Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Salvation

But textual analysis, dating of the materials, and other methods have established the dates of those writings as noticeably later.

And the earliest versions we have date from much later — probably the third century.

Frankly, your sources have an agenda.


31 posted on 09/09/2013 8:38:59 PM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: TBP

Just remember that my sources are correct. After all — the Catholics gave you the Bible.

Good night.


32 posted on 09/09/2013 8:40:05 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: TBP

“But textual analysis, dating of the materials, and other methods have established the dates of those writings as noticeably later.

And the earliest versions we have date from much later — probably the third century.

Frankly, your sources have an agenda.”


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Those dates are from even the liberal scholars. They date it as late as they can, but they can’t date it later because the New Testament was being quoted by sources we still have today well within the 1st century and into the early parts of the 2nd, by men who were already quite old. Ignatius, for example, died between 97-115AD. Clement is dated not long after the destruction of the Temple. To claim otherwise simply isn’t credible.


36 posted on 09/09/2013 8:45:26 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson