ARCHAEOLOGY - Hittite tablet to be deciphered with 3D

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/hittite-tablet-to-be-deciphered-with-3d.aspx?pageID=238&nID=72324&NewsCatID=375 

ARCHAEOLOGY - Hittite tablet to be deciphered with 3D

A tablet found on a rock during excavations in Hattusa, the capital of the Hittite civilization in the central Anatolian province of Çorum, will be deciphered with a...

HURRIYETDAILYNEWS.COM

Learn to Read The Bible More Effectively at the International Society 327 Oxford Road The University of Manchester

Learn to Read The Bible More Effectively at the International Society 327 Oxford Road The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PG

See the website for more details https://sites.google.com/site/readthebiblemoreeffectively/

Learn to Read The Bible More Effectively

Unlock the passages of the Bible for yourself

Whether you’re familiar with the Bible or new to reading it, our Free Courses are designed to help give you the information, tools and enthusiasm to read it more effectively for yourself.

Our next Free Six Sessions starting in October 2014 are to be held In Manchester at the

International Centre

327 Oxford Road 

Manchester 

M13 9PG

These 6 concise and informative sessions are delivered in a friendly and relaxed environment.

If you would like to come along please e-mail lesfern@btinternet.com or call us on 0151 348 4761

PLEASE BE ASSURED THAT OUR COURSES ARE COMPLETELY FREE - YOU WILL NEVER BE ASKED FOR A DONATION

The Sessions will be on the following Wednesdays at 2.30pm

Session 1 1/10/14	Session 2 8/10/14	Session 3 15/10/14	Session 4 29/10/14	Session 5 5/11/14	Session 6 12/11/14
HOW TO SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES 1	HOW TO SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES 2	EXPLORING GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT	EXPLORING HISTORICAL CONTEXT	THE RELEVANCE OF BIBLE PROPHECY	TESTING DOCTRINES AND CORE CONCEPTS

Ancient Egyptian Woman with 70 Hair Extensions Discovered

More than 3,300 years ago, in a newly built city in Egypt, a woman with an incredibly elaborate hairstyle of lengthy hair extensions was laid to rest.

She was not mummified, her body simply being wrapped in a mat. When archaeologists uncovered her remains they found she wore "a very complex coiffure with approximately 70 extensions fastened in different layers and heights on the head," writes Jolanda Bos, an archaeologist working on the Amarna Project, in an article recently published in the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology.

Researchers don't know her name, age or occupation, but she is one of hundreds of people, including many others whose hairstyles are still intact, who were buried in a cemetery near an ancient city now called Amarna. [See Photos of the Egyptian Skeletons and Elaborate Hairstyles]

Bible for the Illiterate

I am From Above John 8:23

What is Gehenna?

Rejoice and be Glad Matthew 5:12

The Plan of God

Born Again, What Does it mean?

The Bible Life's Instruction Manual

The Bible Gematria project

Does God Hear Prayer?

God … endured with much patience”

There is a complete change of theme today in Paul’s letter to the Romans compared to what we read yesterday. In chapters 9 to 11 his thoughts are on Israel: he had formerly been proud of being an Israelite, the chosen nation. The main point he makes in these chapters is that he now sees that everything depends on God’s mercy. Israel, although the chosen nation – is to experience God’s wrath. Although the Gentiles (non-Jews) are now, in a sense, chosen, the underlying foundation fact is that God is calling individuals and each one will depend on God’s “mercy”.

Of course, this has always been the foundation principle in God’s calling; Paul writes, “For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy” (9:15,16).

No one can ‘earn’ salvation. Our lives are a training period – it is surprising to read that it even was for Jesus! The point is made in the letter to the Hebrews, “Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered” (5:8). We follow in his footsteps. We also, as we read recently, should “walk in the footsteps of the faith that … Abraham had …” (Romans 4:12).

Now, we must take note of Paul’s point and his question, “What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patiencevessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known …” (verses 22,23). To make known what?

Before we quote his answer, let us appreciate the patience of God in not yet acting to punish the world for its ungodliness. One of the hidden sevens in the book of Revelation is that this word ‘patience’ occurs 7 times. And what does God’s ‘patience’ make known? Verse 23 continues, “… to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory – even us whom he has called”.

Let us more fully respond to his calling, these are the only “riches” in our lives worth having – indeed, it is essential that we have them, otherwise we will not be among the “us” he is calling to experience the incredible “riches of his glory”.

Judge Righteously

The Holy Spirit

The Gospel of Judas

The Gospel of Judas

You may have heard of the 'Gospel of Judas' which is getting a lot of press coverage at the moment. This is a document which claims to give an account of Christ's life from the perspective of Judas, the Apostle who betrayed Jesus to the Jewish Authorities. Two questions keep coming up:
1. Is this truly an ancient document from the early centuries after Christ?
2. Does this document give us the True Word of God?

Is the Document Ancient?

With regard to the first question, there is no reason to doubt the experts who say that the parchment, the ink and the language all come from about AD 400 or before. So the document is as old as some of the copies we have of the accepted Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. But what about the message it contains?

Is the Document in Harmony with the Bible?

It says early in the document (talking about Jesus Christ):

'Often he did not appear to his disciples as himself, but he was found among them as a child.'.

This is rather a strange statement; if it means that Jesus had the humility, trust and simplicity of a child, then this would concur with the accepted Gospels. If, on the other hand, the writer means that Jesus literally took on the form of a child to talk to his Disciples, then this has no parallel with any Bible account.
A bit later in the document, it states:

'Judas [said] to him, 'I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo. And I am not worthy to utter the name of the one who has sent you.''

Quoting from a web encyclopedia...........

'Barbelo is from the Greek, meaning forethought. (She is also referred to as Ennoia, intention) The Barbelo is the first thought (ennoia), or emanation of the Supreme being in Gnostic creation stories, the mother of the Aeons. She is the emanation of the First Cause, the creative principle who in turn creates (or causes to be created) the entire manifest world. In a sense, she also contains the universe within her; she is sometimes referred to as the womb of the world.'

It seems strange that Barbelo should be mentioned, when this word appears nowhere in the accepted Bible. As we can see from the encyclopedia, this is a Greek or Gnostic idea with no parallel in the 4 Gospels of the Bible.

The Central Message

A central theme of this 'Gospel' is that only Judas understood Jesus and his message and the other disciples were even in opposition to the 'truth'. For example, when interpreting a dream about decadent priests, Jesus says this to the 12 disciples: 'Jesus said to them, 'Those you have seen receiving the offerings at the altar - that is who you are. That is the god you serve, and you are those twelve men you have seen. The cattle you have seen brought for sacrifice are the many people you lead astray before that altar.'

Conflict with Accepted Bible Writings

What this means is that to accept the Gospel of Judas as the Word of God would mean that we have to throw away from the New Testament, the Gospels of Matthew and John, because they were of the 12, John's three letters and Revelation and Peter's two letters. Mark's Gospel is generally thought to be based on Peter's testimony, so this would have to be rejected also. As Peter says in his second letter, chapter 1:

'16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables, when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.'

Luke writes in chapter 1 (verses 1 to 4) of his Gospel:

'Since many have undertaken to set in order a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, even as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write to you in order, most excellent Theophilus; that you might know the certainty concerning the things in which you were instructed.'

Both these writers were using first-hand accounts as material for their writing. If they were lying or fabricating, then firstly, those eyewitnesses would denounce them; secondly, would God allow error to be included in His Holy Word?

The Internal Harmony of the Bible

One of the main proofs of the Divine Inspiration of the Bible, is the internal harmony. This means that despite apparent minor discrepancies, (that could be due to translation or copying errors or could just be down to witnesses of the same event noticing different details), all books of the Bible are in harmony with the others. God does not change; neither does His message.

The 'bottom line' is that either the Bible IS the Word of God or it isn't. If it is not the Word of God, then it cannot matter which books and gospels are included and which are excluded. It is merely an academic exercise.

If the Bible IS the Word of God, then we have to ask whether God would allow it to be filled with false gospels and false writings, whilst the real writings have been excluded and even lost for many centuries, denying countless generations the opportunity of learning the true gospel message?

Gnosticism

The fact is that the gospel of Judas belongs to what are called the Gnostic writings. Gnosticism was a movement that had to be contested by the early true Christians. It was based on the idea of secret knowledge (which is what Gnosis means), which only a select few were allowed to know. It drew on ideas from pagan beliefs and Greek philosophy.

Read what Wikipedia, the free web encyclopedia list for one of the Gnostic sects:

'The Cainites were a Gnostic and Antinomian sect who were known to worship Cain as the first victim of the Demiurge Jehovah, the Old Testament God, who was identified by many groups of gnostics as evil. They venerated Cain, on the basis that by creating murder Cain allowed men to deny it, and thus have a greater chance at redemption from Original Sin. The sect following was relatively small. They were mentioned by Tertullian and Irenaeus as existing in the eastern Roman Empire during the 2nd century. One of their purported apocryphal texts was the Gospel of Judas.'

Just in case you missed it, many Gnostic sects regarded Jehovah as evil! If any further proof were required that the teachings of these people were in opposition with the true teachings of the Bible, then we need not go any further.

Saved by Knowledge

Psalm 49:20 Earthling man, although in honour, who does not understand, Is indeed comparable with the beasts that have been destroyed.

John 17:3 This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ. 

(Ephesians 4:13) until we all attain to the oneness in the faith and in the accurate knowledge of the Son of God, to a full-grown man, to the measure of stature that belongs to the fullness of the Christ;

(Philippians 1:9) And this is what I continue praying, that YOUR love may abound yet more and more with accurate knowledge and full discernment;

The first thing a man has to do, then, in order to gain salvation, is to believe the gospel. To do this he must know the gospel, for as Paul says, "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard"? (Rom. x, 14). Knowledge must always precede belief; for a man cannot believe that of which he has not previously been informed. Hence, the first inquiry on the part of man or woman anxious to be saved will be, WHAT IS THE GOSPEL? Until they know this, they cannot go on to the second stage of believing unto salvation. The gospel is styled "the one faith," because it is made up of things which require faith to receive them - the act of the mind by which these are apprehended being metonymically put for the things themselves. It is laid down as a principle, "Without faith IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PLEASE GOD" (Heb. xi, 6), and it is affirmed of believers, "Ye are saved through faith" (Eph. ii, 8), and " the just shall live by faith," (Heb. x. 38). Now this faith, in scriptural usage, is not a mere abstract reliance on the omnipotence of Jehovah, but the belief of specific promise. It is said that "faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness" (Rom. iv, 9). Now let us note the character of this righteousnessacquiring faith:-

"He staggered not at THE PROMISE OF GOD through unbelief, but was strong in faith, giving glory to God:and being fully persuaded that WHAT HE HAD PROMISED, he was also able to perform" (Rom. iv, 20, 21).

Hence, it is said that faithful Abraham was constituted the father of them that BELIEVE, by which it is evident that scriptural faith is belief in the promises of God; and thus by the consideration of terms of a more general nature, we arrive at the conclusion to which we were guided in a former lecture by specific testimony, viz.: - that the Gospel which must be believed in order to obtain salvation, is made up of unfulfilled promises as its chief element.

http://www.antipas.org/books/chris_astray/ca_lec17.html


HERESIAN: But the apostle saith, we are saved by "the renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Tit. iii. 5).

BOANERGES: He also says, we are renewed by knowledge" (Col. iii. 10). In this, however, he does not contradict himself, but rather makes the one phrase explanatory of the other; as if he had said, "we are renewed by the Holy Spirit through knowledge." The Holy Spirit renews or regenerates man intellectually and morally by the truth believed. "Sanctify them by thy truth," says Jesus; "thy word, O Father, is truth" (John xvii. 17). "Ye are clean," said he to his apostles, "through the word which I have spoken to you" (John xv. 3). God's power is manifested through means. His Spirit is His power by which He effects intellectual, moral, and physical results. When He wills to produce intellectual and moral effects, it is by knowledge revealed by His Spirit through the prophets and apostles. This knowledge becomes power when received into "good and honest hearts"; and because God is the author of it, it is styled "the Knowledge of God" (2 Pet. i. 2), or "the word of truth" (James i. 18), by which He begets sinners to Himself as His sons and daughters. "The word of the truth of the gospel,"" the gospel of the kingdom." "the incorruptible seed,""the word," "the truth as it is in Jesus,"" the word of the kingdom,"" the word of reconciliation," "the law and the testimony," "the word of faith," "the sword of the spirit which is the word of God," "the word of Christ," "the perfection of liberty," etc.-are all phrases richly expressive of" the power of God" by which He saves His people from their sins, and translates them into the Hope of the kingdom and glory to which He invites them. The truth is the power that makes men free indeed (John viii. 32, 36). Hence Jesus says, "My words are spirit, and they are life." The prophets, Jesus, and the apostles were the channels through which it was transmitted to mankind; and the spirit the agent by which the knowledge was conveyed to them. Hence, the knowledge or the truth being suggested to the prophets by the spirit is sometimes styled "the spirit" (Rom. ii. 20). The spirit is to the truth as cause and effect; and by a very common figure of speech, the one is put for the other in speaking of them relatively to the mind and heart of man. So that the phrase "renewed by the holy spirit" is equivalent to renewed by the belief of the truth testified by the Holy Spirit (John xv. 26: xiv. 13-14).

http://www.the-gospel-truth.info/clerical-theology-unscriptural-part-1/

21. We reject that baby sprinkling is a doctrine of Scripture. [Baptism is only valid upon a confession of understanding the complete Will and purpose of God. It is the outward manifestation of an inner conviction — Mark 16:16; Acts 8:12.]

22. We reject that “heathens,” idiots, pagans, and very young children will be saved. [Salvation is based upon a reasonable and logical understanding of the Truth; those who are foreign to the gospel, who lack the capacity to perceive its responsibilities; or who are unable to comprehend, are outside the sphere of salvation — Acts 8:12.]

23. We reject that man can be saved by morality or sincerity, without the gospel. [Morality and sincerity must be accompanied by an acknowledgement of the gospel for salvation — Acts 10:1-6.]

24. We reject that the gospel alone will save, without the obedience of Christ’s commandments. [Obedience to the commandments is a responsibility required of all believers; salvation will be determined upon the application of faith and obedience. Rev. 22:14; Mat. 7:26; 2Pet. 2:21; Mat. 28:20; Gal. 6:2]

http://www.thechristadelphians.org/htm/beliefs/rejected.htm

Is the ‘Secret Gospel of Mark’ genuine?

Posted by Jon Burke | Published on July 1, 2012

The Text

The text (supposedly discovered in 1958), appears to be a letter from early Christian writer Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-c.215), quoting a ‘secret gospel’ by Mark.^1 2

Analysis

Smith himself noted features of the text which could indicate it was an imitation of Mark’s style by another writer.^3 4 5 6 Physical analysis has been impossible since the original letter disappeared after being photographed in 1972,^7 8 but there is no evidence Smith prevented access to the text.^9 10

Photographs show it has the appearance of age,¹¹ but this could be the product of forgery.^12 1314 Suspicion of forgery was raised immediately.^{15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22} The provenance and style,²³ content,²⁴ date,²⁵ and lack of scribal errors, have all been questioned.^26 27

Scholarly Views

Few scholars believe ‘Secret Mark’ is historically useful to studies of Jesus, even if it is genuine,^2829 30 and most question its authenticity.^{31 32 33 34}

1. ‘According to Smith, the letter in question was found on the final blank pages of the works of Ignatius of Antioch, the latter of which was copied in 1646. The handwriting of the extract is written in a different hand from the works of Ignatius and has been dated to c. 1750, about a century later than the Ignatius works of which it is a part. In the letter published by Smith, Clement replies to a certain Theodore who has been troubled by the teachings of the gnostic Carpocratians, a sect that indulges in illicit sexual practices based upon a variant version of the Gospel of Mark. Clement refutes the Carpocratians by citing two passagesfrom the suspect version of Mark, which Morton Smith calls the Secret Gospel of Mark.’, Edwards, ‘The Gospel According to Mark’, Pillar New Testament Commentary, p. 509 (2002). [↩]
2. ‘It was not until 1973 that the text, along with Smith’s translation and notes, was finally published.’, Charlesworth & Evans, ‘Jesus in the Agrapha and Apocryphal Gospels’, in Chilton & Evans (eds.), ‘Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research’, p. 526 (1994). [↩]
3. ‘Smith recognized that Markan vocabulary and sentence construction could point either to Mark’s authorship or to imitation of Mark by another author. Smith noted three features that suggested imitation:’, Brown, ‘Mark’s Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith’s controversial discovery’, p. 6 (2005); Brown is a supporter of the authenticity of the letter, which he defends comprehensively in this work. [↩]
4. ‘More generally, he noted that “The text was more like Mark than a section of Mark should be.”‘, Brown, ‘Mark’s Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith’s controversial discovery’, p. 6 (2005). [↩]
5. ‘‘The style is certainly Mark’s, but it is too Marcan to be Mark’; such was already C.C. Richardson’s verdict in 1974, and E. Best in 1979 confirmed this judgment in detail. In Mark itself the Marcan peculiarities of style are nowhere so piled up as in the ‘secret Gospel’!’, Merkel, ‘Appendix: the ‘secret Gospel’ of Mark’, in Schneelmelcher & Wilson, ‘New Testament Apocrypha: Gospels and related writings’, p. 107 (1991). [↩]
6. ‘Smith refers to three ‘semitisms’, which, however, often occur in the Synoptics; as Smith himself admits, such semitisms are easily imitated.’, ibid., p. 107. [↩]
7. ‘Suspicion surrounded the text in part because after being photographed by Smith in 1958 and then a team of scholars in 1972, the text mysteriously disappeared, making it impossible to subject the text to the testing necessary to authenticate it even as an eighteenth-century production. The text still has its advocates.’, Köstenberger, Kellum, & Quarles (eds.), ‘The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament’, p. 1343 (2009). [↩]
8. ‘M. Smith photographed this text, which breaks off in mid-sentence on the third page, but did nothing about safeguarding the original, which to this day has not been accessible to anyone else. Only in 1973 did he publish the text with an extensive commentary; at the same time he published a popular presentation of the story of the discovery and his work upon it.’, Merkel, ‘Appendix: the ‘secret Gospel’ of Mark’, in Schneelmelcher & Wilson, ‘New Testament Apocrypha: Gospels and related writings’, p. 107 (1991). [↩]
9. ‘The truth is that at least three other scholars and two members of the Greek Patriarchate handled the manuscript. The information obtained by various inquirers, moreover, corroborates Smith’s account that he left the book containing the manuscript among the seventy items that he catalogued in the library at Mar Saba.’, Brown, ‘Mark’s Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith’s controversial discovery’, p. 26 (2005). [↩]
10. ‘It would appear, then, that the manuscript was found at Mar Saba in 1976 rather than 1977, or eighteen years after Smith photographed it, and it disappeared many years after the Archimandrite took it to Jerusalem and a librarian removed it from the book. These facts show how preposterous it is to suggest that Smith prevented other scholars from examining the manuscript.’, ibid., p. 26. [↩]
11. ‘In view of what is known about the fading and browning of inks and the browning of paper in contact with ink, we can conclude that the photos depict a manuscript that looks like it is a few hundred years old.’, ibid., p. 28. [↩]
12. ‘Brown’s research indicates that some formulas of iron gall inks result in writings that would turn brown quite rapidly through exposure to sunlight.’, ibid., p. 28; this would give the ink a false appearance of age. [↩]
13. ‘There was a way of ageing paper artificially that was used in the 1960s by experienced researchers such as Barrow.’, ibid., p. 28; Brown questions whether Smith had the skill for such forgery. [↩]
14. ‘It is also possible to age paper and ink using chemicals that oxidize the ink and paper.’, ibid., p. 28. [↩]
15. ‘Some of the scholars Smith consulted in the 1960s thought the letter was an ancient forgery, although they had difficulty explaining how an ancient author would benefit by creating it. Smith dealt with their arguments in his book.’, ibid., p. 12. [↩]
16. ‘However, the spectre of forgery came back with a vengeance in 1975, when two scholars offered influential arguments that the letter was a modern hoax.’, ibid, p. 12. [↩]
17. Quesnell suggested that an erudite scholar who had access to Otto Stahlin’s 1936 index of Clement’s vocabulary and other modern studies of Clement’s style could have produced the document, especially if he had the help of someone skilled in imitating handwriting. Quesnell added that any scholarly apparatus Smith used to “authenticate” the document could have assisted a forger in imitating Clement. And he pointed out that Smith’s ability to gain access to the tower library at Mar Saba shows that a forger could have planted it there.’, ibid, p. 12. [↩]
18. ‘According to Quesnell, Smith’s approach of not producing the original for scientific study and restricting his analysis to the content is congruent with the pattern of known forgers; that fact raises the possibility of recent forgery.’, ibid., p. 35. [↩]
19. ‘many agreed with Quesnell that the manuscript should be subjected to forensic testing before it is deemed authentic.’, ibid, p. 12. [↩]
20. ‘Their suspicions only increased when Charles Murgia offered arguments for modern forger based on the content of the letter. Murgia suggested that the letter consisted mostly of information that was suspiciously self-authenticating, and noted that the manuscriptlacks the major errors that result from a long period of transmission.’, ibid, p. 12. [↩]
21. ‘Murgia noted parallels between the letter and “Classical fakes,” which raised the possibility that this manuscript was written much later than it appears to be.’, ibid, pp. 28-29. [↩]
22. ‘every sentence of the letter, other than the actual quotation of secret Mark, is admirably designed to provide A SEAL OF AUTHENTICITY for the passage of secret Mark. Great care is taken to convince the modern reader of why he has never heard of this gospel before.’, Murgia quoted in ibid., p. 29; Brown notes ‘Smith himself commented in 1976 that Murgia’s “theory of a ‘seal of authenticity’ is the strongest case I have seen yet for the supposition that the letter is a forgery”‘, but criticizes Murgia’s case, ibid., p. 29. [↩]
23. ‘The only manuscript (actually, a photograph of a manuscript) seems to derive from a different provenance than the monastery where it was supposedly found, and evidence seems to suggest that it appeared at the monastery only in recent times. Its attribution to Clement is stylistically open to quesiton;117 it also clearly presupposes modern idiom and perhaps modern custom.’, Keener, ‘The Historical Jesus of the Gospels’, p. 60 (2009). [↩]
24. ‘Attempts to argue that the Secret Gospel of Mark is older than canonical Mark3 are clearly mistaken, and have been judged so by a majority of scholars.4 The most important reason for this judgment is that the material alleged by Smith appears in no other church father and in none of the thousands of ancient manuscript witnesses to the Gospel of Mark. Furthermore, that Secret Mark is a later addition to canonical Mark is virtually proven by the fact that “they came to Bethany” is a glaring anachronism in the text of Mark since Jesus and the disciples have not yet come to Jericho (Mark 10:46), and Bethany lay beyond Jericho. Finally, the Carpocratians mentioned by Theodore to Clement did not arise until the mid-second century, that is, a full century after the composition of Mark.’, Edwards, ‘The Gospel According to Mark’, Pillar New Testament Commentary, p. 512 (2002). [↩]
25. ‘Even if we accept the authenticity of the letter of Clement and grant that he knew a ‘Secret Gospel’, it suffices to posit a mid-second-century date for its composition.’, Klauck, ‘Apocryphal Gospels: An introduction’, p. 35 (2003). [↩]
26. ‘Over against the linguistic indications which speak for authenticity, differences of substance as compared with the rest of Clement’s writing have been noted. Finally, it is striking that the text contains none of the errors typical in manuscript traditions.’, Merkel, ‘Appendix: the ‘secret Gospel’ of Mark’, in Schneelmelcher & Wilson, ‘New Testament Apocrypha: Gospels and related writings’, p. 107 (1991). [↩]
27. ‘the lack of serious errors indicative of transmission weighs in Murgia’s favour’, ibid., p. 33., Brown, ‘Mark’s Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith’s controversial discovery’, p. 8 (2005). [↩]
28. ‘Very few scholars believed that LGM 1 or 2 [the two texts of ‘Secret Mark’] can tell us anything about the historical Jesus or ventured to use this story to reconstruct the tradition that lay behind John 11.’, ibid., p. 11. [↩]
29. ‘Accordingly, everything points to the view that the ‘secret Gospel’ is an apocryphon resting on the foundation of the canonical Gospels. On this ground alone any conclusions relating to the historical Jesus are not possible. The time of origin of the ‘secret Gospel’ probably lies not before the middle of the 2^nd century.’, Merkel, ‘Appendix: the ‘secret Gospel’ of Mark’, in Schneelmelcher & Wilson, ‘New Testament Apocrypha: Gospels and related writings’, p. 107 (1991). [↩]
30. ‘Even if the letter is authentic, however, we can deduce no more than that an expanded version of Mark was in existence in Alexandria about A.D. 170. When Smith seeks to go back to the last years of the 1^st century for the composition of the expanded Mark,that rests on pure speculation.’, ibid., p. 107. [↩]
31. ‘By the end of the 1970s, New Testament scholars still mentioned “secret” Mark in an incidental manner, but were generally reluctant to take the gospel too seriously and risk looking foolish should it prove to be a fake.’, Brown, ‘Mark’s Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith’s controversial discovery’, p. 14 (2005). [↩]
32. ‘The novelty value of this text and of the reporting of its find justifies the mention of it in this collection, but its antiquity and genuineness are questioned by many scholars.’, Elliott, ‘The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation based on M.R. James’, p. 148 (1993). [↩]
33. ‘There can be little question that the extract produced by Smith considerably postdates Mark. On the whole, so-called Secret Mark appears to be a forgery, although whether modern or ancient is difficult to say.’, Edwards, ‘The Gospel According to Mark’, Pillar New Testament Commentary, p. 512 (2002). [↩]
34. ‘If the jury is still out, it is seeming more and more likely that their verdict will be that the work is a modern forgery or hoax.’, Collins, & Attridge, ‘Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark’, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible, p. 493 (2007)