https://youtu.be/vW4mYR-h95g (must be watched on YouTube).
7:47 AM Mark as the interpres of Peter: Indeed, it is the modern critics, blinded by their conviction of the priority of Mark, who have failed to accept the obvious message of the patristic evidence. That is why they have misunderstood the significance of the texts that always describe the disciple Mark as the go-between…
From Dave Black Online: 7:35 AM Over at the Alpha and Omega Blog, Jamin Hubner’s essay on “Q” is well worth your time. His conclusions?
8:10 AM Saw this today: One of the many curiosities in the study of the NT and earliest Christianity is the early history and fortunes of the Gospel of Mark (hereafter, GMark). On the one hand (assuming the dominant view of Mark’s priority), the GMark appears to have been very influential. It is widely thought…
(We had a report on this from a member of the audience, linked earlier today.) 8:23 AM At the Shepherds Seminary last night I spoke on the origins of the four Gospels. And what a great time we had.
(June 6, 2020) 7:45 AM A few years ago I asked, “Why are there four gospels in our New Testament and not, say, three or five?” But as I read Gal. 2:1-10 this morning — the next paragraph in my study of this marvelous letter — I can see how my question might be a bit…
11:36 AM Now this was a fun read: The awkward truth about snake-handling: it’s totally Biblical. It all depends on how you read Mark 16:9-20 — original or not? The commenter is correct when he says, “There are plenty of biblical inerrantists who correctly discern this long ending of Mark as extra-biblical, using basic textual…