Search found 317 matches

by gmx
Sun Aug 02, 2015 4:43 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Matthew vs Levi
Replies: 11
Views: 15616

Re: Matthew vs Levi

The author of GMatthew knew GMark and "Q" (as commonly accepted) Agree that Markan priority is "commonly accepted", however the evidence supporting such is particularly flimsy. Would be heartwarming to think that the attribution of Matthew with the Gospel bearing the same name i...
by gmx
Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:15 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Matthew vs Levi
Replies: 11
Views: 15616

Matthew vs Levi

What is the significance of the fact that "the tax collector" is called Matthew, not Levi, in Matthew's gospel? Could it have played a role in the original association of the first Gospel with Matthew? It has been suggested that Justin Martyr, though familiar with the gospels, was not awar...
by gmx
Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:20 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Myth vs History and the "Boundary of Certainty"
Replies: 20
Views: 21271

Re: Myth vs History and the "Boundary of Certainty"

The names you could use for this approach include: Justin Martyr Irenaeus Clement of Alexandria Tertullian Origen Cyprian Eusebius These seven authors can provide, epistemically, the foundation of the investigation of ante-Nicene Christianity. I have been wondering why the so-called "genuine P...
by gmx
Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:04 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Myth vs History and the "Boundary of Certainty"
Replies: 20
Views: 21271

Re: Myth vs History and the "Boundary of Certainty"

Peter Kirby wrote:The evidence for ancient Christianity comes in two flavors: literary and documentary. That's it. You've got your books and you got your relics. That's what we go by.

For the second century, it's almost entirely books.......
Thank you for your extremely informative and relevant reply.
by gmx
Wed Jul 29, 2015 4:52 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Myth vs History and the "Boundary of Certainty"
Replies: 20
Views: 21271

Myth vs History and the "Boundary of Certainty"

The question of Jesus' historicity has existed for centuries. If Jesus never existed, then neither did the twelve, nor Paul, nor Luke and Mark... and so on and so forth.... At what point in Christian history are we no longer dealing with "did this person really exist?", but rather with pro...
by gmx
Mon Jul 27, 2015 3:32 pm
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Given Matthew and Luke, why was Mark needed?
Replies: 2
Views: 4685

Re: Given Matthew and Luke, why was Mark needed?

I think it's explicable if Mark is still an author and not merely a conflater-copyist. If he is writing his gospel based on accounts from Matthew, Luke and Peter, then it will naturally be in his own writing style. Just like on the alternative hypothesis, Matthew and Luke have used Mark and Q but st...
by gmx
Mon Jul 27, 2015 5:01 am
Forum: Christian Texts and History
Topic: Given Matthew and Luke, why was Mark needed?
Replies: 2
Views: 4685

Given Matthew and Luke, why was Mark needed?

I've read a few books about the synoptic problem, and the strongest argument against Markan Posteriority still appears to be the dubious rationale for writing the type of abbreviated account that Mark represents if he has based it on Matthew and Luke. One argument says that if Mark's purpose was to ...