Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

The burden of proof lies with the beholder.

No, they have not misread Paul as they have forged and faked him deliberately from thin air. Indeed! The words 'Jesus' and/or 'Jesus Christ' (or 'Christ Jesus') appear to have been forced into all of these passages, with some padding in the form of 'cover ones tracks' insertional lead in cutting fo...

This statement "Then tribulation or persecution having arisen on account of the word, immediately they fall away." as found within the answer to the parable presents a clear indication that the Gospel attributed to Mark definitively dates later in composition than that which is commonly ac...

Secret Alias (Stephan Huller) was saying this as far back as 2008.

http://therealmessiahbook.blogspot.com/ ... giora.html

I don't know if this holds true for gods, but as the saying goes, if you've seen one invisible man, you've seen them all.

Original Manuscript?

If Epiphanius quoted from non-canonical texts, wouldn't that imply that to him they were every bit as authentic and efficacious as actual Canonical texts?

Epiphanius was a biased and prejudiced person. However, as far as we can tell he quotes accurately from the written texts available to him. Andrew Criddle If true, this would be a clear indicator that the so called 'Canonical' texts are perversions of earlier strata texts, would it not? I don't see...

Perhaps the reason is that the earliest strata of gMark didn't know of the Pauline epistles at all. This is my favored position.

andrewcriddle wrote: ↑Sat Jun 24, 2023 3:24 am Epiphanius was a biased and prejudiced person. However, as far as we can tell he quotes accurately from the written texts available to him.

Andrew Criddle

If true, this would be a clear indicator that the so called 'Canonical' texts are perversions of earlier strata texts, would it not?