Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

First candidate: ὑποστρέφω https://biblehub.com/greek/strongs_5290.htm The above site lists 35 NT occurrences of this word: Luke (21 occurrences across chapters 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 19, 23, 24) Acts (11 occurrences across chapters 1, 8, 12, 13, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23) Galatians (1 occurrence) H...

The Journal of Greco-Roman Judaism and Christianity has started posting downloadable articles for it's 2022 volume. This paper may be of interest: Michael Kok - Justin Martyr and the Authorship of Luke's Gospel - JGRChJ 18 2022 http://www.jgrchj.net/volume18/?page=volume18 Just found it this mornin...

@rgprice That's a very interesting post. Thank you. I have also preferred that the we passages denote an earlier source, as it conforms to the author's stated methodology of "researching everything from the beginning". The knock on that argument is why the author didn't harmonise the use o...

In the Wikipedia page on the authorship of Luke-Acts, the following quote from Udo Schnelle is provided to assert common authorship of Luke and Acts. the extensive linguistic and theological agreements and cross-references between the Gospel of Luke and the Acts indicate that both works derive from ...

Why present us with only these two choices as if they are the only potentially viable options? What if zero letters addressed to churches from the pen of someone actually named Paul ever "already existed" (meaning here as authentic letters to authentic churches), and all of them were inst...

I'll just restate my earlier view that the absence of textual support for the OP hypothesis (comparing with the Mark 16 situation) adds strongly to the view that references to Jesus in the Pauline Corpus are original. I hold no brief for the OP (who is, after all, simply asking a question) and I be...

I'll just restate my earlier view that the absence of textual support for the OP hypothesis (comparing with the Mark 16 situation) adds strongly to the view that references to Jesus in the Pauline Corpus are original.

What about non-manuscript evidence ? Christian artifacts, inscriptions, catacombs ?

And what of Christian documents themselves? Are they not evidence of Christians ?

If the Epistles of Paul were originally available in very small quantities and a scribe changed all the letters to include the name Jesus, then it is possible. It implies that all other copies have disappeared or as I said, that they were available in very small quantities or even only in one copy ...

Is it possible that the name Jesus has been insert into the Pauline letters? Is it possible that everywhere we now read "Lord Jesus", "Christ Jesus", "the Lord Jesus Christ", etc., originally just said "Lord", "Christ", etc., i.e. "Grace and pe...