Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Peter Kirby wrote:Herod was king (the "tetrarch" variety in the account by Josephus) of Galilee.

I don't understand what you are saying here, Peter. Do you mean that "tetrarch" was a kind of king? or that Josephus was not being accurate in calling him a tetrarch? or something else?

I still think you guys aren't following the right clues. Something must have led the editor to believe that Aretas could have had 'control' in some sense over Damascus. Aretas did have control over Damascus, just not Aretas IV Philopatris. It's as simple as that. The story can be a simple misunders...

Here's a break up of the verse into semantic groups: Location: εν δαμασκω [in Damascus] Actor: ο εθναρχην αρετα του βασιλεων [the ethnarch of Aretas the king] Verb: εφρουρει την δαμασκηνων πολιν [ kept guard over the city of the Damascenes] Purpose: πιασαι με θελων [to capture me wishing] I have to ...

... For example, when one reads the birth narrative in Matthew it indicates that Josephus was living in Bethlehem, as no change of location is given between Joseph's angelic visitation and the birth of Jesus, yet Jesus was born in Bethlehem, so the natural reading is that Joseph lived in Bethlehem....

The father of (Gaius) Julius Caesar was Gaius Julius Caesar, whose father was Gaius Julius Caesar. "Caesar's household" doesn't give a useful terminus a quo. First, this household is in Ephesus Although I do not accept that the Pauline letters were written before 40 CE, if you are going t...

The cover letter is clearly indicated, "I Tertius, who write this letter, greet you in the lord." It is conjectured that Tertius is not conceptually the writer of the letter, but only the amanuensis (see 1 Cor 16:21). By its nature, however, chapter 16 is not part of the body of the lette...

The notion of "natural reading" that Joe mentions is one that many people overlook when reading text. For example, when one reads the birth narrative in Matthew it indicates that Joseph [] was living in Bethlehem, as no change of location is given between Joseph's angelic visitation and th...

You still haven't contemplated what I asked of you. To spell it out: how did the doxology get to where it is in the earliest manuscript we have? If you don't want to think about it, you could just say so, rather than dodging the issue. But there is no doxology in P.46. :consternation: Rom 16:25-27 ...

I drew already my conclusions: Romans 16:25-27 is out (interpolation) and Romans 15:1 to 16:24 is in (authentic). As stated in my blog post. You should study "the mess" before making your conclusions. Every bit of data counts. Cordially, Bernard You still haven't contemplated what I asked...

It is an interesting, relevant, and cogent argument regarding Corinth (if not airtight), and I thank you for it. <grumbles> I made the point about Corinth on here about 10 pages back . To quote Rodney Dangerfield, I don't get no respect :D Also, there is Phil 4: 4:22 All the saints salute you, chie...