“The Question of Motive in the Case against Morton Smith.” Scott G Brown JBL 125 (2006) 351–83

-
https://www.academia.edu/4604826/The_Question_of_Motive_in_the_Case_against_Morton_Smith

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond Gnosticism [Myth, Lifestyle, and Society in the School of Valentinus ] Ismo Dunderberg, New York, Columbia University Press, 2008 p. 242 - 243

-
Irenaeus takes special note of Valentinian rituals because he can call upon them as proof for his case that Valentinians were different from "ordinary" Christians. Above all, he recounts a number of Valentinian views about "redemption" (apolutrosis). His account shows that the performance of redemption as a ritual was confined to some Valentinian groups. Their identity is debated, but I am inclined to believe that these groups belonged to the followers of Marcus. I follow the view that the entire second main part of book 1 of Irenaeus's Against Heresies (chapters 13-21) describes the views and practices of Marcus (13-16) and those of his followers (17-21). For this understanding of Irenaeus Heresies (chapters 13-21) describes the views and practices of Marcus (13-16) and those of his followers (17-21). For this understanding of Irenaeus Her. 13-21, see, eg, the translation by Unger and Dillon; Fredrik Wisse, "The Nag Hammadi Library and the Heresiologists...
Read more

Papias and Clement and Mark's Two Gospels Terence Y. Mullins Vigiliae Christianae Vol. 30, No. 3 (Sep., 1976), pp. 189-192 (4 pages)

-
With the publication of the letter by Clement of Alexandria which Morton Smith discovered in the back of an early book/ the witness of Papias to Mark's Gospel has been somewhat clarified. I have shown that Papias, in the phrase where he actually defends Mark's writing, does not defend Mark against the charge of not writing an orderly account, but defends him against the charge that he should not have written "a few things as he remembered them".2 And this has to mean that he did not write many things from memory. Furthermore, the opening statement of Papias' testimony to Mark's Gospel may be interpreted as saying that Mark translated what Peter wrote. Putting this interpretation of the opening statement together with the necessary interpretation of Papias' defense of Mark produced an interpretation of Papias as saying that Mark translated what Peter had written and then, later, added a few things to that translation.3 That was as far as I could go at t...
Read more