Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

8

Mark is more reliable.¹ Even if you were to completely discredit Mark², something is more than nothing. You cannot reasonably compare the accuracy of one document that exists with one that is only speculated to exist. Anybody that tries to tell you differently is selling something³. Answering your stated question is really that simple. In the world of ...


8

There is no conclusive internal evidence but there are plenty of pointers that lend themselves to the conclusion that Peter is in some way the source, for example this blog post lists some examples: Peter is the first and last named disciple in Mark (1:16; 16:7). Peter is mentioned more than any other disciple in Mark. Peter appears in some of the ...


6

Here is the various internal evidence that I am aware of, as well as evidence that indicates a "persecuted audience" which fits the idea of this being written after Peter's death at the hands of Nero. Evidence That could Indicate Peter as an Original Source It is possible to see connections in the simple, quick and unpolished nature of this gospel and in ...


5

In my (limited) understanding, the key arguments put forward for the order Mark > Luke > Matthew (i.e., for "Matthean posteriority") are: the literary observation that Matthew appears to collect, collate, and develop traditions found in Luke (e.g., what appears in Matt 5-7 in the "Sermon on the Mount" is found at various points, and in a more "primitive" ...


5

Most readers notice the connection between Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2.4, but the similarities go beyond that. Second Peter has a lot more material in between some of the parallels, but the two epistles actually touch on much of the same subject matter, in the same order: Jude 1 = 2 Peter 1.2 Jude 4-5 = 2 Peter 2.1 Jude 6-10 = 2 Peter 2.4-12 Jude 12-13 = 2 Peter ...


4

The Tetragrammaton, or "YHWH" which is often pronounced "Yahweh" or "Jehovah", is the proper name of the God of the Bible. The word "Elohim" or any variation thereof ("El", "Eloh", "Elah".. etc) is a title which means simply "God" or more precisely, "Mighty Ones" (in the case of "Elohim", or in the singular for all the others) and not a proper name. Just as ...


4

The existence of Q was first inferred by 19th century German theologians from a statement made by the 2nd century bishop Papias of Hierapolis. Papias is quoted in Eusebius' History of the Church as saying, "Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able." (History of the Church, 3.39.16). The Germans pointed ...


3

The Idea in Brief After his conversion and through the ministrations of Barnabas, Paul (then Saul) had met "the apostles" in Jerusalem (to include Cephas for fifteen days) who had provided him first-hand accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. Later, Paul traveled on his missionary journeys with Barnabas, John Mark and Luke, who also had access to ...


3

You have asked about the order being Mark > Luke > Matthew. My answer below addresses the order of Luke being written before even Mark. This arrangement is called Lukan Priority. It is very much a minority opinion. As you know, the prevailing theory in New Testament studies is Markan Priority. It has the most support among scholars. A minority position ...


3

Excellent reasons have been given for a pre-exilic authorship of the book of Joel. I wanted to present some of the reasons for a post-exilic authorship. The temple is standing, and the priesthood is active. (1.9,13,16; 2.17) This could certainly apply to the pre-exilic period, but of course could also apply to the post-exilic. 'Israel' is mentioned by name ...


2

Lots of scholars look for alternatives to the traditional Mark-Q priority, but in my view without success. Dennis R. MacDonald wrote a well-researched thesis in Two Shipwrecked Gospels that Luke knew not only Mark, but also Matthew. That would have caused an even bigger stir among critical scholars than his book, The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, but ...


2

Is it at all possible that these two books were written completely independent of one another by the individual prompting of the Holy Spirit? From a Christian perspective, the Holy Spirit is indeed the true Author of God's word and merely works through men by divine inspiration (as affirmed by Peter in 2 Peter 1:20-21). Given this, is it not quite feasible ...


1

John Dominic Crossan, in The Birth of Christianity, argues that the Q document, the Gospel of Thomas and some of the sayings in Mark's Gospel are based on an earlier Greek document he calls the Common Sayings Tradition. First of all, to the extent they are based on the same common source, they stand or fall together according to the reliability of that ...


1

The significance of the various uses of the names Yahweh and Elohim can be better understood when we realise that often when the author uses the name Yahweh, the focus is on Judah, and whenever he uses the name Elohim, the focus tends to be on the northern kingdom of Israel. When the author uses the name Yahweh, he is speaking of an anthropomorphic God with ...



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