Freethought Nation

presented by Acharya S and TruthBeKnown.com, online since 1995

It is currently Thu Feb 22, 2018 1:09 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


hello

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:21 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2080
Quote:
...I certainly don't remember saying anything about not having thousands of fragments of the first century....

So, is he saying that there ARE "thousands of [New Testament?] fragments of [sic] the first century?"

I'd like to see even one! At least Wallace got that right - if this Markan fragment were to be dated to the first century, it would be the first and only such artifact.

What is Ehrman talking about, then?

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:36 am 
Offline
Thor

Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:48 am
Posts: 43
Acharya wrote:
Quote:
...I certainly don't remember saying anything about not having thousands of fragments of the first century....

So, is he saying that there ARE "thousands of [New Testament?] fragments of [sic] the first century?"

I'd like to see even one! At least Wallace got that right - if this Markan fragment were to be dated to the first century, it would be the first and only such artifact.

What is Ehrman talking about, then?


Sounds to me he was just correcting Wallace about the stuff he actually said. What is important is this part in the non-existent utterance: "Bart said that even so". Wallace was trying to paint Ehrman as a some sort of stubborn denialist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:50 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 4525
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
So, what's the latest on this issue? Has Wallace or anybody come out to say which specific scripture from Mark this fragment is yet? Since, apparently, the image from the previous page is not it.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 2:07 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:09 am
Posts: 1
I think you meant to say "a first century fragment of the material that Mark later used". Mark cribbed too many events and ideas from Josephus for his gospel to have been written in the first century. Jewish Wars wasn't published until 75, and Antiquities until around 94. It has long been thought that Mark used some sort of "sayings" gospel, not unlike Thomas, although probably not specifically assigned to Jesus, whom, after all, Mark invented. Collections of sayings, however, much like Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, Philo's Providence, Cicero's Tusculan Disputations, Plutarch's Moralia, Antiochus of Ascalon's Canonica, etc, abounded during the first century BC, and the first and second centuries AD. Middle Platonists, Stoics and Cynics collected sayings which Mark could have packaged with his midrashim of Old Testament proof texts.

The existence of Thomas, and its obvious antiquity, demonstrate that collections of sayings which later got ascribed or assigned to Jesus, existed in the first century. Parts of Thomas were included in the Oxyrynchus papyrus finds in the early twentieth century, making it possibly the oldest of all the gospels. The ascriptions to Jesus in Thomas are add-ons, at the first of each group of sayings is a line "And Jesus said," and then his name doesn't appear again until the next group. Evidently this was originally an anonymous collection of unascribed sayings like Q.

Doubtless Mark used some such first century anonymous collections and sprinkled them among his midrashim and action scenes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:09 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 4525
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
It's all true the Mark fragment is from the mid first century - KIDDING! :shock:

I was just checking around to see if there were any news on the Gospel of Mark fragment claimed to be from the first century by Daniel B. Wallace. From what I've been reading it doesn't appear to be going very well:

Quote:
Sensation Before Scholarship: Gospel Fragment Tantalizes Experts

"I won't believe it until I see it," said Simon Gathercole, editor of the Journal for the Study of the New Testament at Cambridge University in the United Kingdom.

Peter Head, a New Testament research fellow at Tyndale House, a British residential center for biblical research, is likewise eager to get a look at the fragment before rendering an opinion.

"Other claims for first-century dates for New Testament papyri have not been persuasive," he said. "Also, the approach that puts the 'announcement' before the scholarship is a style that doesn't always seem that bothered with making sure the scholarship is right."

Biblical scholars are increasingly frustrated with sensational finds, often announced during the Christmas and Easter seasons. Magazines, book publishers, and cable channels seem more interested in pumping up sales and viewers than in assuring that discoveries stand up under scholarly scrutiny."

Any Update on the Alleged First-Century Manuscript of Mark?
http://earliestchristianity.wordpress.c ... t-of-mark/

The Green Scholars Initiative: Papyrus Series
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blog ... pyrus.html

http://danielbwallace.com

Please post Acharya's blog around - it would be sweet to find out what specific scriptures this fragment was to see if Acharya's blog discussing Mark 5:15-18 was spot-on or not:

1st-century Gospel of Mark fragment found?

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:50 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2080
Well, perhaps my article - which has received over 12,600 views - took the wind out of their sails.

It's certainly worth reviewing, for a variety of reasons.

I forget how much I've written about all these subjects!

1st-century Gospel of Mark fragment found?

Image

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:31 am 
Offline
Thor
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:28 am
Posts: 22
Pranique wrote:
What do you guys think? Can't wait to find out more.

Quote:
These new papyri will no doubt continue that trend. But, if this Mark fragment is confirmed as from the first century, what a thrill it will be to have a manuscript that is dated within the lifetime of many of the eyewitnesses to Jesus’ resurrection!


Some people don't know when to quit. Of the four approved gospels Mark is the only one which everyone agrees had the resurrection words tacked on later by some other writer.

_________________
http://www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:37 am 
Offline
Thor
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:28 am
Posts: 22
GodAlmighty wrote:
A Facebook friend of mine posted a pic. He knows his Koine pretty well and he says it's definitely from Mark 5:15-18.

Image


As to not quitting, the oldest is in Greek. We are still lacking an Aramaic original OR the original was in Greek and thus not by Mark. Surprise! Surprise!

_________________
http://www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group