Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

7

This was not, perhaps, Leon Morris's finest moment (quote is on p. 17, originally published 1974), although he certainly wasn't alone in assuming this datum. Neither Howard Marshall, nor John Nolland make mention of Marcion in their circumspect discussions of the attribution of authorship of the third (canonical) gospel -- simply to cite two subsequent ...


7

One possibility: the Beloved Disciple is Lazarus The primary source for laying out a case for the author's identity is John 21.24-25, the final two verses of the book. Here we are given a brief glimpse at the book's origin: it seems to have been written by or based on the testimony of an individual we identify as the Beloved Disciple ('This is the disciple ...


6

The Muratorian fragment isn't simply a list of books included in the canon, but also a description of them. It's description of the Gospel of Luke makes it very clear that they believed it was written by Luke: The third book of the Gospel [is that] according to Luke. Luke, "the" physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him ...


6

One of the critical scholars who believe the attribution to Paul is clearly fictional is Burton L. Mack, who says (Who Wrote the New Testament, p206) the language, style and thought of Titus is thoroughly un-Pauline. He says the ‘personal’ references to particular occasions in the lives of Timothy, Titus, and Paul do not fit with reconstructions of that ...


5

Christian tradition holds that John did live to be 80 or 90. We know from Polycarp, that John was still active in Ephesus, and baptised him directly. Following Schaff: It is safe, then, to say that the apostle John, with other disciples of Christ, came from Palestine to Asia Minor. If Polycarp, on the day of his death (Feb. 23, 155), was looking back ...


5

Although the gospel accounts generally evidence the fact that Jesus was fully literate, including this account in John: 6This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin ...


4

Several years ago, I was reading through the Fourth Gospel about every week. During this time, one of the things I noticed was the way in which the author refers to Peter. Matthew, Mark and Luke almost almost refer to him simply as "Peter", the major exception being in the retelling of accounts prior to Peter's meeting with Jesus. On the other hand, the ...


4

Concerning the accuracy of the gospel The introduction to Luke's gospel is in "high" Greek, as was common in historical writing at the time. Moreover, the author claims to have researched events well. We know that the author had gained access to Mark, and claims to have utilized several additional sources until he got "perfect knowledge" of the events ...


3

P66, a manuscript from ca. 200 AD, contains the first nine verses of John 21, indicating that if it was an addition, it was a very early addition. Thus the addition of this chapter cannot have been motivated by Catholic theology of the pope, which was not developed until much later. In fact, Nestle Aland (the most used critical edition of the New ...


3

Most Protestant scholars believe in justification by faith alone (obviously). And there is also a tendency to extend faith alone further, i.e. into sanctification too. Beginning with this doctrinal bias, they start with the presupposition that Romans and Galatians are the unquestionably authentic epistles because Romans and Galatians are the most useful to ...


2

Yes and No Authorship of the gospel First, we must consider who authored the fourth gospel. Tradition attributes this gospel to John, a fisherman who became one of Jesus' first disciples. Because most working people of that era were illiterate, many modern scholars have questioned whether John could have written a gospel at all, let alone one filled with ...


2

This is a "well known" great hermeneutics question, it can't be answered fully here. In fact there are many evidence that support an hypothesis of latter addition. The first is merely of writing style Jhon[20:30-31] is stylistically a conclusion "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book. These are ...


2

Further argument for a late date Not only does Daniel seem able to prophesy events close to the time of 167 BCE accurately, although not the relevant events that occurred shortly after this time, but its narrative around the chronology of the Exile seems flawed. Chapter 8 is in the time of Babylonian rule, then Daniel 9:1 is the first year of Darius, son of ...


1

First of all, Elaine Pagels points out that the 'beloved disciple' is consistently referred to with the disciple Peter, always such as to be the more worthy disciple. For example, compare Luke 24:12, where Peter ran alone to the sepulchre, with John 20:4, where the two disciples ran to the sepulchre but the beloved disciple outran Peter and came first to the ...


1

All four gospels were first published anonymously. Christian tradition from the second century assigned names to all four. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1, late 2nd century: Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible