notapadawan

So then if it is a novel then it is most likely as accurate as "The DaVinci Code". Though I might read it if I come across it.

Clivedurdle

It has been argued that Mark is a novel.

notapadawan

touche... And yet if just a novel, one that is far more influential than is cared to be admitted around here. I believe someone once wrote a book on what if the Bible was never written and it read like a who's who of events.

Steven Avery

That they edited and changed NT writings ?
How about a quote on this one.
Perhaps we are back on Marcion ?

Shalom,
Steven

gregor

\

So much wrong, so little time.

1. Ehrman - perhaps you should read The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture (or via: amazon.co.uk).

2. P52 - 20 lines from John dated 150 C.E. +/-: and this proves what, again?

3. Marcion discarded early - perhaps you should read about marcion and the scope of his influence.

3. Origin of species had numerous printings, with improvements in later versions. And your point is? See, this is where science, materialism, and rationality triumph over myth - improvements in evidence, argument, and conclusion.

4. "Mark" never recanted - who is this Mark you mention? Perhaps you can identify who the author of the anonymous book attributed 100+ years later to some unknown person claimed to be a Mark, and provide some of his other writings or references to others communicating with this mysterious "mark" person so that we might know a little about his life.

Clivedurdle

Why does Ehrman think Acts is the earliest surviving bit of the NT?

(From Amazon - it has the first few pages of his book.)

Toto

Ehrman says that Acts is the "oldest surviving account of Christianity's early years." That's not the same as the earliest surviving bit of the NT, which would probably be some of Paul's letters by most people's reckoning.

S.C.Carlson

Yes, of course. This is also an example where an ambiguity (here, does "of" mean "about" or "from"?) is not apparent until someone reads it another way.

Stephen