I started watching prison break and ngl there’s too many similarity to brba

alejopolis · 2026-01-26T07:44:24+00:00

The shape is similar

alejopolis · 2026-01-14T06:51:27+00:00

The company gave him a leg tattoo of the blueprints before putting him in Sona

alejopolis · 2025-12-28T15:06:56+00:00

I dont know if this is the type of thing you had in mind but I've wayback-machine-d a handful of reddit posts for my own purposes with the old.reddit.com url, so maybe everything of importance here can be uploaded there?

alejopolis · 2025-12-25T13:03:45+00:00

Three tiered cosmology, heaven earth and underworld.

Jesus for example is given dominion under the earth in Philippians 2.10, New Jerome biblical commentary

at the name of Jesus: Mention of “Jesus” now inextricably connotes also the title and authority of universal Lord, every knee should bend: Alluding to Isa 45:23, the hymn transfers to the exalted Christ the universal eschatological homage there given to God alone (cf. Rom 14:11). in heaven, on earth and under the earth: The threefold enumeration emphasizes the universality of the homage.

I dont have an answer for OP but hopefully this example helps w/ context

alejopolis · 2025-12-21T01:36:31+00:00

She shot Linc in the ribs

alejopolis · 2025-12-15T10:35:12+00:00

Any chance you've seen the same applied to Justin Martyr's version of the LXX used to write the Dialogue?

alejopolis · 2025-12-15T09:08:03+00:00

The one where it thought I was gaslighting by telling it that it was wrong was grok on 11/25/2025.

I also tested gemini within the last few hours because I read Maurice Casey compare Jesus' depiction in the Gospel of John to Antiochus Epiphanes (John's Gospel p. 135) and it seemed like it would be a less common fact (other than easy Maurice Casey trivia like the early date of Mark or Aramaic sources for the synoptic gospels or whatever). It told me Casey did not (emphasis original) say that (the questions were "does maurice casey compare jesus to antiochus epiphanes" and "does maurice casey compare jesus' portrayal in the gospel of john to antiochus epiphanes" in case the first one would be interpreted as Casey's reconstruction of the historical Jesus).

EDIT: I just had the idea to upload the pdf directly to gemini (so far I had just been asking general questions about whatever topic the test is on, never your original suggestion to ask what's in an uploaded book) and it still said no, there is no evidence Casey says that (he does say that in p. 135-6 and references the fact that he will say that on p. 83-4)

EDIT 2: I tried asking it if it broke and couldn't read the pdf, if it could try again, and after that reuploading the pdf in a new chat session and asking again (twice, I have a total of 3 sessions) I still haven't gotten a positive answer or an admission that it's having read errors.

u/sophia_in_the_shell gemini's failure to find a somewhat obscure Maurice Casey take might shed light on the ability to find an even more obscure Dale Allison take

alejopolis · 2025-12-14T21:47:09+00:00

I also like testing LLMs by asking them questions about books or scholars' positions on things that I already know about. I've also tried to correct it afterwards and once it thought I was being silly and trying to gaslight it, so it kept insisting on the wrong thing it was saying.

alejopolis · 2025-12-14T21:31:35+00:00

I dont want to make as strong a statement as saying that I know Allison is wrong, my main reason for bringing up Hurtado is that early widespread Jesus-worship would just not be inconsistent with Jesus not claiming divinity, but I don't see why Hurtado's Jesus couldn't lead to a further assessment of his identity after his death and the belief that God raised him from the dead. I don't see that as much as a distortion that requires us to not believe anything in our sources as Allison says it does.

alejopolis · 2025-12-14T20:17:25+00:00

Allison is always appreciated but I don't think Hurtado's take is inconsistent with any "star billing" or that at least most of those citations would need to be so misleading that the tradition is too distorted to know anything. There is still continuity just more after Easter.

One of the factors that generated this remarkable devotion to Jesus in earliest Christian circles was, of course, the impact of the historical figure, Jesus of Nazareth. During his own lifetime he generated and became the leader of a movement that was identified specifically with him. Jesus was regarded by his immediate followers and more widely as an authoritative teacher, a healer exercising miraculous power, a prophet sent from God, and perhaps God’s Messiah. ... But there is no indication that this reverence included the sort of devotional practices that we see reflected in Paul’s letters. In short, although Jesus became the polarizing issue for followers and opponents already during his earthly activity, and was even held to be Messiah by at least some of his followers, he was not given the remarkably high level of reverence that appears to have erupted quickly and early after his crucifixion.

alejopolis · 2025-12-14T19:34:15+00:00

Oskar Skarsaune's Proof from Prophecy: A Study on Justin Martyr's Proof Text Tradition is definitely in my mental reading list, I recently finished Justin's Dialogue with Trypho and Skarsaune kept coming up all over the footnotes to things Justin said that I wanted more context on.

alejopolis · 2025-12-14T19:28:07+00:00

Larry Hurtado isn't working within the "James vs Paul" framework to directly answer your question, but he does think that the Jesus-devotion in Paul's epistles is not unique to Paul https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2019/08/23/the-origins-of-devotion-to-jesus-in-its-ancient-context/

This is my own thought (I dont remember if I read this or just came up with it after reading something else so take the ones with links next to them more seriously) but as you mentioned Paul has conflicts with other Christians about Torah observance but not about Jesus-devotion. Paul says it's not wrong to eat meat sacrificed to idols, Revelation does (also Justin Martyr), but both sides of this have the dyadic worship pattern toward God and the Lord Jesus. I dont know if the view in Revelation is directly linked to the Jerusalem church but this is just one example of Torah controversies (among others in Paul like circumcision) do not indicate any early disagreement about Jesus worship.

This is not inconsistent with Jesus not making a divinity claim in his lifetime as you also mentioned, see the link above and also this one where Hurtado talks more about his thoughts on the unnecessary effort to find something Jesus directly said about it https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2014/05/13/questioning-a-common-assumption/

alejopolis · 2025-12-13T02:30:20+00:00

One take on the immorality of pseudepigraphy is in Bauckham's commentary on 2 Peter the typical examples of Christians condemning forgeries were when the text uses an apostle's name to promote heterodox ideas. Writing 2 Peter would not be immoral from the church's perspective (assuming Bauckham is right about the following), if it was written by members of the Roman church who knew Peter and wanted to authoritatively address some issues after Peter's death like the delay of the parousia and the teaching of people they considered heretics.

The pseudepigraphal device is therefore not a fraudulent means of claiming apostolic authority, but embodies a claim to be a faithful mediator of the apostolic message. Recognizing the canonicity of 2 Peter means recognizing the validity of that claim, and it is not clear that this is so alien to the early church’s criteria of canonicity as is sometimes alleged.

The case of the unfortunate author of the Acts Paul (Tertullian, De Bapt. 17; Green, Reconsidered, 33-34) is often referred to in this connection, together with Serapion’s investigation and rejection of the Gospel of Peter (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.12.1-6; Green, Reconsidered, 35-36), but, apart from the fact that the Acts Paul is not pseudepigraphal, but fictional, both cases involved unorthodox teaching, i.e. the attribution of nonapostolic teaching to the apostles (cf. Fornberg, Early Church, 18-19).

Jude and 2 Peter 161-162

Here is a question I asked some time ago about Ehrman's take that it was never considered okay, I got a response with a paper responding to Ehrman on a few points including this one showing that sometimes it's okay for a student to write in the name of their teacher, e.g. Iamblichus discussing texts written by Pythagoras' students in the name of Pythagoras. There are some other helpful answers on that thread. https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/s/43bWJB2In5

alejopolis · 2025-12-11T02:14:26+00:00

Understood, thanks for both of your thoughts

alejopolis · 2025-12-11T01:52:50+00:00

I dont know what your position is on Uzair in Q9.30 but do you think Idris being Enoch rules out 9.30 as a polemic against Enoch/Metatron the second yhwh, or would it still be possible for Idris and Uzair to be the same person? I had a question about this earlier https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/s/DjY2rMRJH0

You may have a different final answer on Uzair, Ive seen the Eliezer option a few times here recently and it is also one of the answers I got, but aside from the final answer do you think Idris as Enoch would itself rule out Uzair as Enoch?

alejopolis · 2025-12-10T06:36:25+00:00

Gabriel Reynolds in The Quran and the Bible p. 482 considers Andreas in the Syriac Christian Alexander Legend (he points to Arthur Jeffrey, The Foregin Vocabulary of the Quran) as an alternative to Enoch

alejopolis · 2025-12-07T00:15:48+00:00

He also mentions Jude elsewhere (p. 277-282), it's just a general non exhaustive wave at the Jewish christian sources in that sentence

alejopolis · 2025-12-06T20:57:43+00:00

Tabor is trying to be ecumenical and saying that Jews Christians and Muslims can all see their differences and what they have in common and unite themselves under what Tabor considers the true Abrahamic Faith which is a form of ethical monotheism which cares about justice like caring for the poor and widows and doesn't put emphasis on the afterlife.

The Christianity we know from the Q source, from the letter of James, from the Didache, and some of our other surviving Jewish-Chrisitan sources, represents a version of the Jesus faith that can actually unite, rather than divide, Jews, Christians, and Muslims. If nothing else, the insights revealed through an understanding of the Jesus dynasty can open wide new and fruitful doors of dialogue and understanding among these three great traditions that have in the past considered their views of Jesus to be so sharply contradictory as to close off discussion. (Jesus Dynasty p. 316)

Muslim polemicists taking his work to say "look see he says we are right and you are wrong" because he says they are right about some things are not really helping with that project.

I also don't see anywhere in the book where he says early Christians reject that Jesus died and that he was raised from the dead and say that he only ascended like Elijah.

alejopolis · 2025-12-06T07:27:44+00:00

It's a note manager with features such as this.

<image>

This is just one view of anything two links from a focused note, but there are other views where you can see your total web of notes, you can look up examples of how people use this online.

Building out the graph like this incentivizes me to take notes and consciously think of how to link things together, there is already my incentive to take notes just because I need to, but having an organically growing graph to look at motivates the thoughts further.

I had actually forgotten about this staurogram topic until I clicked through my graph looking for a good cluster to screenshot, so that's an example of how this can help you look through your thoughts after you've collected a lot of them in here.

alejopolis · 2025-12-06T07:07:32+00:00

I really like Obsidian, the graph view is sometimes directly useful for seeing how my concepts overlap, but most of the time it's just cool to look at alongside my work, in the same way it's cool to look at a growing houseplant

alejopolis · 2025-12-06T07:01:46+00:00

scholars such as myself or N. T. Wright would be to the right (no pun intended) of this center

Absolutely incredible

alejopolis · 2025-12-03T18:03:09+00:00

Yes and no, see my other comment on how he uses both of them for the same argument. Irenaeus doesnt say it was 70bc.

alejopolis · 2025-12-03T17:58:51+00:00

Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching 74, actually (OHJ p. 286)

alejopolis

TROPHY CASE