Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Lunawalk · 05-04-2006, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Because people who claim to know who the authors were cannot support their claim with a cogent argument.
For any proposition P, anybody who says "I know P" is the one with something to prove.

I guess I believed early church legends about their origins. yet the authors of the gospels don't identify themshelfs Matthew talks about himself in the third person. So I guess they asigned names to the gospels. I guess christian origins are murky at best.

Julian · 05-04-2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunawalk

In reguards to the relations between Christians and Jews after Jesus' death. they appeared to an sect of Judism until the Jewish War. So was Acts invented to create distance between the two groups and curry favor with the Romans?

Acts is a political document designed to give clout to the apostolic tradition claims of the orthodox. Notice how Peter and Paul are getting along fine despite Galatians? Acts shows a nice, smooth and coherent start to christianity, just what the orthodox would want. When faced with forgery it is important to ask: Who stands to benefit? Now, there may be kernels of truth in Acts but it is not history.

Julian

Doug Shaver · 05-05-2006, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunawalk

I guess christian origins are murky at best.

They certainly are. That is why even people who try their level best to investigate them dispassionately can't reach a solid consensus. Before roughly 200 CE, the historical paper trail just isn't good enough to lead to theory that anyone can bank on.

Roger Pearse · 05-05-2006, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

Actually, Peter (and now Joe) post assumed dates of original authorship, not (AFAIK) dated extant copies.

This sounds like a requirement for an original author's copy with some form of date (how?) on it. However in antiquity there may never have been an original copy -- composition by dictation to slaves was common -- and no author's own manuscript of any literary text exists before the 13th century, to the best of my knowledge.

However the NT texts are to be dated, it must be done in the same manner as all other ancient texts, I would have thought.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Awmte · 05-06-2006, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

Actually, Peter (and now Joe) post assumed dates of original authorship, not (AFAIK) dated extant copies.

You're right. :redface: Man, did I ever misread... err... misinterpret... Forget it, carry on.

michael wellenberg · 05-06-2006, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

Remember that Acts is mostly likely from the earlier parts of the 2nd century.

It is though not widely accepted that Acts is from the 2nd century. What is widely accepted as far is that the author of Luke is the author of Acts as well which would put both in the 1st century.

Michael

Julian · 05-08-2006, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

It is though not widely accepted that Acts is from the 2nd century. What is widely accepted as far is that the author of Luke is the author of Acts as well which would put both in the 1st century.

Michael

It is true that the author of GLuke and Acts is probably the same person. It should mentioned that many people put GLuke and Acts in the 1st century but an early 2nd century is commonly seen, as well.

Julian

Doug Shaver · 05-09-2006, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

What is widely accepted as far is that the author of Luke is the author of Acts as well

Agreed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

which would put both in the 1st century.

Why? Are we assuming that the gospel must have been written in the first century?

michael wellenberg · 05-10-2006, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Why? Are we assuming that the gospel must have been written in the first century?

There is no decisive evidence for a 1st century origin of the gospels, you mean. When do you think they were possibly written ?

Michael

Julian · 05-10-2006, 10:13 AM

[MOD]
Remember, this thread is not for discussion. If you wish to discuss the dating of the gospels please start a new thread.

Julian
Moderator BC&H
[/MOD]

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

05-10-2006, 10:13 AM	#290
Julian Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Washington, DC (formerly Denmark) Posts: 3,789	[MOD] Remember, this thread is not for discussion. If you wish to discuss the dating of the gospels please start a new thread. Julian Moderator BC&H [/MOD]

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.