Tag Info

New answers tagged

-2

As stated in the question, the most widely accepted synoptic theory is that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were dependent on Mark's Gospel for much of their narrative content. John Dominic Crossan describes this, in The Birth of Christianity, pages 110-1 as a "masive consensus" and says it is also a major scholarly conclusion that Matthew and Luke relied on ...


0

Some, like Raymond E. Brown, in An Introduction to the New Testament, page 263, prefer to refer to the omission in Luke's Gospel of material from Mark 6:45-8:26 as the 'Big Omission' (or 'Great Omission') in order to distinguish what he terms the 'Little Omission' of Mark 9:41-10:12. Others refer to the major omission simply as the 'Missing Block'. John ...


1

The conservative view is that the Gospel of Thomas dates from the second century. This is largely because it demonstrates the existence of Gnostic Christian beliefs and, to some, it is inconceivable that such variant beliefs could have existed so soon after the crucifixion of Jesus. On the other hand, the dominant view among critical scholars is that it is ...


1

In one way, yes they are, but literally they are not the same. Looking at four different accounts, in context, we can see so many similarities that they must surely be versions of the same account, yet there are important differences: Mark 14:3-5,7 (KJV): "And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman ...


1

Egerton may be to John what Q is hypothetically to Matt/Luke. Wikipedia cites Jon B. Daniels (The Complete Gospels): "... suggestions that the Egerton Gospel served as a source for the authors of Mark and/or John also lack conclusive evidence. The most likely explanation for the Egerton Gospel's similarities and differences from the canonical gospels is ...



Top 50 recent answers are included