Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Sure. References from Josephus similar to the phrase "one whose name was James," where there is also no noun phrase that it modifies, include Ant. 10.6.1, Ant. 11.5.4, Ant. 14.9.4, and Life 56.

I would like it if the Beginning of the Gospel of Christ Jesus text had al kinds of material that was omitted from the other gospel texts. 'The spirit is willing, but the evidence is weak.' Help my unbelief here. Does the idea that there was this kind of material in it have anything going for it?

I'm willing to grant your hidden gospel hypothesis.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 2:41 pm I could post all of them but I don't want to distract from Peter's point. Bye.

I have a point? I'm looking for a better answer, not to prove a point.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 2:37 pm What is the point of discussing Luke in relation to Marcion? What is the value in this? They didn't think Luke wrote the gospel. They attributed that to Paul THE apostle.

Can we say anything about what was in the gospel attributed to Paul that can shed more light on the subject?

SA, sure, a word to the wise is sufficient here. And yet...

Are you trying to help me with the question in the OP? Maybe I am too dense to see the answer or the development towards one.

Okay.

What about the OP's question?

Mark 1:1 Origen Commentarii in Ephesios (Fragmenta e catenis) (1) Date: ca.222 - ca.252 Genre: - Theme: Exegesis, Scripture Commentaries Clavis: 1460 Biblio: GREGG J.A.F., The commentary of Origen upon the epistle to the Ephesians, Journal of Theological Studies 3 (1902), 234-244 ; 398-420 ; 554-57...

Math and statistics (my degree) papers just go up on arxiv.org

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 2:09 pm Come on. We both know. Whenever Paul's "my gospel" is mentioned half the time Mark 1:1 follows.

Alright, it makes sense, but I am also unsure if it's other people like Origen quoting it because that's their "Mark."