Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Ventriloquists can have many characters but the characters are nothing more than puppets of the ventriloquist.

Much like twitter, I wonder just how many posters on this site are make believe characters of a handful of mythicists?
Inquiring minds would like to know.

I reserve the right to avoid responding to dishonest people, especially when they use pseudonyms.

gryan wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 6:39 am

John T wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 6:19 am
James the Just is not the source of the infliction, therefore James the Just can not be a thorn in Paul's side.

There is no one named "James the Just" in the New Testament, of course.

Of course.

@JohnT Re: Lung disease Yes, I can relate to that diagnosis. I'm currently using a C PAP machine. Without it, I had sleep apnea and I would wake up out of oxygen with pain in my chest. When I don't clean the wonderful machine or let the water run out, my lungs hurt in the morning. So I'm increasing...

James is not the "thorn" in Paul's side but rather a lung disease Paul believes was given to him by Satan. Paul believed he had superior knowledge of the Gospel (grace through faith) than the Jewish/Christians who sought grace through works (James). @John T One of my main questions is Whi...

James is not the "thorn" in Paul's side but rather a lung disease Paul believes was given to him by Satan. Paul believed he had superior knowledge of the Gospel (grace through faith) than the Jewish/Christians who sought grace through works (James). However, Paul was restricted in preachi...

That the author of Mark did not put pen to scroll until after Marcion? precisely. With that in mind, perhaps we can fix the date of the penmanship of gMark more precisely. I believe that gMark was a compendium based on oral tradition/eye witness accounts that was put in book/scroll form around 55-6...

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat May 21, 2022 11:24 am

Accordingly, Marcion's Evangelion precedes Mark.

Do I have this right? Marcion could not have taken his razor to the gospel of Mark because it hadn't been written yet? That the author of Mark did not put pen to scroll until after Marcion?

John T the idiot.

I should conclude that this argument pro Marcionite priority is very strong. To think otherwise, i.e. that Mark (author) ended bluntly in 16:8 for a reason different from anti-marcionite polemic, would require a not-so-easy-explanation about why Mark, despite of the his so much vaunted paulinism , ...

As the argument would go: 3) The Gospel of Mark, while loudly proclaiming that Jesus will rise from the dead, and asserting once (at the empty tomb) that he has risen from the dead, offers no (original) account of such an event , and focuses much more on the death of Jesus as a martyr . CONCLUSION:...