1,859 reputation
1613
bio website
location
age 33
visits member for 1 years, 10 months
seen 10 hours ago

Apr
17
comment Does Paul of Tarsus quote Talmud?
Seems unlikely since the Talmud wasn't written down until several centuries later.
Apr
3
comment “ἐν Ἐφέσῳ” in Ephesians 1:1
This answer does an excellent job of laying out the evidence for the two points of view, but I can't upvote because too much of it is spent on arguing that there's no way to evaluate evidence other than by relying entirely on presuppositions. This is somewhat polemical and not related to the specific question asked.
Jan
10
comment What does “Scripture” in the NT refer to?
I missed when I was going through this before that 1 Timothy 5:18 might be an exception. There the immediate quote is from the Torah, but it's followed by a quote taken from Luke/Matthew/Q.
Dec
17
comment Does Nazarene Sect mean Nazarene Cult?
I don't think the modern concept of "cult" was a concept they had in the 1st century.
Dec
17
comment Why is part of Luke 9:55-56 omitted in some Bible translations?
Edited, had the wrong centuries for the Great Uncials (the usual 300s to 3rd instead of 4th century copying error).
Dec
14
comment How can we understand differences between NWT and Latin/Greek on Acts 20:28?
It may also be worth noting that Hort conjectured that the word Son was in the original, but that it was lost very early and no longer appears in the manuscript record. This is a conjecture, and is not backed up by any manuscript evidence.
Dec
13
comment What are the major variations of the “double-fulfillment” hermeneutic?
At the very least include a footnote, as the NASB does. Also, this is not a simple Jewish/Christian split, for example the NRSV uses "young woman."
Dec
13
comment What are the major variations of the “double-fulfillment” hermeneutic?
Even if you want to use this as your example, you should still use an accurate translation.
Dec
11
comment How can we determine the author's intent in listing various ages in Genesis?
Very nice graphs!
Dec
11
comment What are the arguments against the authenticity of “Peter's” sermon in Acts 2?
" it was in all cases difficult to carry them word for word in one's memory, so my habit has been to make the speakers say what was in my opinion demanded of them by the various occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to the general sense of what they really said."
Dec
11
comment What are the arguments against the authenticity of “Peter's” sermon in Acts 2?
Great answer. I think the last point bears reemphasizing. The claim is not that Luke is acting unusually or in a dishonest fashion when he uses speeches this way. This was just how Greek historians wrote. Thucydides explicitly addresses this point.
Oct
8
comment Who are the deceivers 1 John is written against, mentioned in 2:26?
Do you mean 2:26?
Oct
6
comment Was Luke's birth narrative written in response to Marcion's version of the gospel?
Or it was added by Luke at the same time as all the other additions that Luke made.
Oct
1
comment Was Luke's birth narrative written in response to Marcion's version of the gospel?
@crownjewel82: Do you have any references for people making this claim about Matthew's birth narrative. I'd only ever seen it in relation to Luke.
Sep
22
comment Is the ending of the Gospel of Mark (16:9-20) original?
@McGafter: I looked through parts of Burgon's book, and must admit that I found it old-fashioned, out-of-date, and unconvincing. That said, I do think the LEM is something on which reasonable people can disagree! We know that both versions certainly date to the 2nd century at the latest! Furthermore, there are modern scholars who argue for the authenticity of the LEM today (e.g. Maurice Robinson), so there's no need to use arguments that are 140 years out of date.
Sep
22
comment Is the ending of the Gospel of Mark (16:9-20) original?
Also there's a big problem is his discussion of Ephesians 1:1, where P46 (written around 200 but not discovered until 1930s) agrees with B and א. More generally, Burgon thinks that the high esteem in which B and א were held at his time was likely to decline, and this prediction has proven wrong over the last century as early Papyri have typically confirmed the value of B and א.
Sep
22
comment Is the ending of the Gospel of Mark (16:9-20) original?
Similarly, his discussion of the Sahidic versions is missing two ancient Sahidic documents which do not have the long ending.
Sep
22
comment Is the ending of the Gospel of Mark (16:9-20) original?
For example, the Syriac Sinaiticus (a 4th century Syriac text of the gospels) which also does not contain the long ending was not discovered until 1892.
Sep
7
comment How do the traditions of the LXX and MT versions of Jeremiah relate?
Here's another nice paper.
Sep
7
comment How do the traditions of the LXX and MT versions of Jeremiah relate?
I was not talking about 2QJer which that quote refers to (and is mostly proto-MT with some proto-LXX influence), but rather 4QJerb and 4QJerd which are strongly LXX. The Dead Sea Scrolls aren't a single text, and in Jeremiah contains some fragments from each tradition. Thus the DSS shows that there were substantially different versions of Jeremiah circulating in Hebrew, though it doesn't tell you which one was older.