"If others go to hell, then I will too. But I do not believe that; on the contrary I believe that all will be saved, myself with them—something which arouses my deepest amazement." — Søren Kierkegaard (quoted at the end of #DBHart's #ThatAllShallBeSaved
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I'm surprised (but not surprised) by the strong reaction to this thread/article. Most of the criticism I've received are from people who did not take the time to click into the article and read the argument. Typical social media reactions to headers without reading the content.
For example, I am not criticizing Paul or dismissing him based on his decision to leave his wife (it does appear to be mutual too). If I am correct, this does not change anything Paul has done or written. It only criticizes people who ostracize Christians with broken marriages
Also, it is not an argument from silence. It is a syllogism based on scriptural text and supported by church tradition.
In my next thread, Raymond E. Brown delivers a deadly strike to Albert Schweitzer’s lynch pin argument that Jesus’ cleaning of the temple could have only happened once in The Quest for the Historical Jesus. Ready… Set… Go…
Raymond Brown continued (see my other threads) “For the ministry in general John's picture of Jesus going back and forth between Galilee and Jerusalem and of many conflicts with the Jerusalem authorities may be closer to history than Mark's picture of Jesus entire ministry…
… in the North with only one trip to Jeru salem (set at the end of his life) and only one major conflict with the Jerusalem authorities that begins the moment he arrives. …
Raymond E. Brown argues that there was an oral tradition with some written blocks of text behind the Gospel Mark that laid the foundation for the Passion Narrative genre
Mark or UrMark may be the first written gospel genre but the passion program may have its origin in church praxis, that was used to organize the events of the passion into liturgical exercises where groups of memories were recalled for meditation
“Of particular interest is a time framework of one day (Thurs- day evening to Friday evening), where from the beginning of the supper to the burial almost every three-hour period is marked off (14:17,72; 15:1,25,33,34,42). . .
I admit I’m still highly influenced by C. H. Dodd’s summary of Peter’s apostolic preaching points. And his argument that the Gospel of Mark was built off of this list. But…
Raymond E. Brown keenly reminds us that Luke used Mark as his source material (along with Q) and so the order must be reversed. That more likely Acts didn’t have access to Peter’s sermons and so instead used Mark to construct Peter’s sermons and it’s unlikely Peter said any of it
“C. H. Dodd related the skeletal outline of Mark’s Gospel to the kergmatic outline of Jesus’ ministry attributed to Peter in Acts 10:37-39. That view probably has the dependency reversed: Luke, who has read Mark, may well have supplied in the Acts sermon an outline from Mark.”