Help! Joseph of Arimathea.

[Polaris]

I did not expect him to be that educated to know that so I was going to let it slide.

I was talking to you.

I know. I was hoping it would get by because I don't feel like wasting my time going through all the old fragments.

@Phil. The book I mentioned is the only one of his that mentions Jesus and it is quite limited actually. I use Josephus for Jewish history rather than for Jesus given how little is referenced about Jesus.

[Jackalope]

I was talking to you.

I know. I was hoping it would get by because I don't feel like wasting my time going through all the old fragments.

OK.... so what have you got? Nothing? As far as I'm aware, the earliest accepted manuscripts of the canonical gospels date to c.a. 200-250CE. That's not to say that they weren't written earlier, but these are the earliest copies.

[Justtristo]

Except that Josephus did not release his first commentary on that part of history until 93/94 CE while it is said the latest Mark was written was 70 CE (it was most likely closer to 40-50 CE...much of the Bible was written prior to 67 CE). Even his commentaries on the Jewish Wars were not until 75 CE.

Plenty of critical scholars have proposed a date for the writing of the gospel of Mark to after the Bar Kochba revolt (around 140 AD).

[Polaris]

I know. I was hoping it would get by because I don't feel like wasting my time going through all the old fragments.

OK.... so what have you got? Nothing? As far as I'm aware, the earliest accepted manuscripts of the canonical gospels date to c.a. 200-250CE.

I really only accept the Gospel that the British paid 14 million dated just before the end of the 7th century as being the first since it is complete, but then again that might be too harsh since that is the first complete copy found in Europe.

Except that Josephus did not release his first commentary on that part of history until 93/94 CE while it is said the latest Mark was written was 70 CE (it was most likely closer to 40-50 CE...much of the Bible was written prior to 67 CE). Even his commentaries on the Jewish Wars were not until 75 CE.

Plenty of critical scholars have proposed a date for the writing of the gospel of Mark to after the Bar Kochba revolt (around 140 AD).

Which scholars?

[Minimalist]

7Q5 has failed to convince scholars. There is nothing NT in the DSS.

[Polaris]

7Q5 has failed to convince scholars. There is nothing NT in the DSS.

Yeah because they were a Jewish order. Interesting though are the books that made neither the Torah nor the Greek (the most "complete") Bible.

[Justtristo]

Which scholars?

Herman Detering for one, who in the article I am linking shows how the Olivet Discourse can be dated to the time of the Bar Kochba revolt. Also Robert M Price, David Trobisch and Richard Pervo would argue for a 2nd century date for a lot of the New Testament (especially Luke-Acts as we have it today).

http://www.radikalkritik.de/Mk13%20JHC.pdf

[Polaris]

Plenty of critical scholars have proposed a date for the writing of the gospel of Mark to after the Bar Kochba revolt (around 140 AD).

Which scholars?

Herman Detering for one, who in the article I am linking shows how the Olivet Discourse can be dated to the time of the Bar Kochba revolt.

http://www.radikalkritik.de/Mk13%20JHC.pdf

[/quote]

Isn't he a pastor?

Also thanks. I'll save that for a future read. I was not aware of many who favored such a late date for that book...the other books in the NT of course, they have a large number of scholars who prefer the 2nd century completion dates.

[Justtristo]

Isn't he a pastor?

Also thanks. I'll save that for a future read. I was not aware of many who favored such a late date for that book...the other books in the NT of course, they have a large number of scholars who prefer the 2nd century completion dates.

So what that he is a pastor?

You do need to evaluate somebody's position by the strength of their arguments, not wither they have the "proper qualifications" or not.


Anyway David Trobisch has argued for the compilation and editing of the whole New Testament by Polycarp. As Trobisch argues, Polycarp along with that, heavily edited the Gospel of Luke, wrote the Book of Acts , along with the Pastoral Epistles as a way of refuting the macronites.

I would subscribe to a 2nd century date for acts on the basis of a character named Tertullus who is the prosecuting lawyer hired by the Jewish high priests in Acts 24. That name is so much like that of the church father Tertullan, who was said to have been a laywer.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

If I was Christian apologist, I would say 40 CE instead of the more accurate and academic 70 CE.

You might,but not if you were honest. An apologist is simply a person who DEFENDS,which is exactly the position you have have taken in your posts. The the term is often used [incorrectly] as a pejorative,to mean someone who is ignorant, dogmatic or intellectually dishonest. (often all three)

I do not get an impression of deliberate deception from your posts. Rather,I get the impression you are unaccustomed to rational discussion and questioning of your beliefs.