The second gunman and Biblical scholarship
As we all know, a second gunman appeared from nowhere to shoot JFK and Connolly, and then disappeared from history, only to reappear years later in conspiracy theories.
In Mark's Gospel, Joseph of Arimathea appears from nowhere to bury Jesus , and then disappears from history, only to reappear when 'Mark' wrote about him.
The sudden unexplained appearance of Joseph of Arimathea is a useful way of showing that Jesus's body was not left to rot on the cross or be thrown to dogs.
In terms of historicity , how does Joseph of Arimathea differ from the second gunman?
Apart from the obvious fact that mainstream Biblical scholarship accepts the existence of Joseph of Arimathea, while denying that their standards of scholarship differ from those of JFK conspiracy theorists?
In Mark's Gospel, Joseph of Arimathea appears from nowhere to bury Jesus , and then disappears from history, only to reappear when 'Mark' wrote about him.
The sudden unexplained appearance of Joseph of Arimathea is a useful way of showing that Jesus's body was not left to rot on the cross or be thrown to dogs.
In terms of historicity , how does Joseph of Arimathea differ from the second gunman?
Apart from the obvious fact that mainstream Biblical scholarship accepts the existence of Joseph of Arimathea, while denying that their standards of scholarship differ from those of JFK conspiracy theorists?
posted by Steven Carr at 12:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home