tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post2956800331693894849..comments2024-03-14T08:15:15.207-07:00Comments on CADRE Comments: Did GosMark's Author Possibly Invent the Empty Tomb? (Nope 1 of 9)BKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01967809861892681780noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-34127647613159339382016-07-16T14:28:46.506-07:002016-07-16T14:28:46.506-07:00Anon: {{OK, that gets close to my point. If one ho...Anon: {{OK, that gets close to my point. If one holds to the theory of a bodily resurrection one could deduce that the tomb must have been empty of Jesus's body from Cross Gospel/GPeter}}<br /><br />Of course nobody's doing that; not me, not Joe, certainly not Crossan, and not Mark on Crossan's theory based on things written there (and previously). Crossan isn't arguing that Mark Jason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-39914833143007047302016-07-15T21:58:26.403-07:002016-07-15T21:58:26.403-07:00from my apologetics website religious aprioir this...from my apologetics website religious aprioir this is about the preMark redaction he empty tomb, It;s two pages so be sure and clickon link at bottom ofpage 2<br /><br /><a href="http://religiousapriorijesus-bible.blogspot.com/2010/05/gospel-behind-gospels-part-1.html" rel="nofollow"><b>Gospel behind the gospels</b></a><br /><br />Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-75337651414324420032016-07-15T21:54:29.120-07:002016-07-15T21:54:29.120-07:00OK, that gets close to my point. If one holds to t...OK, that gets close to my point. If one holds to the theory of a bodily resurrection one could deduce that the tomb must have been empty of Jesus's body from Cross Gospel/GPeter 9:34-10:42, where two men enter the tomb and three leave, and the third is presumably Jesus. This is apparently what Crossan thinks Mark did. But Crossan's Cross Gospel does not actually contain the detail that Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-10074690757299533102016-07-15T05:59:02.921-07:002016-07-15T05:59:02.921-07:00>>I said he thinks Mark didn't create th...>>I said he thinks Mark didn't create the detail of the empty tomb<<<br /><br />>>Crossan's Cross Gospel thesis, which specifically involves the tomb (and the emptiness of the tomb) existing as a literary device before GosMark<<<br /><br />OK, that gets close to my point. If one holds to the theory of a bodily resurrection one could deduce that the tomb must have Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-36385121580850604202016-07-14T22:07:15.896-07:002016-07-14T22:07:15.896-07:00"Second, you are wrong about Crossan. He does..."Second, you are wrong about Crossan. He does think Mark created the story of the women discovering the empty tomb in Mark 16.1-8."<br /><br /><b>There is a huge difference in saying Mark made up the women and Mark made up the empty tomb. You are trying to leverage in the made up tomb because the women are made up that not what Crosson believes. Yes he believes the women were made up, Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-52580741262423837682016-07-14T12:58:53.565-07:002016-07-14T12:58:53.565-07:00I do end with "even Crossan had to admit"...I do end with "even Crossan had to admit"-ting something, but you've missed the point of why I was saying it: even Crossan, who was seminal in inventing the whole Cross Gospel thesis to begin with, had to admit that <i>his hypothetical Cross Gospel</i> leaned toward Mark not inventing the empty tomb. I wrote that in context of referring back to Joe's previous articles this year Jason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-54852316436472448552016-07-14T12:35:38.033-07:002016-07-14T12:35:38.033-07:00SV: {{arguments of the form "even (fill in na...SV: {{arguments of the form "even (fill in name of skeptical scholar) has to admit" are inherently weak.}}<br /><br />True; it's a good thing I didn't make that argument in regard to Crossan, hm?<br /><br />What I actually noted is that proponents of the belief (that Mark invented the empty tomb) have a tendency in my experience to connect that with ideas from Crossan about the Jason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-46057810797468730392016-07-14T10:47:35.412-07:002016-07-14T10:47:35.412-07:00Other Sepulchral,
Are people who defend (or at le...Other Sepulchral,<br /><br />Are people who defend (or at least hold) the idea that Mark's author invented the empty tomb sceptics? Yes by definition.<br /><br />Are they fringe sceptics? In my experience they are a fraction of a fraction of a fraction even among sceptics about Christianity, at least among scholars of the NT, so yes I'm going to call that a fringe. Out of the disbelieversJason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-30985867321648922422016-07-14T01:04:04.700-07:002016-07-14T01:04:04.700-07:00Hi Jason,
You start off the article with the sugg...Hi Jason,<br /><br />You start off the article with the suggestion that people that disagree with the position that you are going to defend are fringe skeptics. Then you claim even Crossan argues someone else invented the empty tomb story before Mark. I see two problems with what you assert.<br /><br />First, arguments of the form "even (fill in name of skeptical scholar) has to admit" Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-65669729472986859912016-07-13T04:31:11.605-07:002016-07-13T04:31:11.605-07:00great article Jason. thanks for postinggreat article Jason. thanks for postingJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-73960694242030329832016-07-12T14:38:28.830-07:002016-07-12T14:38:28.830-07:00It's a sepulchral no, because I haven't gi...It's a sepulchral no, because I haven't given any reasons yet, so the no is dark and obscure. And in 8 more parts, so deep. And a pun. About tombs.<br /><br />I have to get my entertainment somehow! Writing a 9125 word series is taxing. Rejoice: I could have posted it in <i>one</i> part...!<br /><br />Also, registering for comment tracking.<br /><br />JRPJason Pratthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01602238179676591394noreply@blogger.com