The Life and Times of John Mark or How to Date a Gospel (Part VI)

The earlier posts in this series (part 1) explored the early evidence that a person named Mark is the author of the book we call the Gospel of Mark.

The testimony was largely in agreement about the following information:

  • Mark was the author.
  • Mark was not a disciple of Jesus (while Jesus was alive).
  • Mark wrote down what Peter was teaching and proclaiming.
  • The book was written at the request of believers in Rome.

The testimony of the early church also notes that Mark was in Alexandria, Egypt planting churches.

Who is this person named Mark?

The extant testimony of the early church is unanimous that it was written by Mark, a person taken to be John Mark, the associate of Barnabas and Paul on the 1MJ.

One factor in favor of this being correct, notes Daniel Wallace, is that Mark is “by no means a major player in the New Testament.”1

The author identified as Mark is widely accepted as the person named John Mark that we find referenced throughout the NT.

In The New Testament in Its World, affirms that no alterative person has ever been suggested as the author.

Certainty is impossible, but John Mark is probably the best candidate, not least because his name, as a younger and less well-known early Christian, would not naturally occur to second-century Christians when seeking to name the book. No alternative figure has ever warranted consideration. 2

Continue reading

What if William Lane Craig wrote the lyrics to Panama (Satire)

What if William Lane Craig of Reasonable Faith wrote the lyrics to Panama by Van Halen? If he is right about Molinism and middle knowledge then there must have been a possible world where this happened. So I offer you what those lyrics might have looked like in some other world that we have not had the blessing to see actualized. Apologies to William Lane Craig, Van Halen and Luis de Molina.

Rock on!

Continue reading

Wednesday with Wesley: Mr. Edwards whole mistake

This post is part 6 of a series that has explored the three essays on the topic Liberty and Necessity by John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards and Lord Kames. This series started with this post Wednesday with Wesley: Thoughts Upon Necessity

In “Thoughts Upon Necessity“, John Wesley critiqued the Lord Kames’ views on Necessity, Liberty and Moral Obligation and highlighted its flaws. He then went on to admit that Jonathan Edwards avoids the problem Lord Kames found himself in.

But Mr, Edwards, has found a most ingenious way of evading this consequence …1

Through “deep, metaphysical reasoning”, Edwards has asserted that “the actions of men are quite voluntary; the fruit of their own will” while also claiming that the strongest motive “determin[es] the Will [causing] the choice to be thus, and not otherwise.” 2 Despite using words like “voluntary” and “choice”, Edwards’ Liberty of Necessity, according to Wesley, amounts to the acts of a moral agent being “irresistibly impelled.” 3

Through this series we have explored how Edwards understood a Liberty of Necessity as well as how he understood a Liberty of Contingency. In this post, we will explore Wesley’s claims about Edwards’ framework and his own perspective on these matters.

Continue reading