Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

The title alone, "the Preaching of Paul", suggests a writing after all the Synoptic Gospels. So does Peter and Paul being in Rome together. I didn't say that The Preaching of Paul was pre-Synoptic. Yet you're arguing that it isn't. In principle you seem to acknowledge that there could be ...

Even the redoubtable spin has suggested that the historicity of Marcion is something that we "know." What is the basis for this "knowledge" (in inverted commas) other than the deemed "authority" invested in the multiple manuscripts of the "Fathers". Scholarsh...

Recall that Marcion campaigned against non-literal interpretation. Why do you say this, Peter. How do you know this? I thought this was well-known among those interested in Marcion. It's based on the references to Marcionite interpretation and their opposition to non-literal interpretation in those...

A victim in all of this is the non-Marcionite 'heretical' tradition I see Marcion as the leader of a coalition of anti-demiurgist sects. So now they can't even exist without being subsumed into a subservient role to Marcion, claimed to be their "leader" in a way that allegedly absolves yo...

It's unfortunate how much scholarship is defined by agendas either to shore up or attack someone's own modern day religious heritage. Marcion-focused scholars being frequently an example of the latter. Marcion is being used.

A victim in all of this is the non-Marcionite 'heretical' tradition, which is almost entirely ignored and frequently sold short in the quest to use Marcion as a bludgeon against the orthodox canon.

If Marcion corrupted the epistles, then Marcion corrupted Luke/Acts; Maybe he did. Recall that Marcion campaigned against non-literal interpretation. So where other exegesis could adroitly interpret Paul and the Gospels in a demiurgical way, Marcion would balk at this. This certainly suggests the p...

So they are not being honest about the actual results of their research in their conclusion, even if their claims in the body of the article are taken at face value as if they were all correct. Michael Kok seems to disagree with you in a some measure. So he wrote recently on a Facebook group: Richa...

So the Arius's reading of the low christology in Mark is evidence that that same low christology is an early answer to Marcion's *Ev. Non sequitur. my point is that if the Arians, who were Catholics, used willingly Mark and used Mark in the way a Catholic would use Mark against Marcion (i.e. by poi...

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2025 10:23 am So the Arius's reading of the low christology in Mark is evidence that that same low christology is an early answer to Marcion's *Ev.

Non sequitur.