Jarek
To begin with, I would like to remind you that Hermann Detering (rip) in his book Fabricated Paul ascribes to Marcion the authorship of Paul’s letters.
keywords=Fabricated+Paul+by+Detering&qid=1653715562&sprefix=fabricated+paul+by+detering%2Caps%2C72&sr=8-1
= = =
1 Thessalonians 2: 14 – 16
…the utmost wrath has come upon them.
What?
Answer: interpolation because the utmost wrath is AD70.
There is textual evidence that contents in the Pauline material dates after AD70.
– Dr. Robert Price in the video above (at 41:00 minutes) paraphrased by Steefen
** you do not have permission to see this link **
…the utmost wrath has come upon them.
What?
Answer: interpolation because the utmost wrath is AD70.
There is textual evidence that contents in the Pauline material dates after AD70.
– Dr. Robert Price in the video above (at 41:00 minutes) paraphrased by Steefen
I realize that I’m wasting my time but here goes anyway. Yes many scholars have speculated that this interesting passage may be an interpolation because one logical reading is that it might reflect a knowledge of the consequences of the First Revolt. However, we have NO manuscripts without this passage or that have this passage in another spot in the letter, the usual textual methods for identifying an interpolation. Up until we find such textual evidence this all remains speculation. (Note my comments in the other thread about blank spots on our maps and learning to live with not knowing.)
Other scholars have pointed out alternative interpretations consistent with Pauline authorship. Note the theme of the letter, reassurance about the imminence of the parousia. Perhaps by “utmost wrath” Paul simply means the judgement which he expects very soon. What could be more “utmost” than final judgement? Also why assume 14 – 16 is an interpolation and not just the concluding line? The passage fits neatly in the the larger context of the letter. And of course there is the question of motive. In context Paul clearly believes Jesus was a historical figure and so, per the mythicists, this passage MUST be an interpolation. Otherwise it craps all over their theory.
Lastly, just for the record, there is a distinction between claiming that all the Pauline letters were written post-First Revolt, and the claim that the Pauline letters contain interpolations produced post-First Revolt. The first claim is rather fringe but the second is entirely possible. Note the passage in I Cor 14:34-35.
Jarek said
Steefen said
Jarek, Judith Lieu’s book, Marcion and the Making of a Heretic: God and Scripture in the Second Century, is on my reading list.
Would you recommend it?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
OMG, I have to watch another video. That’s okay. Thank you. Looking forward to what I need to know.
In the first edition of my book I had a scope stop at 100 C.E.
I guess the gospels continued to develop after 100 C.E., especially since Luke was not in final form when scholars date it to 80-85 with Matthew.
= = =
Textual history
** you do not have permission to see this link **
The ** you do not have permission to see this link ** (= Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV) is another very early manuscript (late 2nd/early 3rd century), and it includes an attribution of the Gospel to Luke.
The oldest complete texts are the 4th-century ** you do not have permission to see this link ** versions on facing pages, appears to have descended from an offshoot of the main manuscript tradition, departing from more familiar readings at many points.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** shows comprehensively the differences between the versions which show no core theological significance.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
= = =
There could not have been a completed version of Luke
if Marcion only had a small version of Luke?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)