Underseer

I'm having a friendly debate on another message board, and a fellow is insisting that there is no evidence that the Gospels were written by anyone other than those the Gospels were named for.

However, I seem to remember seeing claims otherwise around here. So, erm, what is the actual PROOF of this? Or is it just hearsay on both sides of this argument?

Also, we're arguing about WHEN the Gospels were written. He's suggesting a range of dates from 50 CE to 85 CE, which puts all the Gospels well within the lifespans of the claimed authors. Yet the dates I've seen around here tend to be much older than that. Is there proof for this?

Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Underseer

Clarification: I said CE, but I am clueless about dating systems.

He is counting 50 years from Christ's birth, not death. Not sure which one CE is.

Peter Kirby

Here's an essay: Dating Early Christian Gospels by Andrew Bernhard

best,
Peter Kirby

Underseer

Thanks. Now what about the authorship? Do I conceed that point?

Peter Kirby

To be clear, Bernhard in the essay above is arguing that "dating" the gospels, to anything more precise than a century or two, is not right.

On the question of the dating&authorship of the four gospels, Richard Carrier indicated to me a while ago that a comprehensive source from a skeptical perspective does not exist on the Internet (and may not exist in a single book either). But I can point you to a few more web resources.

Rejection of Pascal's Wager: Jesus: Sources

Steven Carr: Matthew & Mark and Luke and John.

Peter Kirby: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

For the other side: Tektonics: Dates and authorship

best,
Peter Kirby

Bernard Muller

Thank you Peter, thank you Richard.
But I put a lot of work on the dating and authorship of the gospels, and I am certainly skeptical, and it is available on the internet at:
http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/gospels.html

Best regards, Bernard

Peter Kirby

D'oh! Thanks for supplying that link Bernard! I had read that page before, just forgot.

(I will be reading your entire web site once I get a few other things taken care of. Sorry to keep you waiting.)

best,
Peter Kirby

spin

CE stands for "current era" or "common era".

Our dating system is based on a botched calculation for the birth of Jesus, so originally Jesus was thought to have been born in 1 AD, anno domini, the year of our lord. However, the birth stories make us believe that Jesus was born in the reign of Herod the Great, who died 4 years before that calculated birth of Jesus, so Jesus, if born at all, had to have been born at least five years before they say he was...

Now, this botched calculation has been used for well over a thousand years, bearing its implied dominance of xianity, which is of little interest to Jews, Muslims, Hindus or any other non-xian who has to deal with the common dating system and the slur to other religious positions implied in the naming conventions, BC = before christ.

We have a de facto dating system which is acknowledged with BCE and CE, but without the religious implications. It just means that where you once said BC you now say BCE (Before CE) and once AD but now CE, and the numbers stay the same.


spin

WinAce

I don't think there should be such a thing. If the evidence favors any particular authorship hypothesis, that should be "the skeptical perspective." Alternatively, if the evidence is unclear, there shouldn't be a single "skeptical perspective" at all, but rather various options that a skeptic could adopt.

To say otherwise is to put ideology before the facts, just like the apologists do.

However, we may do well to produce a collaborative and thorough summary of the usual arguments for and against traditional authorships, and their usual rebuttals (and shortcomings of those, if applicable). The closest I've seen to such a TalkOrigins-like resource is your EarlyChristianWritings, but there's too much apologetic BS online for any one site to debunk.

Bernard Muller

My site is not apologetic and I state my evidence (and lot of it!) front and center.
gospels internal & external evidence for dating

However, I am issuing that post in order to flag two other pages I got on the topic, one about the authorship of GLuke (a woman from Roman Philippi, if you are interested):
authorship, origin, etc. about GLuke
And GJohn authorship, at the end of that page:
GJohn original gospel
Of interest, this is the start of my mini web site on the long (around 25 years) making of GJohn, step by step:
GJohn, from original to canonical

Best regards, Bernard