Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

are you sure this not representing questioning who gets to go to heaven/who is saved? this question appears a few times in scripture Paul talks about salvation, so yes. Whether jew or greek, he who believes in his heart and confesses with his mouth is saved. But Paul's emphasis here is on the super...

Paul, or those writing under his name, is interpreting Deuteronomy 30 here in the light of his own belief. If the life giving Law is not too hard to bear or grasp (Deut. 30:11 "Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach") and if Christ is the end o...

I'm glad you elaborated on the reasons for your frustration, as the invectives and the threats do not contribute to the value of your arguments. Furthermore, yes, I can see how your quote could be explained as a pun on chrestos. Very interesting.

They are referring to the first three letters of the inscription: ΧΜΓ , with a supralinear stroke. These three letters appear together like this in Byzantine Greek frequently. I can't tell from the photos whether the first letter (Χ) is clear enough or just predicted from the other two. The meaning...

I can't see it either. I found the same article on LiveScience, originally posted in January 2021 and recently updated to clarify that the lintel dates to the late fifth century and was later repurposed. Unfortunately no more details on the inscription itself. https://www.livescience.com/christ-born...

The Wiktionary page for the original Greek ἰδιώτης: Etymology From ἴδιος (ídios, “one's own, private”) +‎ -ώτης (-ṓtēs). Noun 1 a private person, one not engaged in public affairs 1 a private soldier, as opposed to a general 2 (adjectival use) private, homely 3 commoner, plebeian 4 uneducated person...

Ha Giuseppe, you never cease to amaze me. How on earth did you happen to read Pierre Krijbolder, it's pretty niche. I think much of his ideas are pretty speculative but he makes some very interesting observations, including the one you've posted.

Though your reconstruction is not evident from the chapter quoted, that might well be the case; we don't know proto-Mark. Nevertheless as Bruno Bauer quite brilliantly illustrates, the baptism story is another jarring gospel element that had to be smoothed out over time.

Mildly interesting. Have you ever read a comparison of the Emmaus and the Testimonium Flavianum? Remarkable similarities there, too. See https://www.josephus.org/GoldbergJosephusLuke1995.pdf.

You must be mistaken. Read the text again (italics are mine): Apart from the report of Mark, in which the original view has been preserved, which is the basis of the later reflection work of Matthew and the Fourth Gospel, there is not a single testimony for the "Factum" of this baptism Fol...