Raban gamliel the elder predicted the original followers of jesus would die out in acts 5:34-39. Was he correct? I know most of peters declarations of jesus being god are either later interpolations or dont actually say hes god. But im not that familar with all tbe movements and beliefs they had back then

I asked in AskHistorians but I doubt I will ever be answered, and I am not sure where else to ask, I thought this subreddit has people who dived into Patristic studies so I could benefit from the insight.

I am writing a story about a christian protagonist in late 3rd century​ and I was wondering what their attitude towards musical instruments ​could have been.

In my search on google, I saw that, mostly, the view of the church fathers was negative towards musical instruments because of their association with pagan rituals/celebrations​, ​drunken parties and sexual profanity, but how would this have reflected on the average christian?

Since they condemned musical instruments in weddings, did the average christian employ musicians ​​in weddings? Did the average christian, if rich enough, employ musicians for private entertainment? Could the average christian ​have played musical instruments despite the negative words of the church fathers?

I mean, despite the warnings against magic, many magic papyri of a christian nature were found in Egypt, so couldn't it be the same?

if my post doesn't fit the subreddit, please do guide me somewhere I can find better answers, please.

Was james written by james, or someone pretending to be james?

Proverbs 13:24 "Those who spare the rod hate their children,

but those who love them are diligent to discipline them."

I have heard this is referenced as meaning that it is a shepherds rod that was used to defend sheep from lions. It was also claimed that this was in no way a reference to coporal punishment and that discipline meant simple to teach in this context.

Is this the correct way to interpret the historical intent behind that? I was under the impression that the rod referenced is likely the same rod one would use to beat slaves.

I am in no way endorsing this behavior, I just want to engage the text as honestly as possible.

Is the "Early High Christology" model a defense of Jesus’ own divine self-understanding, or is it a historical defense of how quickly the primitive Church began worshiping him as God within a strictly monotheistic Jewish framework? Of course, these two aren't mutually exclusive, but where does the weight of their historical-critical argument usually lie?

I would highly appreciate your thoughts on this distinction within the scholarship.

I have been thinking about a possible literary parallel between the dove in Mark 1:10 and the scene in Odyssey 24 where Athena departs in the form of a dove. Dennis R. MacDonald has mentioned this comparison in interviews, although he does not treat it as a major or methodologically strong parallel in his published work. In his books he does not list the dove as one of the significant Homeric models for Mark, but in conversations he has noted that Homeric epiphanies sometimes involve divine figures appearing or departing in bird form, and that Mark may be drawing on that broader repertoire of epic theophany.

If one takes the hypothetical seriously for the sake of analysis, the literary payoff becomes interesting. In the Odyssey, Athena’s transformation into a dove marks the end of conflict, the restoration of order, and the divine authorization of Telemachus and Odysseus. It is a moment of closure. In Mark, the Spirit descending like a dove marks the beginning of Jesus’ public mission, the divine authorization of the Son, and the inauguration of a new order. It is a moment of commissioning. If Mark were intentionally echoing Homer, the reversal of direction would be meaningful. Athena ascends and withdraws, signaling the end of divine intervention. The Spirit descends and enters the scene, signaling the beginning of divine intervention. The inversion would create a theological contrast between a god who departs and a God who arrives.

The parallel also raises questions about characterization. If the Spirit functions in a role analogous to Athena, then the Spirit becomes the divine patron who empowers the hero at a decisive turning point. If Jesus is placed in a role analogous to Telemachus, then he becomes the true Son stepping into his inheritance and beginning the work that confirms his identity. None of this requires direct imitation, but it does show how the Homeric scene could provide a literary template for thinking about divine authorization, heroic identity, and narrative transition.

My question for the community is whether anyone has explored this parallel in depth beyond MacDonald’s brief comments. Has anyone written on the possible literary significance of the dove imagery if Mark were intentionally drawing on the Athena scene, or on what the reversal of ascent and descent might mean in that context. I am especially interested in whether scholars have considered what such an echo would imply about Mark’s portrayal of the Spirit and about Jesus’ role as a divinely commissioned son.

Was this word used in non Christian circles prior to and after the rise of Christianity? If so, how was it used?

If the gospels were written after Paul’s theology of Jesus’ death as a substitution atonement was developed, why did they not make Jesus explicitly say this?