Jbcaptain2
Welcome!
editHello, Jbcaptain2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Agent00x (talk) 00:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
February 2024
edit
Hello, I'm Tgeorgescu. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Mark the Evangelist seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please read WP:RS/AC. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. Your original edit does not express a neutral point of view at all. In fact, it makes a blanket statement. My edit was making it more neutral, and you know that. Jbcaptain2 (talk) 06:28, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- No, I don't know that. WP:NPOV means WP:DUE, WP:GEVAL, and WP:FRINGE. Read them well in order to understand what Wikipedians mean by "neutrality". They do not mean halfway between religious fundamentalism and mainstream WP:SCHOLARSHIP.
- Please do not invent silly excuses when the mainstream academic view is that the authors of the four gospels from the New Testament are fundamentally anonymous. tgeorgescu (talk) 08:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- The anonymous claim isn't what I take issue with. What I take issue with is "other than Mark". Anonymous means that they could have been written by Mark or someone else, that they cannot tell. None of the sources you provided said that it wasn't Mark. They boiled down to "we cannot be certain that it is Mark". Stop crying "fundamentalism" when you are making a claim that the provided sources do not back up. Jbcaptain2 (talk) 11:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also pointing out the obvious: the mainstream academic view is that Mark did not write Mark, there are plenty of WP:RS WP:CITED to that extent. There are some scholars who maintain that the author could have been an otherwise unknown Mark, but an otherwise unknown Mark is not the same as Mark the Evangelist. Whoever wrote the book, it wasn't John Mark, the companion of Peter. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Read the sources. None of them said that it wasn't Mark. The possibility was still left open. Hence why I was suggesting the removal of "rather than by Mark.". None of the suggested sources exclude the possibility of it being Mark, just that they couldn't be certain. Jbcaptain2 (talk) 12:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- E.g.:
- Holman Reference Staff (2012). Holman Illustrated Bible Handbook. B&H Publishing Group. p. PT344. ISBN 978-1-4336-7833-2.
Most critical scholars deny that Mark was the author or that he wrote on the basis of Peter's recollections
- Holman Illustrated Study Bible-HCSB. B&H Publishing Group. 2006. p. 1454. ISBN 978-1-58640-277-8.
Most critical scholars deny that Mark was the author or that he wrote on the basis of Peter's recollections
- Easley, Kendell H. (2002). Holman Quicksource Guide to Understanding the Bible: A Book-By-Book Overview. B&H Publishing Group. p. PT233. ISBN 978-1-4336-7134-0.
Most critical scholars deny that Mark was the author or that he wrote on the basis of Peter's recollections
- Craig, William Lane; Lüdemann, Gerd; Copan, Paul; Tacelli, Ronald K. (2000). Jesus' Resurrection: Fact Or Figment?: A Debate Between William Lane Craig & Gerd Ludemann. InterVarsity Press. p. 43. ISBN 978-0-8308-1569-2.
I wanted to use that quotation in order to show that the results of historical scholarship can be made known to the public—especially to believers—only with difficulty. Many Christians feel threatened if they hear that most of what was written in the Bible is (in historical terms) untrue and that none of the four New Testament Gospels was written by the author listed at the top of the text.
- Holman Reference Staff (2012). Holman Illustrated Bible Handbook. B&H Publishing Group. p. PT344. ISBN 978-1-4336-7833-2.
- Quoted by tgeorgescu (talk) 12:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- E.g.:
- Read the sources. None of them said that it wasn't Mark. The possibility was still left open. Hence why I was suggesting the removal of "rather than by Mark.". None of the suggested sources exclude the possibility of it being Mark, just that they couldn't be certain. Jbcaptain2 (talk) 12:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also pointing out the obvious: the mainstream academic view is that Mark did not write Mark, there are plenty of WP:RS WP:CITED to that extent. There are some scholars who maintain that the author could have been an otherwise unknown Mark, but an otherwise unknown Mark is not the same as Mark the Evangelist. Whoever wrote the book, it wasn't John Mark, the companion of Peter. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- The anonymous claim isn't what I take issue with. What I take issue with is "other than Mark". Anonymous means that they could have been written by Mark or someone else, that they cannot tell. None of the sources you provided said that it wasn't Mark. They boiled down to "we cannot be certain that it is Mark". Stop crying "fundamentalism" when you are making a claim that the provided sources do not back up. Jbcaptain2 (talk) 11:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)