Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Part 2 Mark 10, 18 QDS 1 § 2 (p.159, l.8) Luke 18, 14 QDS 1 § 4 (p.160, l.3) BP1 Matthew 5, 16 QDS 1 § 4 (p.160, l.12) BP1 Mark 10, 27 QDS 2 § 2 (p.161, l.3) BP1 Mark 10, 25 QDS 2 § 2 (p.160, l.21) BP1, 2 § 2 (p.161, l.2) BP1, 3 § 1 (p.161, l.14) BP1 Matthew 19, 17 QDS 3 § 1 (p.161, l.15) BP1 Luke 1...

Yes. The guy who is interested in the 'gay narrative' of David and Jonathan.

'The evidence' = whatever is actually available, no matter how paltry. Part 1 the acknowledged allusions to the gospels in QDS: Matthew 5, 3 QDS 16 § 3 (p.170, l.12) BP1, 17 § 5 (p.170, l.33) BP1, 19 § 2 (p.172, l.2) BP1 Matthew 5, 6 QDS 17 § 5 (p.170, l.34) BP1 Matthew 5, 8 QDS 19 § 3 (p.172, l.5) ...

The paucity of references to Luke 10:41, 42 is extremely unusual especially when juxtaposed against Clement's casual 'you know that Mary and Martha story ...' comment. Whoever he was writing for clearly knew the story.

But you realize there is no actual EVIDENCE for any of this right? Not even Clement's use of the passage which I find particularly interesting. A stronger circumstantial case can be made for Secret Mark or whatever Origen's gospel was in the Commentary of Matthew as Clement's source than what you ar...

No but Gregory Thaumaturgos was so named

But we have to start with something, we have to start somewhere. Sometimes in this field or at this forum it feels a little like 15 people speaking in different languages AT one another. The idea that Mark was used to make Matthew and then Luke is generally regarded as basically correct. Yes the Chu...

I will have to try this. Nothing better than learning something new about food. Thanks for sharing that.

Genesis 1, 26 QDS 36 § 2 (p.183, l.24) BP1 Genesis 3, 19 QDS 17 § 1 (p.170, l.17) BP1 Genesis 4, 9 QDS 42 § 10 (p.189, l.20) BP1 Isaiah 1, 18 QDS 39 § 4 (p.185, l.22) BP1 Ezekiel 18, 21 - 22 QDS 40 § 3 (p.186, l.16) BP1 Daniel 3, 50 QDS 41 § 7 (p.187, l.24 - V) BP1 Matthew 5, 3 QDS 16 § 3 (p.170, l....

I think it's safe to assume that Luke and John were later than Mark and Matthew - not in the least because that's what our earliest sources tell us.