Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

FWIW, my advice as a close reader of Trobisch, is to buy and carefully study The First Edition of the New Testament.

The article in Free Inquiry is okay, but nothing special. Even though “The Edition of Carpus & Crescens” has a certain charm.

Trobisch’s little book, with its simple and clear argument, demolished a flood of nonsense that has been written about “The Canon” since the 19th century; which is still being written and parrotted today. His idea is summarized in three sentences: The existing early specimens of the New Testament fe...

Thanks for the kind feedback, Lane. I’ll think about it.

Walter Bauer reached the conclusion, although he did not like the implications, that the earliest Pauline material was nothing other than some primitive draft of 1 Corinthians. This hypothesis seems to get little attention today. But it aligns strikingly with Thomas Brodie’s analysis of Paul, which...

My dear Wadsworth, I like your idea. I don’t know if it will work. I am unclear about the criteria to be followed. The term “preachy,” for example, can mean different things, and at any rate is imprecise. More problematic is that users tend to cherish idiosyncratic pet theories about christian origi...

What this Jacob adds of new is only this point: but rather stole the place of the maker The place of the maker is expected by the Scriptures for YHWH and his messiah. If Marcion's Jesus is said to have stolen a such place, then the entire point is that Marcion used the Jewish scriptures to describe...

Yeah but.... I'm not so sure that the name Mary was in the original version of Mark. Another decisive insight? Take up thy Sharpie, reader. Strike out "Mary" from Mark 6:3, and replace it with "Paula" ("Sophie"? "Georgette"?). (Sarcasm. I couldn't resist.)

"For Marcion said, ‘Our Lord was not born from a woman but rather stole the place of the maker, Ok maybe this is a strange idea— that the Marcionite Lord “stole the place of the maker.” Brings to mind the harpagmon of Phiippians 2:6, but that hardly clarifies it. came down, How can this be a h...

Both Jacob and the academic commentator seem to forget that Mark's Gospel also says nothing about lineage, seed, flesh, or Mary. What about 6:3? ("Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?") Ver...

I think it's more likely to reflect a lack of awareness of Galatians 4 [ :4 ] or avoidance of it. Besides, 'not born of a woman' seems to be Marcionite. My thought was that the canonical emendation of Galatians 4:4, adding “born of a woman, born under the law”, would have been a known and convenien...