Is There a First-Century Fragment of Mark’s Gospel? Apparently Not
Over the last several years, there has been much discussion in the blogosphere (and beyond) about the possibility that a fragment of Mark’s Gospel had been discovered which could reliably be dated to the first century.
Most notably, the fragment was alluded to by Dan Wallace in his 2012 debate with Bart Ehrman (though no details were offered due to Wallace having signed a non-disclosure agreement). But it has also been mentioned by Scott Carroll, Craig Evans, and Josh McDowell. There was an even article about the fragment in Forbes.
Needless to say, many scholars were skeptical about the possibility of a first-century Mark for a … Continue reading...
Book Notice: The New Archaeology Study Bible Edited by @RTSCharlotte’s John Currid
Congratulation to John Currid, the Carl W. McMurray Professor of Old Testament here at RTS Charlotte, for the recently released ESV Archaeology Study Bible. John was the editor of the project which was a monumental piece of work.
The volume includes contributions from a number of archaeologists. David Chapman was the NT editor for the project.
This new project fits with Dr. Currid’s other works in archaeology, including ESV Bible Atlas, Against the Gods, Doing Archaeology in the Land of the Bible, and Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament.
Dr. Currid has regularly led trips to Israel, is currently an adjunct faculty member … Continue reading...
The Heresy of Orthodoxy: Was the NT Text Reliably Transmitted?
This post is the final installment in a series of videos where Andreas Köstenberger and I discuss the theory of Walter Bauer on unity and diversity in early Christianity.
These discussions are based on our book, The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture’s Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity (Crossway, 2010).
You can find the prior four installments here, here, here, and here.
In this last video, we tackle the very important issue of textual transmission. Skeptics have argued that the wild theological diversity in early Christianity would not only have led the church to have different canons, but it would also … Continue reading...
Codex and Canon: A Response to John Meade (Part 2)
The conversation between myself and John Meade continues. He offered an initial critique of chapter 7 of Canon Revisited, to which I responded. And now he has responded to my response. (I know, the back-and-forth is hard to keep up with!).
I appreciate Meade’s interaction with my material. In some ways, our conversation is making progress. But in other ways, unfortunately, it is not. Let me offer some reflections on his latest post.
Understanding the Argument from the Codex
In my initial response to Meade, I argued that he has misunderstood the argument I (and others) are making about the codex. The argument is not that the codex … Continue reading...
What Do Manuscripts Tell Us About the Origins of the NT Canon? A Response to John Meade
Over at Evangelical Textual Criticism, John Meade has posted an article reviewing chapter seven of my book, Canon Revisited. In particular, he challenges a number of the arguments I use to show how NT manuscripts may illumine our understanding of the development of the NT canon.
Meade focuses his comments on two issues, namely the number of manuscripts and the use of the codex. Before offering a response to those issues below, let me begin by making a simple observation about the purpose of this chapter. If one understands the flow of the argument in the book, and sets chapter seven in the larger context of the prior … Continue reading...