aa5874

Around here people do NOT use Myth Fables to date the Day of Pentecost.

The Myth Fable of the Resurrection is NOT an historical account and neither is the story about the Holy Ghost on the Day of Pentecost.

The Day of Pentecost is about 50 days AFTER the Passover and has NOTHING whatsoever to with the Myth Fables called Gospels, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings.

Duvduv

Isn't it something that in 1 Corinthians 12 - 14 none of the discussions of speaking in tongues has ANYTHING to do with the Christ person of the gospels or even of the epistles. And the verse in Isaiah 28 has nothing to do with the Christian idea of speaking in tongues either.

aa5874

But speaking in tongues in the Epistles is connected to Acts of the Apostles and the INTERPOLATED gMark.

In order to preach the gospel to EVERY creature as commissioned by the Resurrected Jesus [Myth Jesus], the disciples must MAGICALLY be able to speak in other TONGUES, that is, to speak the various languages and dialects of EVERY Country and Nation in the world.

The Pauline writer gives the FALSE impression that he could MAGICALLY talk in other languages.

1 Corinthians 14:18 KJV The short-ending gMark is BEFORE the Pauline writings since the author did NOT write that the disciples preached the Gospels and did NOT write the disciples spoke in other tongues after his Jesus died.

Duvduv

......alternatively, the part about speaking in tongues in GMark was added in after someone heard or knew about the ideas found in 1 Corinthians LATER ON.

aa5874

Well, the short-ending gMark does NOT contain any thing about the disciples would speak in tongues so you are OBLIGATED to show that the author of the short-ending of gMark wrote after the Pauline writings when there are much more evidence from apologetic sources that place the Pauline writings AFTER the short-ending gMark.

Why do you speculate but NEVER show that your speculation can be substantiated????

Once you do a proper research you will find that your suggestion is NOT really logical.

The short-ending gMark story did NOT require the disciple to talk in tongues and the INTERPOLATED passages did destroy the short-ending gMark story.

In the short-ending gMark the Jesus story was ONLY to be known publicly for the first time AFTER the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE.

Duvduv

Why couldn't the interpolation into Mark have happened later in time after 1 Corinthians was known to people who had Mark instead of the other way around? One speculation is as good as another.

aa5874

You are speculating because you have NOT provided any evidence to support what you assert.

You have admitted that you are speculating so please do NOT associate me with what you have imagined without a shred of evidence.

I do NOT regard your speculation as being good.

Duvduv

Come now, AA. We are both observing the same two sources. You speculate on one direction of dependence, and I speculate in the opposite direction.
But your speculation is more difficult because you cannot explain why Mr. Corinthians knew about speaking in tongues from Mark but didn't know about other important parts of the Mark story.

aa5874

Again, you have admitted you are speculating so what you assert is no significance.

Adam

So Acts 2:1 is an INTERPOLATION because it starts out, "When Pentecost day came round"? It's not in Sinaiticus?