Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Doug Shaver · 06-02-2011, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Yes, I believe that GJohn used Mary's gospel as a source, as did Mark/Matthew. The references to the "beloved disciple" were originally references to Mary.

To what problem is that speculation supposed to be a solution?

dog-on · 06-02-2011, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hjalti

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meatros

I'm not sure how this is supposed to be an argument for historicity. It seems to me that the women in the empty tomb story did not testify in any legal sense. Also, they were not believed by the disciples.

Finally, it's not like the Church honors any Gospel of any of the women at the tomb.

So what's the supposed big deal with the testimony of women?

This argument makes no sense to me. Why? Because in the oldest gospel (and the source for the story about the empty tomb in the other three gospels in my opinion) the women don't testify to anything. They "said nothing to anyone".

Indeed...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.