His Noodly Appendage

Does anyone have a nice simple (preferably graphical) timeline of OT/NT authorship and inclusion/exclusion from the canon?

Something like earlychristianwritings, but arranged in book order.

Obviously impossible to be comprehensive, concise, accurate and definitive and not grossly oversimplified to the point of incoherence all at once... but I'll take whatever you have to offer.

A (very, very) layperson I know has asked 'when was the bible written', and I want to give them a general sense of what's involved, without drowning them in details.

S.C.Carlson

Try this site: Development of the NT Canon

gregor

Carrier also has a great summary on the II site for Metzger's work.

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...rrier/#history

However, does anyone have a reference to a similar resource for the Hebrew bible? Something past the DH, as to the content and compilation dates for scrolls separately and then combined?

driver8

Some info here:

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/septuagi.htm

A good long narrative starts here:

http://cc.usu.edu/%7Efath6/intro.htm

Roger Pearse

I did open this link, and the first thing that my eye fell on was this:

"It is indisputable that Luke dates the birth of Jesus to 6 A.D."

After which the urge to read the remainder of these 'indisputable' opinions and deductions waned somewhat.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

gregor

Mr. Pearse,
The general reference was to Carrier's summarization of Metzger, but it's no surprise that objective historical reviews would be off-putting to anyone with presuppositions.

mountainman

The Constantine Bibles circa 330 CE represent the very first
time that the new and old testaments were bound together,
by his faithful christian historian and book-binder Eusebius.

Before that time, there was some form of loose leaf reporting
service, operating underground in the Roman empire, for fear
of heretics, literary perversionists and the magical devices of
Apollonius of Tyana.

The Evil One

If you've read the paper for which that is the blurb, you will have observed that this is the conclusion after a very long evaluation of what is purported to be all the relevent arguments and evidence. Now if there's some evidence or argument that Carrier doesn't address, or if his evaluation of it is lacking in some respect, then that might actually constitute a legitimate criticism.

Not that that has anything to do with this thread. (/derail).