u/Pineappleman78

I’ve noticed that when Jesus says something that could suggest divine authority or identity, scholars sometimes argue that the saying reflects the theology of the early Christian community rather than something the historical Jesus actually said.

I’m curious about the methodology behind this. The Gospels are our earliest surviving narrative accounts of Jesus’ life, and much of what we reconstruct about him comes from these same sources. Paul’s letters also suggest that remarkably elevated beliefs about Jesus existed very early.

And I’m not just referring to John’s Gospel. The Synoptics also contain passages that could suggest an unusually elevated understanding of Jesus’ identity or authority, such as Mark 2:5–12, Mark 14:62, and Matthew 11:27/Luke 10:22. I recognize that these passages can be interpreted differently and don’t necessarily amount to explicit claims of being God.

I also understand that the Gospels have different theological emphases. Some focus more on Jesus’ earthly ministry and mission to Israel, while John emphasizes his relationship with the Father and heavenly identity. But couldn’t these differences reflect what the authors chose to emphasize rather than necessarily indicating that the more explicit claims were later theological developments?

I’m not suggesting that every saying attributed to Jesus must be authentic, or that early belief in his divinity proves he claimed to be divine. I’m wondering what historical criteria scholars use to distinguish authentic sayings from later theological developments.

Is there a risk of circular reasoning if sayings suggesting divine identity are considered inauthentic partly because they’re inconsistent with a reconstruction of Jesus that was developed by excluding those same sayings?

I’d appreciate scholarly perspectives on how historians approach this question, including arguments both for and against the historical authenticity of these sayings.

Sources:
● Bart D. Ehrman, How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee (HarperOne, 2014).
● Dale C. Allison Jr., Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History (Baker Academic, 2010), especially chapter 5, “More Than a Prophet: The Christology of Jesus.”
● Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity (Eerdmans, 2008).
● Biblical passages: Mark 2:5–12; Mark 14:62; Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 8:58; John 10:30; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Philippians 2:6–11.

I’ve been reading about the textual dispute surrounding Luke 23:34a, where Jesus says, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

I understand that the saying is absent from some important early manuscripts, including P75 and Codex Vaticanus, which has led scholars to argue that it was added later.

However, I’ve also come across several scholars who defend its originality:

Bart Ehrman and David Flusser argue that the passage may have been removed because of growing anti-Jewish attitudes among early Christians.

Nathan Eubank, in A Disconcerting Prayer: On the Originality of Luke 23:34a (2010), defends the longer reading using textual evidence and early Christian interpretations.

Dirk Jongkind (2018) also favors originality, but questions whether anti-Jewish motivations adequately explain the omission.

On the other side, Jason Whitlark and Mikeal Parsons (2006) argue that the saying was inserted partly to produce seven sayings of Jesus from the cross.

I’m curious which explanation is better supported by the manuscript evidence and what we know about early scribal practices. How much weight should be given to the early manuscripts that omit the saying versus the arguments that it was deliberately made removed?

Sources:
Eubank (2010), Journal of Biblical Literature: https://doi.org/10.2307/25765950
Whitlark and Parsons (2006), New Testament Studies: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688506000117
Jongkind (2018), Tyndale House: https://tyndalehouse.com/2018/11/15/father-forgive-them-the-variant-in-luke-2334a/

I’ve been reading about the proposed literary relationship between Luke-Acts and Josephus, particularly the possibility that the author of Luke-Acts used Antiquities as a source. I’m trying to get a better sense of the main positions in current scholarship and the evidence for each.

What are considered the strongest arguments for and against direct literary dependence on Josephus?

I’m particularly interested in the proposed parallels involving Theudas and Judas the Galilean in Acts 5, and the Egyptian and Sicarii in Acts 21. In the first case, Acts places Theudas before Judas, while Josephus places Judas historically much earlier but discusses Theudas shortly before returning to Judas and his sons in Antiquities 20.[1] In the second, Acts associates the Egyptian with the Sicarii, while Josephus discusses the Sicarii, wilderness prophets, and the Egyptian in related material without straightforwardly identifying the Egyptian’s followers as Sicarii.[1]

How are parallels like these evaluated when trying to establish literary dependence? In particular, how do scholars distinguish Luke directly using Josephus from both authors having access to overlapping oral or written traditions? I’m also curious how much weight is given to the relative lack of sustained verbal agreement between Luke-Acts and Josephus compared with something like Luke’s use of Mark.

I’m also interested in the implications for dating. If Luke-Acts did use Antiquities, its publication around 93/94 CE would provide a terminus post quem. Does the evidence for dependence itself tell us anything beyond that? What do we know about the early circulation of Antiquities and whether access to it around 95-100 CE would have been plausible?

I’d appreciate recommendations for recent academic work representing different positions on these questions as well.

Sources
[1] Steve Mason, “Was Josephus a Source for Luke-Acts?” in On Using Sources in Graeco-Roman, Jewish and Early Christian Literature (Peeters, 2022), 199–246.
[2] Richard I. Pervo, Dating Acts: Between the Evangelists and the Apologists (Polebridge Press, 2006).
[3] Andrew Gregory, “Acts and Christian Beginnings: A Review Essay,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 39.1 (2016), 97–115.

They said I did really well on the mock demo portion. They ended the call by saying the last round would be with the VP of sales, and that was more of a culture fit round. They then asked to confirm my salary expectations for the role.

Is that a really good sign? I don’t want to assume, because they said I’d hear back on next steps, so I’m not even sure if I’ll make it to that final conversation. But hard not to get my hopes up…

They could always go with someone internal

Been looking around LinkedIn at some big companies (such as salesforce) and seeing people who have no experience.

Examples I have seen recently

- Graduated in 2024, 3 month BDR stint, followed by 6 months of unemployment, next role was MM AE at salesforce

- 1 year of BDR experience (company with 30 followers on LinkedIn), next role was AE (Microsoft)

-6 months at Jimmy John’s, next role was MM AE

Meanwhile I have 5 years of MM AE experience and haven’t gotten interviews with some of these companies

About to be laid off. Have 5+ years at my previous company, been at my current one for 1 year.

I feel like it will probably take me 3-4 months to get a decent role.

Can I just take a job that I know is a sweatshop and that I’ll probably get fired from quickly, and then I can just take it off my resume?

I’d rather just have a gap after my 1 year tenure at my current company rather than have 5 year, 1 year, and a 6 month tenure after that

About to be laid off. Have 5+ years at my previous company, been at my current one for 1 year.

I feel like it will probably take me 3-4 months to get a decent role.

Can I just take a job that I know is a sweatshop and that I’ll probably get fired from quickly, and then I can just take it off my resume?

I’d rather just have a gap after my 1 year tenure at my current company rather than have 5 year, 1 year, and a 6 month tenure after that

Have about 6 years of sales saas experience. Around 4 years in closing roles as an MM AE.

In 4 weeks, I have gotten 16 phone screenings (all decent companies) and 13 first round interviews. From those, I have moved on to 2nd rounds for 7 of those, and have made it to final round / mock discovery for 3.

My resume is solid. I’m a likable guy who can hold a good conversation. I know all the right things to say. I know what type of candidate they’re looking for. I do my research, I sell myself hard, ask for feedback, send post meeting follow ups.

No offers.

Have about 6 years of sales saas experience. Around 4 years in closing roles as an MM AE.

In 4 weeks, I have gotten 16 phone screenings (all decent companies) and 13 first round interviews. From those, I have moved on to 2nd rounds for 7 of those, and have made it to final round / mock discovery for 3.

My resume is solid. I’m a likable guy who can hold a good conversation. I know all the right things to say. I know what type of candidate they’re looking for. I do my research, I sell myself hard, ask for feedback, send post meeting follow ups.

No offers.

Heard it’s a sweatshop over there and they fire you after 2 bad quarters.

Also you only get 120 accounts? Thats crazy. I bet they’ve been hit 1000 times already

Heard it’s a sweatshop over there and they fire you after 2 bad quarters.

Also you only get 120 accounts? Thats crazy. I bet they’ve been hit 1000 times already

I assume the MM NGO role is undesirable because non-profits have no money and try to spend as little possible.

My feeling is pay is low and quota is rarely met

I assume the MM NGO role is undesirable because non-profits have no money and try to spend as little possible.

My feeling is pay is low and quota is rarely met

Have some interviews. Just wanted to know what to expect. I assume it’s a pretty competitive and intense interview process.

Anything I should keep in mind or emphasize during
The process to give myself a good shot?

Im asking what they WANT to hear for a MM role

How others you’ve worked with would describe you, including where you’re still growing?

What you feel you do especially well, and how you keep yourself sharp and motivated?

Im asking what they WANT to hear for a MM role

How others you’ve worked with would describe you, including where you’re still growing?

What you feel you do especially well, and how you keep yourself sharp and motivated?

How is the sales org looking? I’m applying for MM Ae role with the DX team

Is it a sweatshop?

Looking at the MM AE role. Sounds like it’s “hunter role.” Is that true, or do they just want to filter people out? I know they acquired DX back in October

I don’t want to join a company where I’m making 100 cold calls a day and get laid off in 6 months if I don’t hit quota 1 month

Is it a sweatshop?

Looking at the MM AE role. Sounds like it’s “hunter role.” Is that true, or do they just want to filter people out?

I don’t want to join a company where I’m making 100 cold calls a day and get laid off in 6 months if I don’t hit quota 1 month

Is it a sweatshop?

Seems like a decent product market fit. On repvue lot of SDRs saying it’s churn and burn.

More interested on the AE side.