![Prof. Elder](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- Видео 285
- Просмотров 53 644
Prof. Elder
США
Добавлен 5 янв 2021
Hosting videos on the New Testament, Greek, and Exegesis for the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary.
What is Media?
Dr. Elder defines and overviews "media."
0:00 Introduction
0:22 Medium and Media Defined
2:07 Russian Nesting Dolls Model of Media
5:52 Politics, Economics, and Technology (PET) and Media
7:10 The Medium is the Message
8:42 Overview of Media
0:00 Introduction
0:22 Medium and Media Defined
2:07 Russian Nesting Dolls Model of Media
5:52 Politics, Economics, and Technology (PET) and Media
7:10 The Medium is the Message
8:42 Overview of Media
Просмотров: 7
Видео
Reading the Gospels
Просмотров 914 часов назад
Dr. Elder argues that the gospels were different kinds of media that were read different kinds of ways. 0:00 Introduction 0:33 Gospel Labels 2:50 Mark (Gospel) 8:57 Matthew (Book) 14:50 Luke (Account for an individual) 20:10 John (Document)
How did people read in the ancient world?
Просмотров 814 часов назад
Dr. Elder argues that people in the ancient world read a variety of different ways, not just aloud and communally. 0:00 Introduction 0:50 Silent and Vocalized Reading 7:43 Solitary and Communal Reading 14:10 Variety of Reading Events
The Bible is not a Book
Просмотров 9414 часов назад
Dr. Elder overviews the ways that the Bible is not (and also is) a book. 0:00 Introduction 0:37 "The" 3:46 "Bible" 5:50 "is not" 7:07 "a" 8:30 "Book"
What is Biblical Performance Criticism?
Просмотров 3314 часов назад
A video in which Dr. Elder introduces Biblical Performance Criticism, an interpretive method that uses performance as a means of interpretation. 0:00 Introduction 0:10 Definitions 2:12 Overview of Biblical Performance Criticism 3:58 History of Biblical Performance Criticism 13:46 Emphases of Biblical Performance Criticism 15:35 "Communication Events" or "Performances" 18:45 Conclusion
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Catholic Letters
Просмотров 45Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents the five most important things to know about a group of New Testament texts called the Catholic Letters. These consist of Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude. 0:00 Introduction 0:42 #5: Half of the Catholic Letters are not letters. 3:21 #4: The Catholic Letters are “universal” documents. 6:34 #3: Many of the Catholic Letters are attributed to pe...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Pastoral Letters (1-2 Timothy, Titus)
Просмотров 34Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents the five most important things to know about he so-called pastoral letters: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus. 0:00 Introduction 0:14 #5: The Pastoral Letters are letters. 2:05 #4: The Pastoral Letters are addressed to two individuals: Timothy and Titus. 5:48 #3: The pastoral concerns that the letters address are mostly related to correct teaching and church organization. 8:43 #2: ...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Biblical Book of Revelation
Просмотров 79Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents the five most important things to know about the last book in the New Testament and the Bible, Revelation, sometimes also called the Apocalypse of John or simply the Apocalypse. 0:00 Introduction 0:28 (Bonus) It's Revelation, not Revelations, and there is no antichrist in this book. 1:05 #5: Revelation is an apocalypse. 6:03 #4: Revelation was written to encourage people who ...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about Ancient Apocalypses
Просмотров 423Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents the five most important things to know about ancient apocalypses. Among biblical literature, portions of Daniel and the book of Revelation are the most-famous apocalypses. 0:00 Introduction 0:15 #5: Ancient apocalypses are not primarily about the destruction of the world. 2:46 #4: The word “apocalypse” means unveiling or uncovering. 5:02 #3: Apocalypses were a familiar litera...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Apostle Paul's Letter to the Romans
Просмотров 222Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents the five most important things to know about the apostle Paul's letter to the Romans. 0:00 Introduction 0:58 #5: Romans is Paul’s longest letter, and was written in collaboration with a scribe named Tertius. 3:35 #4: Romans contains all the generic elements of ancient letters. 5:28 #3: Romans was written to a community that Paul did not found. 11:08 #2: There are three promin...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about Paul's Letter to Philemon
Просмотров 75Месяц назад
Dr. Elder offers the five most important things to know about the letter to Philemon. 0:00 Introduction 0:13 #5 Philemon is Paul’s shortest letter, likely written entirely in Paul’s own handwriting. 4:03 #2 Philemon is often paired with and interpreted alongside Colossians. 7:48 #3 Philemon contains all the generic elements of ancient letters. 10:55 #2: Paul is suggesting that Philemon take som...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about Ancient Letters and letter writing.
Просмотров 241Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents his five most important things to know about ancient letters with a look at a number of real letters recovered from the sands of Greco-Roman Egypt. 0:00 Introduction 0:38 #5: Letters were a common form of communication, and we possess thousands of them from the ancient world that address a variety of topics. 4:35 #4: Most everyday letters were surprisingly short. 6:14 #3: Let...
The Five Most Important Things to Know About the Apostle Paul
Просмотров 213Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents his five most important things to know about the Apostle Paul. 0:00 Introduction 0:44 #5: Paul was born and raised a devout Jew. 2:43 #4: For some time Paul persecuted Christians before having a religious experience of the resurrected Jesus that caused his worldview to be utterly transformed. 6:28 #3: Paul's central message was the “gospel.” 9:11 #2: Paul had an itinerant, Ge...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Acts of the Apostles
Просмотров 106Месяц назад
Dr. Elder presents his top five most important things to know about the Acts of the Apostles. 0:00 Introduction 0:16 #5:Acts is a companion volume to Luke that continues the story after the ascension of Jesus at the end of the gospel. 3:17 #4: Acts is a historical novel that was written with several different purposes. 6:23 #3: Acts presents early Christianity as a movement inspired by the Holy...
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Gospel of John
Просмотров 83Месяц назад
Dr. Elder's five most important things to know about John 0:00 Introduction 0:17 #5 The Gospel of John is significantly different from the Synoptic Gospels. 3:29 #4 The Gospel of John has some striking similarities with the Synoptic Gospels. 5:36 #3: The Gospel of John expresses a very high Christology. 7:30 #2: The Gospel of John was written around the end of the first century CE by “the Belov...
Five Most Important Things to Know about the Gospel of Luke
Просмотров 65Месяц назад
Five Most Important Things to Know about the Gospel of Luke
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Gospel of Matthew
Просмотров 2522 месяца назад
The Five Most Important Things to Know about the Gospel of Matthew
The Five Most Important Things to Know About the Gospel of Mark
Просмотров 982 месяца назад
The Five Most Important Things to Know About the Gospel of Mark
The Synoptic Problem and Synoptic Solutions
Просмотров 922 месяца назад
The Synoptic Problem and Synoptic Solutions
Multiple Judaisms in the New Testament Context
Просмотров 1323 месяца назад
Multiple Judaisms in the New Testament Context
The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament
Просмотров 824 месяца назад
The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament
Top Five Thing to Know About The Apostle Paul
Просмотров 1669 месяцев назад
Top Five Thing to Know About The Apostle Paul
The Strong and the Weak in Romans 14-15
Просмотров 4310 месяцев назад
The Strong and the Weak in Romans 14-15
it is a book of stories.....the same as Tolkien, stephen king, hans christain anderson, j k rowling
This cant hold candle to Dark Souls lore.
Totally. And several other kinds of documents, some historical, some not.
So interesting and informative! Definitely subscribing to see what else you have. Thanks for sharing all this knowledge and research :)
bro presented the important things
God of Israel? So Israel has its own God.
SIX THINGS WE MUST KNOW ABOUT PAUL 1. Paul admitted having a regular messenger from satan? 2. Paul was made to take nazaren oath and shaved his hair for teaching against the Mosaic Laws by the Apostles. 3. Paul was not accepted by the Apostles, even fell out with Barnabas, they depart a thunder. 4. Paul admitted being troubled by thorn in the flesh many suspected immorality. Check late Bishop John Shirley Sponge in his RUclips. 5. Paul admitted lying and justifies lying, Romans 3:7. 6. Paul is a false prophet giving failed prophecy. Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a Gospel contrary to that we (originally) preached to you, let him be condemned to destruction...THIS PERFECTLY FITS PAUL, WHO DIED IN HUMILIATION.
It uses Josephus and Greek playwrights as its source.
F acts
Wow this is amazing now I need one for the other gospels
I just uploaded the Top Five on John-so there is now one for each canonical gospel! Mark: ruclips.net/video/Ma2Qis1n5qY/видео.html Matthew: ruclips.net/video/Smc7C6bSsSA/видео.html Luke: ruclips.net/video/7Q_fkZ_jrvQ/видео.html John: ruclips.net/video/Gb99K48b4v0/видео.html
When i hear the term C.E. used i ma confident i am gunna hear some new age speculative nonsense. Proven right again
Always happy to bring that speculative nonsense! Thanks for watching.
Thank you for this, but your analysis of which disciples are called first is incorrect. Philip and Nathaniel are not the first in John's Gospel
Amazing
Great video Although some interpretations are questionable aka korean jesus
Plenty of things about the shroud are debunking the previously held notions that it was a fraud. We know exactly what Christ looked like, and all the icons up to now are proving it. There was only one Jesus, and his race is irrelevant.
Do you think the alleged documents of Jesus' appearance saying he had grey/bluish eyes, and blondish hair are reliable?
@@s3v3n3 I've never seen blonde Jesus. Only brown hair Jesus. I've heard far more talk about a blonde Jesus but never actually seen a visual depiction of any sort, and we've got icons dating back to the 5th century
Good video
different interpretations of Jesus does not denote to different ideals of him. Hes the same person regardless the paintings and pictures
Not necessarily The Seth McFarland ones are outright blasphemous and myopic projections of what a reddit atheist thinks of Jesus and God.
Some representations of Jesus are outright heretical and should be condemned.
Seth McFarland is the worst in my opinion
You say people depict Jesus in their own likeness. Africans do it, Asians do it, Europeans do it. But you call the video Unlearning WHITE Jesus. It feels almost like, although Asians and Africans are doing the same thing, they are not to blame, but only Europeans and Americans are. I like the general point of your video, diversify the depictions of Jesus. I could even get behind that. But all of this feels like a lesson only for "white people", despite them behaving exactly the way everyone else does. Speaking of, concepts like "whiteness", and "brown middle easternness" didn't exist 2000 years ago. Some Middle Easterners would definitely pass as "white" in the US, some wouldn't. Some Europeans wouldn't pass as white in the US. I don't think applying these almost uniquely American concepts to a different region 2 millenniums ago is constructive. A lot of what you called "white depictions" of Jesus, like the Christ Pantocrator, show him with dark or black hair and brown eyes which is definitely a plausible look for a Middle Easterner of that time.
Transcend race
What is your cradle religion, prof Elder?
If you're more worried about his skin color than the red letter words of Scripture then you aren't a child of God and he doesn't know you.
He didn’t look like Cesare Borgia, sure we know that. But come on man He was a jew, do you seriously want to tell me jews aren’t white? Because that will really help get Ben Shapiro off being called a white supremacist
Jesus wasn't Caucasian, nor was he Black. You've only done a video on one, despite the existence of dangerous idiots on both sides. I don't need to know anything else about you.
Father forgive them, for they do what they do not.
1. There is no grand conspiracy to portray Jesus as white so that other races associate whiteness with divinity and authority. This is one of the most inane conspiracy theories I’ve heard in a good while. 2. The people of the Levant during Greco-Roman rule over the Mediterranean weren’t “brown middle easterners”, they were Levantines. Many of them had fair features, straight or wavy hair, and blue or green eyes, which you can still see in some from the region today, even despite the Arab conquest having suppressed most of these recessive traits. Consider Bashar Al-Assad and his family as an example. Did Jesus have blue eyes, wavy hazel hair, and fair features? Possibly, since others from that area and time period did also. Does that mean whiteness is divinized, or that divinity is white? No, that’s just stupid.
Thanks for your interest in understanding how depicting Jesus matters for race relations! One of the points of the video is that how Jesus is *imagined* matters both theologically and sociologically. That Jesus continually is depicted in a manner similar to Sallman's "Head of Christ" in art and film suggests that white Jesus is still implanted in the American imagination of him. Perhaps I did not make clear enough in the video (though when I give this lecture to undergraduate students they can pick up pretty easily), but my take towards the end of the video is that depicting Jesus in the guise of multiple different cultures (including white, euro-centric ones), rather than just or primarily the dominant one, is to our advantage. The reason I don't give white, eurocentric depictions a "pass" is because this is the dominant culture in America and when the divine is depicted in the likeness of the dominant culture it can have negative effects for minoritized persons. If you'd like to read and think more on the topic Dr. Stephen Prothero's _American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon_ is a great book about Jesus in the modern, American context and Dr. Joan Taylor's _What Did Jesus Look Like?_ is really great on the ancient context. Thanks for engaging!
@@prof_elderAmerica is a White nation that is being attacked.
I am glad to see the interest in understanding how depicting Jesus matters for race relations! I'm really glad when I read that people recognize that Jesus was not white, but a brown middle eastern man. One of the main points of this video is that how Jesus is *imagined* matters both theologically and sociologically. That Jesus continually is depicted in a manner similar to Sallman's "Head of Christ" in art and film suggests that white Jesus is still implanted in the American imagination of him. Perhaps I did not make clear enough in the video, but my take towards the end of the video is that depicting Jesus in the guise of multiple different cultures (including white, euro-centric ones), rather than just or primarily the dominant one, is to our advantage. The reason I don't give white, eurocentric depictions a "pass" is because this is the dominant culture in America and when the divine is primarily depicted in the likeness of the dominant culture it can have and has had negative effects for minoritized persons. If you'd like to read and think more on this topic, Dr. Stephen Prothero's _American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon_ is a great book about Jesus in the modern, American context and Dr. Joan Taylor's _What Did Jesus Look Like?_ is really great about Jesus in the ancient context. Thanks for engaging!
Have you not read the descriptions by Pontious Pilate that describe Jesus as white? Also the writings of Lentulus describe Jesus as white skinned.
I just did, also Lentulus'. There is nothing in it that says that Jesus was white. They even contradict each other, as Pontius wrote, he had blue eyes, while Lentulus wrote he had grey eyes.
The problem is people have seen Him. Ie sister Faustina. That's your problem.
Letter of Lentulus
exactly and the writing of pontious pilate. there is also a video of someone going round parts of Africa and asking africans what colour skin they believe Jesus had and like 90% say white.
I just did, also Lentulus'. There is nothing in it that says that Jesus was white. They even contradict each other, as Pontius wrote, he had blue eyes, while Lentulus wrote he had grey eyes.
@@GuideGame1 Blue and grey eyes are the same. If one wrote that he had brown the other blue then yes i’d understand but now you’re just being pedantic.
@@GuideGame1 It says he has a slightly reddish complexion, only whites get red complexions and visibly blush.
@@worldmusictheory Excuse me, for I did not know you were colourblind. Nevertheless, not a single word indicates anything about the skin colour of Jesus. There is no evidence of him being white. You are mistaken.
Every culture depicts him in their own way.
Yes indeed. And that's why, theologically speaking, I think it is important to celebrate multiple different depictions of Jesus.
@@prof_elder and that’s what everyone does. You obviously need to study this more my friend. I’m not discrediting you more. Never good to do that. But you seem like you have an agenda about you. Christ loves you my brother.
no, you cnanot do this according to Orthodox Iconogrophy
@@mariorizkallah5383 the different churches depict him differently. As an orthodox myself.
@@prof_elder and you don’t need to even say this. I’m Jewish myself but converted to Christianity.
Jesus is jewish. now, what skin color of jewish people ? when christian italian artist leonardo da vinci, want to draw picture of Jesus, he go to jewish comunity in italy and jews is white with dark hair. so he draw jesus as white with dark brown hair. when christian african artist want to draw Jesus, he go to jewish comunity in africa, jewsnis black, so he draw black Jesus. when christian chinese artist want to draw Jesus, he go to chinese jewish (kai feng) community, so jews like chinese, so he draw chinese (yellow) Jesus. jews in america all over in hollywood, so Jesus is like Hollywood actor maybe, real face of Jesus like PRINCE OF PIECE painting by akiane kramarik, with her spiritual stories, almost white middle easterner and , for "standard' face of jesus, all follow old writing called "letter of lentulus"
Let God be true and every man a liar. Your racialist theories will go along with the rest of the chaff.
No one said Jesus was white, and no one is correlating whiteness as divine. This is just weird stuff you yourself are inserting. I've never heard this. Jesus was Jewish and looked no different to any other Jew of the time, "like a root out of dry ground there was nothing that should attract us to His majesty". Depicting Jesus as white associates whiteness with divinity as much as asians depicting Jesus as asian means asianness is divine. This is just weird racially obsessed theory with no basis in reality. ' Go cry about a topic that actually has relevance and actually exists..
Agree, but truthfully we do not know, logically thinking you can imagine Him similar to a person living in those regions today, but remember He was born of the Holy Spirit
Thanks for your interest in understanding how depicting Jesus matters for race relations! I'm really glad when I read that people recognize, like you do, that Jesus was not white, but a brown middle eastern man. One of the points of the video is that how Jesus is *imagined* matters both theologically and sociologically. That Jesus continually is depicted in a manner similar to Sallman's "Head of Christ" in art and film suggests that white Jesus is still implanted in the American imagination of him. Perhaps I did not make clear enough in the video (though when I give this lecture to undergraduate students they can pick up pretty easily), but my take towards the end of the video is that depicting Jesus in the guise of multiple different cultures (including white, euro-centric ones), rather than just or primarily the dominant one, is to our advantage. If you'd like to read and think more on the topic Dr. Stephen Prothero's _American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon_ is a great book about Jesus in the modern, American context and Dr. Joan Taylor's _What Did Jesus Look Like?_ is really great on the ancient context. Thanks for engaging.
Everybody knows this, even most of the people you think *don’t* know this. What is happening is that most cultures have depictions of Jesus as someone of their own ethnicity, but only White depictions are demonized due to the anti Whiteness of modern society. There is no way around this. Majority of tweets and FB posts with racial hatred are anti-White, based on Metas own dataset. Most descriptions that include the word “White” or people in modern news articles are negative. It’s self hatred, which we’ve inherited from Christianity.
This is why I left this crazy middle-eastern cult. Only in Christian nations do majority groups show negative in-group biases. It’s a “self-unalive” cult that’s infiltrated the White countries.
You're a liar or speak out of ignorance.
I feel like you’re completely contradicting yourself. At first you said: “It (depicting ‘whiteness’ as divine) associates whiteness with authority.” Then you go on and explain how other cultures have depicted Jesus as their own race and show examples. So the Asians depict Jesus as Asian. Makes sense…but if we’re going to follow the logic of your first statement, does Asians depicting Jesus as Asian associate Asian-ness with authority? Does Africans depicting Jesus as black associate blackness with authority? Why do the other races/cultures get a pass, but white people don’t? I really don’t care what race Jesus was. To do so is pretty shallow IMO. He’s my savior, and that’s all that matters. I don’t need to “unlearn” anything except sin.
He did not think that far ahead.
you raised a good question and I doubt this guy is going to make video about unlearning Asian, Black Jesus anytime soon.
Thanks for your interest in understanding how depicting Jesus matters for race relations! I'm really glad when I read that people recognize, like you do, that Jesus was not white, but a brown middle eastern man. One of the points of the video is that how Jesus is *imagined* matters both theologically and sociologically. That Jesus continually is depicted in a manner similar to Sallman's "Head of Christ" in art and film suggests that white Jesus is still implanted in the American imagination of him. Perhaps I did not make clear enough in the video (though when I give this lecture to undergraduate students they can pick up pretty easily), but my take towards the end of the video is that depicting Jesus in the guise of multiple different cultures (including white, euro-centric ones), rather than just or primarily the dominant one, is to our advantage. The reason I don't give white, eurocentric depictions a "pass" is because this is the dominant culture in America and when the divine is depicted in the likeness of the dominant culture it can have negative effects for minoritized persons. If you'd like to read and think more on the topic Dr. Stephen Prothero's _American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon_ is a great book about Jesus in the modern, American context and Dr. Joan Taylor's _What Did Jesus Look Like?_ is really great on the ancient context. Thanks for engaging!
I am going to recommend your video to my students as a study assignment
At first clicking this video, I was in disbelief, how a biblical video with 8 views, got recommended to me as a non-christian. I am very pleased with the content, you are providing very useful informations about the historical and socio economic situation of the greco-roman world in which the new testament was set. Amazing video with high quality pictures and it definately deserves a lot more views.
Super appreciate your Greek content God bless!
Please see the article ‘John and John Mark’ (1960) by Pierson Parker in JBL, volume 79. It is very possible that the ‘we’ who issued and endorsed the gospel of ‘John’ (in Ch 21) want the readers/audience to believe that it consists of the recollections and writings of John Mark. To me this is the most likely ‘presumed author’, the author the first audiences (likely to be in cities of the Province of Asia, such as Ephesus) would assume to be the author or source of the accounts. The preacher whom we today call John Mark is written up in the late 1st century/early 2nd ‘Acts’ and the details imply he was was likely rich and lived in Jerusalem in a large house, with gatehouse and servants at the time of Jesus’ preaching. Based on Acts his house was a probable site (and indeed also the later ‘traditional’ site) for the last supper, in the rich area of the Western Hill, and yet close to the Essene Quarter. If this supper occurred in his house, described as the house of his mother ( a Mary) he would be present as the male host, and lying beside the main guest, Jesus. Note that John Mark is simply called “John” twice in Acts 13:5 and 13:13 suggesting that even in the early second century this figure was known by either Mark or John. John Mark appears from Acts and Philemon and 1st Peter to have been well-known and thought to be ‘active’ in the Province of Asia (the likely place for ‘JOHN’s’ creation) . MARK is mentioned in three letters supposed to be by ‘Paul’ and and one forged to be by Peter (1Peter’).See the article by Pierson Parker (1960) ‘John and John Mark’ that vigorously defends this identification. This prominence in the churches of the Anatolian provinces would enable John Mark to be Papias’ ‘John the Elder’. From what Papias says, a highly esteemed personal disciple of Jesus who is not an apostle and yet who supposedly knew what the apostles such as Andrew and Philip had said. This John the Elder was still alive in Papias’ youth and yet was talking about what he had heard apostles like Philip and Andrew ‘had said’, when (all?) the apostles had themselves had apparently died.
Yes the Col 3:3-4 is a chiasm. And it's a legitimate chiastic structure. What you said is a stretch regarding C & C' is not at all. C) is hidden C') is revealed Since antithetical ideas are common place in Hebrew parallelism. In other words, contrasting ideas is part & parcel with Hebrew parallelism. This should jog your memory. The proverbs are saturated with antithetical parallelism. e.g. "but" cola (lines): Proverbs 10:4 Poor is the one who works with a negligent hand, but the hand of the diligent bring riches. An example from the NT: 10 I appeal to you regarding my child, Onesimus , whom I fathered during my imprisonment. A) 11 Formerly he was / useless / to you, A) but is now / useful / to you and to me.
Hello! Quick question: Which Bible translation would you recommend for academic/scholarly studies? Thanks!
Is this an African version of Arabic?
The New Testament is the New Law or Covenant which God has promised before Jesus was born
To the so called negroes aka israelites of the bible the chosen ones
I subscribed!
I watched Bert ehrman and James tabor. And now I’m trying to figure out the contradictions in the Bible’s. Lol
Let's get rid of the Erasmus pronounciation of Greek, once and for all.
Comment only Jesus is a greek name but Maria ( mother) is a hebrew a lineage of Judah is also a hebrew .The god gave his name to Moses is YHWH in hebrew name and Jesus is a false Messiah.who created the name Jesus in antioch, turkey ,the first christian is apostle Saul alias Paul with the help of Gamaliel are both pharasee member. The Messiah saying to pharasee and Saducee is a " Generation Viper" or "Serpent" in Mathew 23:33, Mathew 12:34-36,Mathew 3:5-7. Jesus is a Fake Messiah and he is not a son of Maria ( his son name is connected to YHWH ).
I am a bit surprised that this fellow isn't familiar with the theory that the Gospel of John was written by John the Presbyter (a.k.a. John the Elder). It's a theory most recently proposed by Richard Bauckham (but first alluded to by Eusebius), professor of New Testament Studies at St Andrews University in Scotland, in his groundbreaking book "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses." The main evidence he gives is that we know that John the Elder was formally a Jewish priest (Ignatius and Polycrates says he wore the priestly plate on his forehead), was from a family of some status and lived in Jerusalem, so he would have been known by Caiaphas's family and been allowed to come into their home. John the Elder's family probably owned the home that Jesus and his disciples had the Last Supper, and as the owner of the home (or representative of the family that owned it) he would have had the right to dine next to Jesus as per Jewish custom. There is a lot of patristic evidence that John the Elder was different from John the Apostle (even Pope Benedict accepted this). He is mentioned as being separate by Papias and still being alive when John the Apostle died. Papias also states that John the Elder was a disciple of the Lord and was a direct eyewitness of Jesus' ministry. Also, like the Apostle, John the Elder resided, taught and died at Ephesus, having a tomb that's different from the Apostle's.
Yes. I have commented “Please see the article ‘John and John Mark’ (1960) by Pierson Parker in JBL, volume 79. It is very possible that the ‘we’ who issued and endorsed the gospel of ‘John’ (in Ch 21) want the readers/audience to believe that it consists of the recollections and writings of John Mark. To me this is the most likely ‘presumed author’, the author the first audiences (likely to be in cities of the Province of Asia, such as Ephesus) would assume to be the author or source of the accounts. The preacher whom we today call John Mark is written up in the late 1st century/early 2nd ‘Acts’ and the details imply he was was likely rich and lived in Jerusalem in a large house, with gatehouse and servants at the time of Jesus’ preaching. Based on Acts his house was a probable site (and indeed also the later ‘traditional’ site) for the last supper, in the rich area of the Western Hill, and yet close to the Essene Quarter. If this supper occurred in his house, described as the house of his mother ( a Mary) he would be present as the male host, and lying beside the main guest, Jesus. Note that John Mark is simply called “John” twice in Acts 13:5 and 13:13 suggesting that even in the early second century this figure was known by either Mark or John. John Mark appears from Acts and Philemon and 1st Peter to have been well-known and thought to be ‘active’ in the Province of Asia (the likely place for ‘JOHN’s’ creation) . MARK is mentioned in three letters supposed to be by ‘Paul’ and and one forged to be by Peter (1Peter’).See the article by Pierson Parker (1960) ‘John and John Mark’ that vigorously defends this identification. This prominence in the churches of the Anatolian provinces would enable John Mark to be Papias’ ‘John the Elder’. From what Papias says, a highly esteemed personal disciple of Jesus who is not an apostle and yet who supposedly knew what the apostles such as Andrew and Philip had said. This John the Elder was still alive in Papias’ youth and yet was talking about what he had heard apostles like Philip and Andrew ‘had said’, when (all?) the apostles had themselves had apparently died.”
@@craigfairweather3401 I do not believe that the author of Revelations, the Gospel of John and the three letters attributed to John are the same person and I believe John Mark is the author of the Gospel of Mark. I believe John the Elder wrote Revelations and I believe the Gospel of John was written by the Apostle John, with a lot of editorial help from the Christian community of Ephesus. The letters of John were written by John the Elder, again with a lot of editorial help from the Christian community of Ephesus, hence the very close writing style between the letters and the Gospel of John. John the Elder was not John Mark. I follow a modified version of Richard Bauckham's belief that John the Elder was the John the Elder that Polycrates of Ephesus says "rested on Jesus' bosom" at the Last Supper and "... wore the sacerdotal plate (petalon) of the high priest."
@@craigfairweather3401 and there is very little proof that 1 Peter was a forgery as all the early Churches deemed it genuine per Eusebius. The good Greek of 1 Peter is probably because Peter used a scribe, in 1 Peter's case the scribe is identified specifically as Silas within the text of the letter itself. You might be confused with 2 Peter, which is the likely forgery given it's extensive use of passages and verbiage from the shorter epistle of Jude?
In the "list about the Beloved Disciple" (at 5:53), the second item is John 18:15-18, but there we only find references to "another"/"that"/"the other" disciple. The love is (conspicuously?) missing so why is this disciple nevertheless identified as the beloved disciple?
Great question! Not all scholars presume that it is the Beloved Disciple here, but I do because it fits the pattern of the Beloved Disciple and Peter being pitted against one another. Though I don't have a great answer as to why the author opts to use the adjective "other" rather than "beloved" here.
Excellent work ! An unbyased and clear view. Wish there weere more works like that to make true comparisons. Congrats and greetings from Brazil.
Thank you very much!