Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Some may find it difficult to believe that Origen could have confused what he read in Hegesippus with what he read in Josephus (as Henry St. John Thackeray, Richard Carrier, and I all think he did). Origen does sometimes make mistakes. Even within his own Bible 1.PNG Paget in "Some Observation...

Maciej, Thanks for posting this. I think it shows that Mason evaluates Whealey's argument differently from the way she does. I think she believes she has a knockdown argument for the reading 'believed to be' (Jerome's credebatur/Michael the Syrian's mistabra) that circulating in Josephus Antiquitie...

Also, Mason says he agrees with Whealey on the reading in the Testimonium in Ant. 18.63-64, but then he seems to think she's arguing for the reading 'called Christ", which she's not. She's arguing for 'believed to be the Christ." Placing 'called Christ' in 18.63-64 is a conjectural emenda...

If AJ 20.200 is about James the Just, then the only reason why Josephus would single him out of the others who were killed with him and indentified him by saying he is the brother of Jesus called Christ, is because Jesus called Christ is already known to his readers. Many scholars see it this way fo...

Matti Myllykoski writes: "The passage may well have been modified by a Christian scribe, who added the idea that Jesus was called Christ" “James the Just in History and Tradition: Perspectives of Past and Present Scholarship (Part II)” (University of Helsinki, Currents in Biblical Research...

There is a footnote in Ken Olson's "Eusebius and the ‘Testimonium Flavianum" with names of few additional scholars who doubted AJ 20.200. The most important one is probably Benedictus Niese.

I once looked at the ancient sources to see how early Christian writers understood the passage about "James, the brother of the Lord". Some indeed understood it to be an honorary title. Origen (184-254 A.D) "Paul, a genuine disciple of Jesus, says that he regarded this James as a brot...

"Scholars disagree on whether ταξις refers to a chronological or literary arrangement. Chronology was a desideratum of historians and Papias may have borrowed the platitude on neither subtracting nor adding falsehood from them … The difficulty with this is that historians rarely chose the term ...

Are there scholars who argue that the Eucharist was interpolated in Paul? I think the Eucharist is a good example of Mark creating a "narrativized version of the contents of the most important letters of Paul the Apostle". Paul attributes his knowledge of the "Lord's Supper" to r...

Several scholars argued that Mark and Matthew not only knew but also reworked the letters of Paul. Bartosz Adamczewski, Polish biblical scholar and Catholic Priest, holds that “contrary to the widespread opinion, which is in fact based only on the post-Lukan patristic text termed the ‘testimony of P...