Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 18, 2025, 11:14 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Historical Reliability of the New Testament
RE: The Historical Reliability of the New Testament
(May 23, 2015 at 8:47 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Ah, but Nestor, I'm not buying into your assertion that the authors used Jesus as their mouthpiece.

However, let's pursue this for a moment. You've read the thread and know my positions, but I need to know yours.

1. Who are the authors of the gospels?
2. When were they written approximately?
3. What was their motivation for writing?
Mark - Unknown, 65 - 75 AD
Matthew - Unknown, 75 - 90 AD
Luke - Possibly someone named Luke who knew Paul, 75 - 90 AD
John - Someone in the "Johannine community," a network of churches in Asia Minor, 90 - 100 AD

I usually go with a dating that is somewhere in the middle of conservative and liberal scholars, as that seems to be a safe bet considering the arguments for and against earlier or later dates.

While all of the questions you posed admit of only speculative guesses, determining motivation is probably the most uncertain, but I see the purpose of the Gospels as primarily setting forth the theological ideas circulating amongst the early churches, with an eye to the virtuous life as embodied by the ideal godly man, whom they believed was exemplified by Jesus. Like myths that came before them, they use allegories and miraculous signs to convey their beliefs about the relation between man and deity, with a sort of Herodotean view of history, employing a narrative structure as a means to express their conceptions of truth in a manner that the average first-century listener will remember when the story is being read in front of a private audience.

I should also note that Mark is almost certainly the earliest, as all of the other Gospels (with the greatest exception in John) adhere to a similar format and often expound on ideas in that gospel, Matthew and Luke borrowing entire sections as well as mirroring each other to a substantial degree that one must have either been correcting the other's work (such as in placement or ordering of events and sayings) or they were both using an earlier common source (the Q hypothesis).
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: The Historical Reliability of the New Testament - by Mudhammam - May 23, 2015 at 10:59 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Did Jesus call the Old Testament God the Devil, a Murderer and the Father of Lies? dude1 51 11654 November 6, 2018 at 12:46 pm
Last Post: Angrboda
  Old Testament Prophecy Proof of Jesus Nihilist Virus 45 8527 August 12, 2016 at 12:50 pm
Last Post: Nihilist Virus
  The Immorality of God - Slavery in the Old Testament athrock 307 50570 January 31, 2016 at 5:03 pm
Last Post: Aegon
  Richard Dawkins and the God of the Old Testament Randy Carson 69 19915 October 8, 2015 at 10:51 pm
Last Post: orangedude
  The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament Whateverist 66 13619 May 24, 2015 at 6:59 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The Question of the Greek New Testament Rhondazvous 130 28254 May 19, 2015 at 8:13 am
Last Post: Aractus
  Historical Easter Question for Minimalist thesummerqueen 26 8996 April 5, 2015 at 3:47 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  New Testament arguments urlawyer 185 32800 March 24, 2015 at 5:26 pm
Last Post: The Reality Salesman01
  Reliability of the creation account robvalue 129 17390 January 20, 2015 at 3:48 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Jews and the old testament Vivalarevolution 40 8827 October 21, 2014 at 5:55 am
Last Post: Vivalarevolution



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)