Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I don't know what Origen was really thinking. But one guess is that he was thinking that Paul didn't acknowledge his writings as scripture; that he knows that the evaluation of the post-Septuagint Christian texts as scripture ("new scripture") is not as ancient as the apostle Paul's state...

When I say that, I mean that I'm not the person Bernard I assumed that I was, a faithful Doherty-following mythicist. When I say that my opinion is that post 70 AD is a better hypothesis, it isn't because I see that changing "the non-historically relevant nature of Paul's information about Jes...

That great city certainly refers to Rome and not Jerusalem, even if that great city is often identified in some verses (unquoted here) as Babylon. However, in these days, Babylon was a dying city of little importance, with no power & wealth. It is generally agreed that Babylon became a code nam...

How can one concede awareness of a human Jesus in a non-HJ hypothesis?? Try thinking about it. You should think about what you wrote. A non-HJ hypothesis is based on the premise that there was no awareness of a human Jesus by any of the supposed authors in the Canon. The Pauline writer admitted he ...

You might be aware that Epictetus mentions Christians from around 110 A.D. He taught at Nicopolis, the place where Titus mentions there being a Christian community. If you have Christians there at this date you must surely date the Christian movement's beginning several decades before. You seem not...

..... The most reasonable explanation, in my opinion, is that the copy prepared in the monastery had been written, in Latin, (in my opinion, a translation of Tacitus' original text in Greek) Chrestians , "good people", as they proclaimed themselves. The issue is not what was the original ...

Beliefs can be considered evidence worthy of consideration, when one takes into account the details of the belief. For example, if Paul believed Jesus had been crucified just one year prior to his conversion, wouldn't that count for something? Wouldn't that be worth a whole lot more than if Paul be...

It works just fine. I sometimes think it is worthwhile pointing out your blu dn ers to the world. These reveries of yours which string together assertions, naive-literalist readings of source materials, failures in basic reasoning and a host of other joys don't seem like they are ever going to impr...

Just thought I'd poke my head in here. While I acknowledge what Earl Doherty has done in his way to contribute to the discussion, I do not consider it the strongest possible non-HJ hypothesis. My present opinion is that the strongest possible non-HJ hypothesis would put the epistles of Paul after 7...

Markan Priority is the theory that gMark was the earliest version of the Jesus story in the Canon. This is simply wrong. Marcan priority is the theory that Mark is the forerunner to both Matthew and Luke. And the rest is argument from silence without any reason to believe the silence is significant...