Reputation
4,721
Next tag badge:
53/100 score
3/20 answers
Badges
2 17 45
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~128k people reached

Jan
24
comment Internal Evidence of Authorship of the Fourth Gospel
Yes, the authors call him "Peter", but when they record another person speaking to him, he is called "Simon". It seems likely that he was still usually known as Simon during Jesus' earthly ministry. So the use of "Simon Peter" in the fourth gospel does not necessarily imply that the author knew Peter before meeting Jesus--it might simply indicate that he know Peter before Jesus' death.
Jan
24
comment Internal Evidence of Authorship of the Fourth Gospel
I'm not convinced that the use of the name Simon indicates knowing him before he received the name of Peter: All four gospels record that he was often called Simon long after he received his new name (see, e.g., Matthew 16:17, Mark 14:37, Luke 22:31, Luke 24:34, John 21:15 ).
Jan
24
comment Internal Evidence of Authorship of the Fourth Gospel
See also: Who was the Beloved Disciple? and Was the Beloved Disciple the author of the Fourth Gospel?
Jan
22
comment Is it possible to be unbiased when interpreting Scripture?
This questions seems more appropriate for meta than for the main site.
Jan
9
comment Was the ending of Matthew 28 added later?
@MarkEdward Yes, that's a big factor. The Nag Hammadi library (papyrus codices) was preserved in similar conditions.
Jan
9
comment What is the context in Mark and Luke as regards the buying and preparing of the spices?
@swasheck Could you expand that into an answer? I don't see how it fits the context. (24:1, "But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared.") To my ears, it sounds like they had prepared the spices before their rest.
Jan
9
comment What is Babylon refering to in the New Testament?
This could be a good answer if you left out the replacement theology and focused on the metonymy.
Jan
9
comment Was the ending of Matthew 28 added later?
@JimThio The Dead Sea Scrolls are written mostly on parchment. A few fragments of papyrus have also been found among the scrolls.
Jan
9
comment Was the ending of Matthew 28 added later?
@JimThio Regarding how we know when the gospels were written, there was an explosion of Christian writings shortly after the time of the New Testament. Many of these writings quote from the gospels (especially Matthew). Many of them also quote each other. By looking at who quotes what, we can get an idea of the approximate latest date each one could have been written. For Matthew, it's the late part of the first century.
Jan
9
comment Was the ending of Matthew 28 added later?
@JimThio Before Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in the 4th century, Christians did not have the resources to make durable copies of their sacred writings. Early manuscripts were written on papyrus, a thin paper-like substance that is not made to last 2000 years. After Constantine's conversion, the church was able to afford parchment (calfskin) which is much more durable.
Jan
9
comment What signs does Q show of stages of composition?
Note: Personally I'm partial to the Farrer Hypothesis, and not a believer in Q. But I think this is a fair summary of current Q scholarship.
Jan
9
comment What is the context in Mark and Luke as regards the buying and preparing of the spices?
So are you saying you favor Mark's chronology over Luke's?
Jan
3
comment What is Babylon refering to in the New Testament?
Much of this question is its own answer. You should consider moving the section beginning with "Most scholars..." into an answer.
Dec
30
comment What is the best translation of πᾶς ἀνὴρ in 1 Cor 11:4?
I don't see how we can ignore the rest of the sentences when translating these words. The context forces a particular translation, I think.
Dec
26
comment Was only the woman to be scourged in Leviticus 19:20?
How does this answer the question?
Dec
19
comment How should we understand the “Cleansing of the Temple”?
Three of the four gospels place this event just days before Jesus was crucified, and they all hint that he went to Jerusalem believing he would soon die. So one factor in the temple cleansing may have been simply that he wanted to force an open confrontation with the authorities that would ultimately lead to his arrest. I'm not sure I can support this, so I'm leaving it as a comment rather than an answer.
Dec
19
comment How is genre determined?
In what sense is this an answer the question?
Dec
10
comment Does Scripture imply that Judas knew that the high-priests and elders' goal was to have Jesus killed?
One interpretation I've seen is that Judas was expecting Jesus to lead a rebellion against Rome, and was getting restless waiting for it to happen. By having Jesus arrested he was hoping to force Jesus' hand and get the rebellion started. When events played out in a very different way, Judas committed suicide.
Dec
10
comment How can we understand differences between the NWT and Latin/Hebrew/Greek on Zechariah 12:10?
FWIW, the Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version also translate this him/the one who was pierced, presumably for different reasons than the NWT.
Nov
13
comment What evidence exists that supports the understanding of the Exodus as a deliverance metanarrative and not as a historical narrative?
Isn't this now asking the opposite of the original question?