spin

Again, who is interested in you unfounded contentions? They are just par for your course.

You must be joking. You make the claims, you supply the evidence. No evidence and your claims are worthless. I am not obliged to do your work for you. How egotistical is such a view?

That's a stretch, isn't it? Scholarship rests squarely on evidence, that stuff you are so lacking in. Evidence is important because it allows for claims to be verified, so you fly off at the sound of "verify" into a tangent on logical positivism.

Ad hom & error. You don't attack the poster, you deal with the post. If you weren't on my ignore list because of your persistent contentless posting you could view my blog, but your responses here have shown you don't listen to anything, so whether someone is saying anything or not, would you hear it?

The juvenile retort: "it's not me, it's you". Deep, Adam.

Toto

Proposal:

This train wreck of a thread will be closed.

spin's posts 162-3 (IIRC) can be split out, with any substantive replies, to start a new thread that will focus only on Adam's claims.

No one may post with references to strings of posts.

Adam may not claim that he has established anything, or that anyone else has to refute his ideas.

We have established that Adam does not know enough Greek, does not know anything about historical methodology, that he may be confused about whether something happened in 1980 or 1981. These topics are closed, along with peer review and any personal characteristics or flaws of the combatants here.

Otherwise, I can just close this thread, or I can ship it down to ~Elsewhere~ where I don't have to read it.

Toto

I don't think that Adam has answered this point.

I don't see the point in continuing this thread if Adam really thinks that critical historians believe that women visited Jesus' tomb on Easter morning.

Jeffrey Gibson

Elsewhere, please. The thread is not worth reading. And BTW, I've discovered that the eyewitness source behind the story of Jesus and Zachaeus is Zachaeus himself who then gathered up and provided to Luke all the stories about Jesus and tax collectors that appear in Luke's Gospel. Common sense tells us so. Clopas is also the source of the last words of Jesus. After all, his wife was an eye witness to the crucifixion.

Jeffrey

Jeffrey

Sheshbazzar

This thread has degenerated from any discussion of John, into an endless discussion of Adam's personal 'problems' and 'contentions'.
We have given Adam's claims a good and long hearing, and don't need this 'stuff' to continue cluttering up BC&H.

~Elsewhere~ please.

spin

I would have recommended splitting the two posts containing the full essay off for critical discussion, but not after the last 130 posts. I now recommend that we just lock the thread and, unless Adam can provide scholarly input on the subject of layers and sources, he be directed to follow the guidelines regarding argument by assertion and agenda-driven posting.

Jeffrey Gibson

I second the motion.

Jeffrey

JoeWallack

JW:
Crucify it!


"The Jews"

spin

I was thinking of a more human approach. Put it down, so that it doesn't have to suffer any more.

Adam

Let’s break it down first into the chain involved here:
Who was involved in John 20:11-16?
Mary Magdalene
Could that person have written it?
No, because we have contrasting accounts from two or three women, not just one witness.
Could anyone else tell what happened?
No, Jesus didn’t hang around to write anything.
Who could have been told what happened?
Disciples. We have no known accounts from anyone else.
Did any of these people write about the event?
Yes
Where did they write about it?
Perhaps still surviving in the gospels.
Does it looks like fiction?
No, it looks like a diary entry about the latest weeks in the writer’s life—it’s straightforward without any supernaturalism.
Which strata in the gospels is it?
A source in John 20.
What other verses can be linked to that?
Other source verses in the Johannine Passion Narrative.
Who could have written that strata?
Various disciples.
Are any of those involved in that strata?
Peter, the disciple known to the High Priest, and “another disciple” (not the Beloved (agapa) Disciple (just ephilei in 20:2), perhaps the same disciple known to the High Priest)
Are any of those named in that strata?
Just Peter and maybe Thomas. (The Beloved Disciple of John 19:26-27 is from a later stratum per Teeple. If that later edition nevertheless refers to someone already in the story, it would have to be John Mark, making him the Beloved Disciple.)
Which of these seems in the best position to know the most of these contents?
Peter and the other disciple.
If this person is not named, are there any indications herein of who he is?
Priestly family.
Any other clues in the New Testament?
Peter goes to John Mark’s house in Acts 12:12, perhaps same house as Last Supper. John Mark in good position to know a lot.
Mark 14:51-52 tells of a young man fleeing away naked. 14:54 picks up with Peter following Jesus, same as in John 18:14. This young man may be the “another disciple” in John.
Are there any external indications of who he is?
Peter had John Mark write his gospel, thus young in the time of Jesus. John Mark was said to be from priestly family.