Jesus Christ in James 1.1 and 2.1 is, to be exact, Yahweh himself, then Yahweh himself is the Messiah (Christ), correct? If so, then which of those authors you ask me about held that the Messiah would be none other than Yahweh himself? (Honest question here.) Well, it appears that this ...

Ben wrote: An option which has occurred to me is that the phrases "and of the Lord Jesus Christ" in James 1.1 and "in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ" in 2.1 are Catholic interpolations. Those are the only two verses which mention Jesus at all. What looks like the second advent of...

andrewcriddle wrote: One issue with James is the limited evidence of any early knowledge of it. Not by Paul alone by David R. Nienhuis argues that James is late 2nd century. I'm not convinced, but the fact that the case can be made shows how obscure the work was in the early Church. Very true. It r...

Peter wrote: One of the earliest and most pervasive arguments for the inauthenticity of James and 1 Peter is their good Greek. Such eloquent-sounding polished Greek style, it is said, could not have come from men who were simply rustic fishermen from Galilee. While I suspect that the Damascus Docume...

David wrote: For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus:" if Galatians is authentic, this is not. Paul loves his independence and how the Jerusalem "whatever they ares" "added nothing to me" but he taught his churches to be ...

I finally had a chance to look at Segal's book (Ben sent me a better link to it but I could only open it at the library and not on my work computer). I'm not good at giving book reports (beyond saying "It was good"). Well, I thought it was good and it's packed with information, but I found...

David wrote: Well Nehemia Gordon is merely an ex-Christian playing Karaite. And one thing Christians are typically unaware of is Daniel is in the Ketuvim not the prophets in Jewish Bibles. Further, there is gradation of inspiration is Judaism, Torah most inspired, prophets a little less, ketuvim a l...

David wrote: Its obvious that since Saducees didn't believe in the resurrection they didn't accept Daniel as scripture. Maybe they interpreted Daniel differently. As Nehemia Gordon puts it: We often hear in ancient literature that the Sadducees denied the doctrines of the immortality of the soul and...