Diogenes the Cynic

What are these previous layers, how do you identify them, how do you sate them and how does any of that contradict the fact that CANONICAL Mark dates after 70 CE?

Johann_Kaspar

I do not care about "canonical" books. I am no xian. I care about documents. Do you want to tell us that the second gospel was written all after 823? You know at least one layer added later... I have little doubt that the final editing of the second gospel was done after 823. As I have little doubt that the final editing of the first gospel (the most important one so far...) occured even later. About the different layers... only study the texts without an agenda and without the aim to find which was "first", it is not so important at all and there is no final proof. You are loosing your time.

Duke Leto

Well Matthew was probably inspired by a garbled account of the acts of Gordon Freeman as related to him by the G-Man, or perhaps a time traveling Vortigaunt.

I mean, we have to go with the most obvious explanations, right?

TomboyMom

Millions of Jews have died for refusing to accept that Jesus Christ is savior. Does that mean he isn't?

TomboyMom

If I grasp the main point of the OP, it's that if the gospels exist, they must be true, or how did we get them? And to summarize the counter-argument, this applies to many books that you do not believe to be true, such as th Koran and the book of Mormon. To Half-Life and anyone in agreement with the arguement: What is there about the New Testament that gives it any more credence than ancient books of other religious faiths? Was it written by people who actually witnessed the events? Is it corroborated by external sources, such as other books of the period? Or any other reason it should be given more credence than the Koran?

judge

Not millions , billions and maybe even trillions.

Peter Kirby

Hello,

I saw my website mentioned, and I thought I would clear something up, or at least stir the pot. I think it is a good thing that some people say it is "too traditional" and some people say it is "too liberal." That is the necessary outcome of making statements that reflect consensus without getting too loose with them as to render the information meaningless or nearly so. (e.g., putting 30-230 on the Gospel of Mark)

Sometimes the consensus and/or my sampling of it and/or my interpretation of that sampling changes. For example, the website should now say something like 70-255 for the Secret Gospel of Mark. Actually, it should say 70-1950, but I naively put an 8-bit value for the date field. This is to reflect a trend in the past decade or more away from defending the authenticity of the SGM (as a text of Clement of Alexandria), even in the circles that might have defended it.

You can always petition to have specific changes made to the website. (Petition is really the wrong word--for a long time I have actually been begging people for feedback.) You may do this privately by sending me an email at peterkirby.com or at peterkirby AT gmail.com, or as some might prefer, publicly at IIDB with the name 'Peter Kirby' in the body of the message (note: please don't put my name in the subject). I can only respond to requests for specific changes. Also, please assume that I have posted all documentation known to me with regards to dating on the website already, so there is no need to present a request for additional evidence--it may be that there is none known to me and I have made a range out of a date given in a textbook or extrapolated from multiple authorities. (This is mostly the case with some of the minor church fathers of the later second century.)

kind regards,
Peter Kirby

Chris Weimer

Peter Kirby - how have you been? Good to see you back, even if just advertising your site. Do you have a script which combs the boards for your name and/or website?

I've got some suggestions for your site - update the material! At least update the TF incorporating the new information out. Have you been checking the email lists lately?

Keep up the good work, and I hope real life is working out for you ok.

best,

Chris

Peter Kirby

Yes, I do have a script--it is the little search button at the top of the page of the IIDB forum. I look for my name whenever I feel like it.

I haven't really kept up with the lists, can you point me to the thread?

I really do want to make more regular updates to the website. I will let people know about them as they are made. Right now I am switching everything over to the new database-oriented system, and then I will be checking link validity. Then I will be updating the 'Information' sections, starting with the shortest ones. I even want to add 'Blurbs' that give a 1-paragraph executive summary for those docs that have several pages of info. (I have already made that field for the 'Blurb' in the database.)

Also, if you think you could do my job better, or that you could help me build my websites, send your proposal to peterkirby AT gmail.com. (This is a general "you".) You could be compensated up to $1,000,000. :rolling:

Finally, Chris, let me know where we stand on that project we were talking about. You can send me an email or post to your board.

kind thoughts,
Peter Kirby

Chris Weimer

Here's Ken Olsen's reply. He quotes my response, so that is really all you need.

Actually, Peter, I'll send you an email on both of those topics. I've been behind of late, but recently I've been trying to get more focused. Expect correspondance soon.

best regards,

Chris Weimer