Search Results for: how john used mark

Essential Guide to the Historical Jesus: Introduction (James H. Charlesworth)

“This book is an essential guide to the life and thought of Jesus . . . “ That’s James H. Charlesworth’s opening line in the preface to The Historical Jesus: An Essential Guide, one title in Abingdon Press’s Essential Guide series. James H. Charlesworth is George L. Collord Professor of New Testament Language and Literature … Continue reading “Essential Guide to the Historical Jesus: Introduction (James H. Charlesworth)”

[10] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 10th and final post in the series

10th and final post in the series by Roger Parvus. The complete series is archived here. In posts one through five I showed why Peregrinus should be regarded as the author of the so-called Ignatian letters. In posts six through nine I argued that he was an Apellean Christian. In this post I will tie … Continue reading “[10] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 10th and final post in the series”

Paul’s “Mystical-Mythical” Christ the real — or rival? — foundation of Christianity

Géza Vermes is not a mythicist. He believes in the historical reality of Jesus to be found beneath the Gospels. But in the context of any mythicist debate what he writes in The Changing Faces of Jesus about the “myth” of Christ Jesus in Paul’s writings is noteworthy. It shouldn’t be. What he writes is … Continue reading “Paul’s “Mystical-Mythical” Christ the real — or rival? — foundation of Christianity”

Turning the Philippian Hymn into a Precambrian Rabbit

This post attempts to build on my two recent posts about classicist John Moles’ discussion of the meaning and power of the name “Jesus” in the earliest Christian literature through reflections on a Hymn in Paul’s letters that seems impossible for most scholars to accept at face value. I’ve made positive use of two of … Continue reading “Turning the Philippian Hymn into a Precambrian Rabbit”

Gospel Puns on the Name Above All Names

Last year I posted an amateurish discussion about puns in the Gospel of Mark. During my recent break from blogging I stumbled across a classical scholar’s discussion of puns in the Gospels in an online scholarly journal. The subject is far richer than I had ever imagined. There are possibly major implications for our understanding … Continue reading “Gospel Puns on the Name Above All Names”

Why are the Gospels so believable?

One of my first posts on this blog asked why the Gospel of Mark was not more often interpreted in a way we would normally interpret any other form of literature. I was referring to Frank Kermode’s discussion of the Gospel of Mark in The Genesis of Secrecy: On the Interpretation of Narrative. This post … Continue reading “Why are the Gospels so believable?”

[8] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 8th post in the series

8th post in the series by Roger Parvus. The complete series is archived here. When I presented my first contention—that the real author of the Ignatians was Peregrinus—I argued that a proto-Catholic editor/interpolator later, probably around 200 CE, made changes to the letters to disguise Peregrinus’ authorship. To make the letters acceptable for use by … Continue reading “[8] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 8th post in the series”

Doherty’s responses to McGrath’s ch.10 (pt.1) review

Dr McGrath’s review of the first part of Doherty’s chapter 10 is here. My response is here and between that post and this I have posted a number of McGrath’s defences against my criticisms. Earl Doherty has today posted his response(s) on McGrath’s blog and I copy them here. There are two. The first is … Continue reading “Doherty’s responses to McGrath’s ch.10 (pt.1) review”

[6] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 6th post in the series

6th post in the series by Roger Parvus. The complete series is archived here. TDOP = The Death of Peregrinus by Lucian. Harmon’s translation here. II. THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTERS WAS AN APELLEAN CHRISTIAN In my previous posts I have presented my case for identifying Peregrinus as the real author of the so-called Ignatian … Continue reading “[6] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 6th post in the series”

Messiahs, Midrash and Mythemes — more comparisons with the Gospels

6th August: expanded “the trial” comparison into “The face to face confrontation of secular and religious leaders“ Comparing other rabbinic midrash with the Gospels In my previous post I covered Galit Hasan-Rokem’s comparisons of some early Christian and rabbinic midrash. In this post I comment on Hasan-Rokem’s discussions of other tales in the midrash of … Continue reading “Messiahs, Midrash and Mythemes — more comparisons with the Gospels”

Midrash and Gospels 3: What some Jewish scholars say (and continuing ‘Midrash Tales of the Messiah’)

Jewish scholars of midrash have recognized that “midrashic” techniques, methods of interpretation of texts in the Hebrew Bible, have been creatively woven into Christian Gospel narrative and teaching material as much as Jews worked creatively with midrash in their own literature. Jon D. Levenson Jon D. Levenson wrote The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved … Continue reading “Midrash and Gospels 3: What some Jewish scholars say (and continuing ‘Midrash Tales of the Messiah’)”

Midrash and the Gospels 2: debates in the scholarly sphere

(Added a paragraph commentary in the “proves historicity” section about half an hour after original posting.) New Testament scholars do not speak with one voice when it comes to applying the word “midrash” to the Gospels. Some have resolutely opposed the idea; others take its justification in their stride. In this post I would like … Continue reading “Midrash and the Gospels 2: debates in the scholarly sphere”

Midrash and the Gospels 1: Some definitions and explanations

Updated 4th August to clarify reference to Lewis John Eron’s definition of midrash. New Testament and Jewish studies scholars have often used the terms “midrash” or “midrashic” in connection with the Gospels, but some scholars object to applying the term to the Gospels. The difference is essentially between “purists” who want to restrict the term … Continue reading “Midrash and the Gospels 1: Some definitions and explanations”

Response to McGrath’s review of Doherty’s chapter 9

Dr McGrath’s review of Chapter 9 of Doherty’s book Jesus: Neither God Nor Man conveys no idea to the uninformed reader what the chapter is about. So to make up that lack (surely scholarly reviews should give readers some clear idea of what exactly is being reviewed!) I outline the content of the Doherty’s chapter … Continue reading “Response to McGrath’s review of Doherty’s chapter 9”