Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Nothing in my reconstruction requires Christians expecting to eat only fish at the banquet. I fear I have once again run up a hidden assumption on your part, one invisible to me until you spell it out for me. I really thought I had made clear that one of my points was that 2 Baruch had more than th...

It would seem that the Greek word for fish appears in the Inscription of Pectorius of Autun (the consensus date is late fourth century) because by then the “Jesus Fish” had been established. I read somewhere that the first letter of the words introducing each of the first five verses form the word ...

There are no fish at the Last Supper or the Eucharist. Well, quite. That was supposed to be clear in the OP. My whole analysis depends upon the eucharistic overtones of fish being late and derivative, not early and constitutional. This contradicts your assigning fish as a symbol of the Eucharist as...

I don’t think you have provided clear linkages between fish being symbolic of something in Judaism, or of it being a particular symbol of the Messianic banquet. There are no fish at the Last Supper or the Eucharist. The earliest reference to the Eucharist are likely to be 1 Cor. 10:16-17 [16] The cu...

I will treat chapter 11:1-15, which forms a textual unity. … If Paul was discussing two Christs, we might expect elements of an opposition between two Judeo-Christian factions, but there are no elements in this fragment that point in this direction. Verses 22 and 23 should also be included: [22] Ar...

Nearly a week ago I posted that Steven Avery had written: Since we know that Luke completed Acts in 41 AD, ... (http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3095) He replied: Thanks. My fingerfehler. Luke 41 AD, when Theophilus was the "most excellent" high priest. …. Meaning tha...

You seems to assume that the pre-Markan passion narrative was a rational and senseful text in good Koine Greek and that Mark’s main work was to add puzzling comments and to rewrite some verses into a bad Greek, so that these things are the obvious signs of Markan redaction. I think you have misunde...

The problem with this is that the context is likely to have been added by Mark. But Ehrman is talking about the way the verse reads in the Gospel of Mark, so for the purposes of his argument it's irrelevant whether this is an addition by a Markan redactor to something that no longer exists... You a...

But I will make one attempt to show what in the text looks like to me as typical Markan grammar. [1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salo'me, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him . [2] And very early on the first day of the week they ...

What I am saying is that if Mark doesn’t care about the specialness of the twelve, then he would not have used “Simon Peter” in his resurrection appearance to link back to the appointment of Simon surnamed Peter as one of the twelve. If he did care about the twelve then it would have made sense to ...