robto

I agree that the usual dates for the gospels are largely a matter of something that gets repeated so often that it is assumed to be true.

Surely you are aware of Eusebius's quotation of Papias (c. 110 AD)? This gives us evidence for Mark in the 1st century. Matthew is more problematic given what Papias has to say about it.

Surviving 2nd century documents, even if fragmentary, show that the gospels were widespread by then. (Not sure offhand which gospels this applies to besides John.)

That's about it as far as external evidence. As far as internal evidence...

That's a good point. Does the emphasis on goings-on in Jerusalem indicate that they were written before the expulsion of the Jews in 135?

Johann_Kaspar

Several sayings from "Thomas" and the little apocalypse.

judge

Why do you expect these books would be mentioned in what we have left from those men?

On what basis and at what point in their writings specifically would they have mentioned them.

Is there some specific part of theor writings, some particular point they address where you would specifically expect they would have mentioned them.

If not then this more vague expextation may not be very compelling.

Amaleq13

The range of possible dates for Papias extends from 110 to 140. His writings are typically dated to c.130.

What Papias says about Mark is as problematic as what he says about Matthew and only as reliable as his story about bloated Judas getting squished by a chariot.

At best, this gives us evidence of rumors in the late 1st or early 2nd century that two texts existed which were attributed to these two individuals.

Chris Weimer

Some of the sayings of Thomas I can agree with. Personal comparisons on certain sayings appear older than the synoptics. However, I haven't figured out a sure-fire way to date Thomas before 823 auc except by Mark, which is done by dating Jesus' death to 784 auc and working from there, but we only get that from the gospels, which brings us back to where we started. Unless you have a better way for dating the gospels?

We also have Paul and Josephus for the date of Jesus, but there's still too much controversy to say with any exactness.

RUmike

Is there any reason everyone is using the Roman calender on this thread?

Chris Weimer

Quod Romani sumus? I personally have always preferred it over the BCE/CE (slightly disguised religious symbols), and Johann Kasper's use of them allowed me to do the same. I also think I've done the math wrong. Earlier that should have been 822 auc and not 824. I think...

Chris Weimer

This might be blasphemy, but I think I agree with Yuri that the dating of P52 that early is not exactly kosher...

yalla

CW
You had better define blasphemy.
Someone recently published an article that was about the dating of P52, anybody got a link please?
IIRC the article suggested that the dating should be quite open ended and early 2C is not really justified.

hatsoff

I've tried Google, without luck. AUC?

I'm assuming it's -720 regular dating, but can anyone help out, here?