Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

8

The traditional view As OP notes, Jeremiah was traditionally regarded as the author of the collection of five poems we know as "Lamentations". This goes back at least to the brief prologue in the Septuagint:1 And so it was, after Israel had been taken captive and Jerusalem laid waste, that Jeremiah sat weeping; he sang this dirge over Jerusalem.... ...


7

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 ...


7

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 ...


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 ...


7

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 ...


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 ...


6

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 ...


4

Bibliographic Postscript This is offered as a supplement to Soldarnal's fine answer. Probably the most thorough (one is tempted to say "exhaustive") account of the internal evidence bearing on the question of the common authorship of gJohn and 1 John is found in A.E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (Edinburgh, 1912), ...


4

While before the 20th century there was common agreement on common authorship between the Gospel and Epistles of John, there is, as you mention, no such agreement today. At the same time, we are quick to note, however, that John and 1 John share a vocabulary of words and thought forms to such an extent that no one has mounted a serious proposal that they are ...


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 ...


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 ...


3

Apparently the Theory is not from Analysis of Pre-Extant Texts If C. Marvin Pate is correct in his Romans commentary statements (no page numbers shown in that Google Book link, but it is under the section where he discusses those verses in the commentary), then the two main reasons this becomes a question at all for this passage has nothing to do with any ...


3

It is easy to show that Paul did not write the Epistle to the Hebrews, in fact that is the view of almost all modern scholars, who generally do not regard Hebrews as an epistle at all. Although attributed to Paul quite early, even many of the Church Fathers expressed doubts about Pauline authorship. When considering other possible authors, Luke was not among ...


1

If the author is not the apostle Peter, we can never establish from the text who the real author was. However, the text can help establish whether Peter or another author wrote this epistle, and if another author then perhaps in what timeframe it was written. I think Susan has dealt with the issue of vocabulary very well, and I would endorse this, noting ...


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 ...



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