Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Were you looking for anything in particular? Other discussions have led me to think again about the possibility of second-century provenance of Paul's letters, and even of the figure of Paul himself. But I want to be sure I am not overlooking anything in the basics of why the conventional wisdom tr...

What are the reasons for dating Paul's "genuine" letters pre-70 CE?

It has been pointed out earlier in this thread that "church/assembly of God" appears comfortably in the writings of the second-century fathers. Might not that context resolve the problem raised by Geoff and acknowledged by others here? That is, Galatians is a second-century document addre...

I understand that Greg Doudna hopes to publish the case for an Aretas V from an examination of the sources in the near future.

It has been pointed out earlier in this thread that "church/assembly of God" appears comfortably in the writings of the second-century fathers. Might not that context resolve the problem raised by Geoff and acknowledged by others here? That is, Galatians is a second-century document addres...

I should ignore this, as the real answer requires a lot of build up and dependencies. So I'll give the short answer, and follow with a really stripped down background explanation. The answer is possibly, but we have to consider context. The context you likely are thinking of are the stories about M...

Someone has argued that Lista'a is a caricature-name for P'lista'a : Pilate . I like your enthusiasm, but does not this interpretation run against the way "midrashic" word plays worked? I'm thinking of Greg Doudna's explanation at https://vridar.org/2020/12/10/another-pointer-towards-a-la...

What is the evidence that you see in 1 John for the author presenting himself as (a) the beloved disciple, or (b) any kind of historical witness? I defer to Georg Strecker's commentary (Strecker, Georg. The Johannine Letters. A Commentary on 1, 2, and 3 John Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996. -- pa...

1 John doesn't present himself as an eyewitness in any meaningful way "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched" I read this as a collective 'we' recalling something historical of the group...

He seems to think that the author of 1 John is presenting himself as an eyewitness to Jesus in essentially the same manner as the GJohn puts forward the beloved disciple, and I don’t see any basis for that. Are there any good arguments for Gospel priority? At the risk of testing your patience and a...