Category Archives: Textual Criticism

Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea’s apologetic for the veracity of the Gospel accounts

What follows is a relatively long and extremely interesting passage from Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea, in Book 3, chapter 5 of his Demonstratio Evangelica (Proof of the Gospel). This passage is one of the most interesting to me among the Nicene Fathers … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Patristics, Resurrection, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged | Leave a comment

Sosthenes

Sosthenes is one of the interesting ‘background’ characters who appears in the New Testament. He appears in the book of Acts, where it notes: Then the crowd there turned on Sosthenes the synagogue leader and beat him in front of the proconsul; … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Apostolic Scribes

I can’t deal with every objection to 2 Peter’s authenticity all at once (or at least, I’m too lazy to do so at the moment), however I thought I would raise a point about the very different style of 2 … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Patristics, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Lord’s Prayer and the hypothesis of Matthean priority

Suppose we accept as a working hypothesis (for the sake of argument) that Matthew was written prior to Mark (and prior to Luke). Mark’s Gospel does not have the Lord’s prayer. However, if Mark really is written, as Clement of … Continue reading

Posted in Sacraments, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Is the Semeia source really a ‘Miracle’ source?

My Parish Priest made a point in his sermon this morning which stuck, even though it was a rather simple and obvious point. He pointed out that the reading from the Johannine Gospel this second Sunday in ordinary time, concerning … Continue reading

Posted in Exegesis, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Multiple Attestation to the Virgin Birth?

Interestingly, if one does not accept that Luke’s Gospel is using Matthew as a source, and thus accepts the two-source hypothesis first proposed by Heinrich-Julius Holtzmann, along with the hypothesis that two other sources in addition to Mark and Q … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged | Leave a comment

Matthew and Q

‘Q‘ is the title Biblical scholars have given to an entirely hypothetical document which is sometimes believed to underlie the content which is common to Matthew and Luke and which isn’t found in Mark. The designation of ‘Q‘ is shorthand … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Patristics, Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Mark’s ending in Bezae

Interestingly, I and a professor of mine were looking into, to appease our curiosity, whether the ending of Mark (meaning past verse 8) was present in Codex Bezae. What we found was that although much of the ending is still missing … Continue reading

Posted in Textual Criticism, Theology | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Divinity of Jesus; another Johannine verse

In the debate over whether the New Testament clearly teaches of Jesus that he was literally God, Christian orthodoxy finds itself faced with opponents ranging from some secular scholars, to Jehovah’s witnesses, and even some Muslims. Muslims obviously are inspired … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Exegesis, Textual Criticism, Theology, Trinitarianism | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Ending of Mark’s Gospel – an apologetic

I heard something today which inspired me to think up an apologetic response to some scholars who suggest that the ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20) could neither have been authored by Mark nor by any person contemporary with the Apostles. … Continue reading

Posted in Apologetics, Liturgy, Textual Criticism, Theology | 8 Comments