Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Where do Papias and Irenaeus assert that Mark used a Hebrew original of Matthew? Loosely reinterpreted. Irenaeus says that Matthew's gospel was first written in Hebrew and he got that information from Papias and Papias says that Mark had the same stories as the/that Hebrew gospel ('that' if you bel...

Were the museum to be revealed to be “some kind of missionary activity,” he [Trobisch] said, “It would be an enormous disappointment. I could not identify or work for a museum that wanted to do that.” It sounds like Trobisch has never talked to his employers. The "Bible Museum" is 100% mi...

"Chrestus was a common name in Rome." https://books.google.com/books?id=lwzliMSRGGkC&pg=PA33 "ordinary name Chrestus" https://books.google.com/books?id=JyYKIclOBzkC&pg=PA204 "Chrestus was a common name" https://books.google.com/books?id=k8ECAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA20...

A letter found in the cartonnage of a Nag Hammadi codex cites "Chrestus."

People today construct a "Jesus" who fits their views. He only exists in their imagination, and can be altered at any time as their views change.

Why should people in the first century have been any different?

It's not an interpolation. Those who want it to be one either have a vested interest in trying to soften the Hitleresque tone of the passage, or they don't want it to be there since it destroys their Jesus-crucified-in-outer-space hypothesis.

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/fictional_jesus.htm Anyone else read this? It kind of reminds me of Muller's website, but on opposite day... and actually quite bad (not just middling with some bright spots). No I was not particularly impressed. If this kind of thing (in quality of presen...

I'm confused here. You say the last essay (which cites Doherty) dates from 1998, but in the first post above you say that "the author's moment of skepticism of Jesus wouldn't come until 2001, after reading the website and first book of Earl Doherty." (You quote an article by Doherty from 1...

Finally, Sanders adds this insult to the injury: "The sources for Jesus are better, however, than those that deal with Alexander. The original biographies of Alexander have all been lost, and they are known only because they were used by later - much later - writers." In contrast, Sanders...