Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Jax wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 2:45 pm Not so sure about 1.

Controversy already.

Jax wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 2:29 pm

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:01 am For instance, what if we were to make a thread containing 'all the verifiable facts about early Christianity.' Imagine how small a list that would be. Maybe I should start that thread ...

Please do!

I think he did: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7864.

In the Talk Section of the Wikipedia Page on "Secret Mark," someone claimed that "Secret Mark" uses English idioms , unfortunately the only example that they gave was the phrase "And he remained with him that night". Based on John 1:39, Biblical Greek uses the word for...

A good example of what I am talking about is that I am personally very predisposed to consider the "bishops/overseers and deacons" of Philippians 1.1 to be a sign of a later era. That is what my common sense tells me. But I am not sure, because I do not (yet) have enough information about ...

The church has become established and regular part of the local community, and so is worried about it's image with "unbelievers". Issues like mixed faith marriages are not something a very early evangelical movement makes great pronouncements about, as they are trying to convert everyone....

The church has become established and regular part of the local community, and so is worried about it's image with "unbelievers". Issues like mixed faith marriages are not something a very early evangelical movement makes great pronouncements about, as they are trying to convert everyone....

I am certainly open to finding baptismal sayings in different contexts in our extant texts. What I am wondering is why you think Mark put a baptismal saying here, in this context. Was it a saying he knew and decided that this was a good home for it? Did he invent it on his own, about baptism, and t...

I would not say it is necessarily in conflict with the context, but the context would not have suggested a baptismal interpretation to me (and it seems from the commentaries that I am not alone in this respect). Does the context suggest it to you? If so, how? Aaah!, No, or not much. But the context...

I'm not getting the premise of the question. I don't see that the interpretation I suggested is necessarily in conflict with the Markan context in which it is set. I would not say it is necessarily in conflict with the context, but the context would not have suggested a baptismal interpretation to ...

I have been looking at the metaphor (or parable) about the cloak and the wineskins in Mark 2.21-22. It seems to me it would most plausibly be interpreted as a reference to the Christian becoming a new person in baptism through reception of the holy spirit. That interpretation seems fairly obvious t...