u/StallauEppen

Is the position argued for by Geza Vermes (that Jesus likely never predicted his death and resurrection because his disciples reacted in a way which makes it appear that they had no prior knowledge of the event of the crucifixion and resurrection) the standard scholarly position? Or would scholars nowadays hold to what Dale Allison argues in his book “the resurrection of Jesus” (pages 187-192) that these are historical but the exact wordings in the gospels have been developed over time the standard scholarly position??

I’d like to know what arguments do the scholars who claim that “Jesus is not god in the Synoptics” use to explain passages like the end of Mark 2 and Mark 12. Also just generally.

I was reading Galatians and it appeared to me that in Galatians 3:10 when Paul is making the claim that whoever relies on the law is cursed, the proof text he brings is Deuteronomy 27:26 which says the opposite… have Scholars noted this as an inconsistency, or am I reading this passage wrong?

I know there’s a work by Hans Conzelmann and he argues that Luke does not believe that Jesus’ death was the reason for the forgiveness for sins, but are there any more recent works which argue this?? Because his work is quite old.

I know there’s a work by Hans Conzelmann and he argues that Luke does not believe that Jesus’ death was the reason for the forgiveness for sins, but are there any more recent works which argue this?? Because his work is quite old.

In Hyam Maccoby’s book “the mythmaker” (page 133) he points out an inconsistency between how Mark has Jesus preaching that “all foods are clean” (Mark 7:19) but in Acts 10, Peter does not view all foods as clean, rather, he hesitates from eating “unclean food” THREE TIMES! I wanted to know if other scholars have pointed this out? (Ik Maccoby’s book is not very authoritative in scholarship but this argument struck me as quite interesting.

I saw it somewhere that Clement Quoted Acts although I cannot find the refenrence rn, but if it is the case then wouldn’t that debunk a second century dating of Acts?

I know that the best works for early high christology would probably be something like Larry Hurtados stuff, but I wanted to know the other side of the spectrum, scholars who don’t think that the earliest followers of Jesus thought of him as God or Worshipped him.