Freethought & Rationalism Archive

maryhelena · 05-30-2010, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

I have no idea how many ahistoricists go for that hypothesis. I know that Doherty's dating, last I heard, is only somewhat later than the consensus dating. My own suspicion is that the documents as we now have them are from the early second century, though an early version of Mark might go back to the late first.

This is a key point that tends to get lost in these discussions. When we are discussing the dating of texts, we are discussing the dating of the texts as we know them. The dating does not apply to possible earlier versions that we don't have access to and have no way of knowing the content therein.

Yes, and its a key point worth repeating and repeating....

Kapyong · 06-05-2010, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

And I'll ask you a question I've asked before but you haven't answered: why do so many scholars -- even atheist scholars -- believe in a HJ?

The vast majority of those scholars are Christians who work in Christian organisations, whose work and reputation depends on believing.

The rest of them just follow the others.

Kap

Toto · 06-09-2010, 09:10 PM

discussion of Justin Martyr split off here

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-09-2010, 09:10 PM	#73
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	discussion of Justin Martyr split off here

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.