Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 12-09-2008, 05:29 PM

Been called lots of things over the years, as always, when it proves easier than dealing with the actual issues at hand.

Just happened to jump in here from another thread where you also concluded by calling spin an A..hole.
Is this your standard way of dealing with everyone that tries to lead you into employing better scholarship?

Casper · 12-10-2008, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

My interest is not in any contradiction, but in the fact that there is a chronological implication, ie that "on the third day" post-dates "after three days" in the christian tradition. The latter was acceptable to the writer of Mark and apparently Q (the sign of Jonah, three days and three nights...), but not to the other synoptics. If "on the third day" comes chronologically after the writing of Mark which is several decades after 1 Corinthians, then what does one make of the use of "on the third day" in the creedal material in 1 Cor 15:4? I think the chronological implications are straightforward.

spin

ahh, now I see the implication.

So help us out, would that part of 1 Corinthians be interpolation, or later addition, or do we posit that the Markan material is older and 1 corinthians represents a later evolution?

Sounds like at least the beginnings of a case for an earlier dating of gMark, and like you say, an early tradition which gMark represents.

I'm going to have to revisit the marcion threads. Is there any ante-Nicene criticism of marcion based on how this is worded, or is it even in our limited reconstructions of Marcion?

spin · 12-10-2008, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

My interest is not in any contradiction, but in the fact that there is a chronological implication, ie that "on the third day" post-dates "after three days" in the christian tradition. The latter was acceptable to the writer of Mark and apparently Q (the sign of Jonah, three days and three nights...), but not to the other synoptics. If "on the third day" comes chronologically after the writing of Mark which is several decades after 1 Corinthians, then what does one make of the use of "on the third day" in the creedal material in 1 Cor 15:4? I think the chronological implications are straightforward.

spin

ahh, now I see the implication.

So help us out, would that part of 1 Corinthians be interpolation, or later addition, or do we posit that the Markan material is older and 1 corinthians represents a later evolution?

Mark is much later than the time of Paul. A gospel is a sign of the end of the coming end and people were starting to settle in for a long duration which involved chronicling traditions for posterity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

Sounds like at least the beginnings of a case for an earlier dating of gMark, and like you say, an early tradition which gMark represents.

I'm going to have to revisit the marcion threads. Is there any ante-Nicene criticism of marcion based on how this is worded, or is it even in our limited reconstructions of Marcion?

Sorry, I haven't followed the Marcion connection with Paul.

spin

Ben C Smith · 12-11-2008, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_cave

Note that gJn seems to crucify Jesus on a Thursday....

What do you mean?

Ben.

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

12-09-2008, 05:29 PM	#61
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Been called lots of things over the years, as always, when it proves easier than dealing with the actual issues at hand. Just happened to jump in here from another thread where you also concluded by calling spin an A..hole. Is this your standard way of dealing with everyone that tries to lead you into employing better scholarship?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.