Mark's Other Gospel

My video review of the scholarly survey of a fragment of the Gospel of Mark discovered in 1958. The Book's by Scott G. Brown.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Krapek
• Pneumatikon
• Gay
• Gospel
• Morton
• Smith
• Secret
• Gnostic
• Mar
• Saba
• Scott
• Brown

[kwgmaxamillion]

thats unreal!...5 stars!

[wkrapek]

Thanx!

[EdM021]

This would certainly clear up the mystery of "the certain young man" of Mark 14:50-51, who was seized and was about to be arrested, but his strip of linen slipped off his body in the young soldier's hand and he ran off, completely naked (gymnos).

And study John chapters 13-21 there are two men whom Jesus loved: Lazarus and the Beloved Disciple, who allegedly wrote the book of John. The words used to describe this love were "agape" & "phileo" which had sexual elements in certain contexts then.

[BNatural01]

Well done! Finally!

[RogerViklund]

Since you have no hard facts in support for your statements, it really is no more than your personal opinion. There really is no homosexual activity, or sexual for that matter, in the quotations from Secret Mark. Thats only in the eyes of some beholders.

[ElijahBenYehudah]

The Secret Gospel of Mark is an elaborate hoax, a prank concocted by a dishonest homosexualist with the means and the motive for fabricating it ; a collective of sodomites and lesbian radicals pursuing the legitimization of their homosexual lifestyle choice and the indoctrination of our nations' youth via social engineering, banked on people falling for it hook, line, and sinker. They were wrong!

The rebuttal can be viewed on my channel.

[RogerViklund]

There is no reference to granulated salt. The Clement letter reads: *For true things have been mixed with invented [things] and [the true things have] been forged so that, as indeed the saying goes, also the salt loses its savour.* The text says that the true things which the Carpocratians speaks of - not the salt - are mixed with inventions. It never says that the salt is mixed with anything and so the clue is no clue at all. (Roger Viklund)

[RogerViklund]

Accusing Smith of being mischievous, changes nothing. One needs to show that the letter is forged. You refer to the photos Elijah, but they show no clear signs of forgery. See *Reclaiming Clement s letter to Theodoros* jesusgranskad (dot) se (slash) Theodore (dot) htm

[RogerViklund]

All ten experts whom Smith consulted, and every other expert I have heard of, attest that the text looks like e typical eighteenth century handwriting. Smith labelled every book he catalogued with his name and a number. Apart from *Smith 65* we also have photos of *Smith 22*. The letter did not disappear until after 1990 and was there for more than 30 years. Apart from Smith, at least four scholars have seen the letter, i.e. David Flusser, Shlomo Pines, Guy G. Stroumsa and Quentin Quesnell,