(June 9, 2012 at 5:40 pm)Drich Wrote: So?
I am assuming you lead with your strongest evidence. If that is the case then may I ask Who cares what robert Price thinks in the face of
Evidence that defines the known time line of authorship?
Robert Price is only providing support for my primary reason for thinking (as many other scholars do) that 70 CE is the earliest date for the Book of Mark, because of Mark 13.
I'm curious as to why some apologists feel justified in pushing the date earlier than the one indicated by scripture.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
