Replies

Sorry, redleghunter,

That last part should have been for dartuser. This part:

>>>The first one I recognize is FF Bruce, who certainly did not espouse what you are claiming.<<<

LOL! You do recall making that rebuttal to my claim in your post #159, don’t you? Read the first chapter in this commentary by Bruce:

http://www.full-proof.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/F.F.-Bruce-Revelation-excerpt-from-NIBC.pdf

Philip

That's ok, I am enjoying reading the bios on the theologians you selected to stake your early claim. Next in the hopper is Firmin Abauzit from your list. The dude did not even think Revelation should be in the canon:

Little remains of the labours of this intellectual giant, his heirs having, it is said, destroyed the papers that came into their possession, because their own religious opinions were different. A few theological, archaeological, and astronomical articles from his pen appeared in the Journal Helvetique and elsewhere, and he contributed several papers to Rousseau's Dictionnaire de musique (1767). He wrote a work throwing doubt on the canonical authority of the Apocalypse, which called forth a reply from Dr Leonard Twells, and was published in Denis Diderot's Encyclopédie.[1] He also edited and made valuable additions to Jacob Spon's Histoire de la republique de Geneve. A collection of his writings was published at Geneva in 1770 (Oeuvres de feu M. Abauzit), and another at London in 1773 (Oeuvres diverses de M. Abauzit).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmin_Abauzit

The next in your series would be a hero for our Hebrew Roots FRiends. Charles Cutler Torrey seems to have rewritten a good portion of the Bible of sorts.

Charles Cutler Torrey, (born Dec. 20, 1863, East Hardwick, Vt., U.S.—died Nov. 12, 1956, Chicago), U.S. Semitic scholar who held independent and stimulating views on certain biblical problems. Torrey studied at Bowdoin (Maine) College and Andover (Mass.) Theological Seminary and in Europe. He taught Semitic languages at Andover (1892–1900) and Yale (1900–32), and was founder and first director (1900–01) of the American School of Archaeology (later renamed the American School of Oriental Research) at Jerusalem. Torrey’s Islāmic studies are represented by The Mohammedan Conquest of Egypt and North Africa (1901), based on the Arabic work of Ibn ʿAbd al-Hakam, of which he subsequently published an edition (1922), and by The Jewish Foundation of Islam (1933). He offered a fresh critical appraisal and rearrangement of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah in The Composition and Historical Value of Ezra-Nehemiah (1896), which was followed up by his Ezra Studies (1910) and by The Chronicler’s History of Israel (1954). In The Second Isaiah: A New Interpretation (1928), he argued that Isa. 34–35 and 40–66 should be dated c. 400 bc. His Pseudo-Ezekiel and the Original Prophecy (1930) presents his theory that the canonical book of Ezekiel is a revision of a 3rd-century pseudepigraphon. In The Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels (1912), The Four Gospels: A New Translation (1933), and Our Translated Gospels (1936), Torrey held that the four Gospels were Greek translations from Aramaic originals. The posthumous Apocalypse of John (1958) argues that Revelation was a translation of an Aramaic original written in ad 68. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/600139/Charles-Cutler-Torrey

Another of your theologians seems to be a bit more 'dispensational' in his thinking of the Hebrew people as a nation. This from Bishop Thomas Newton:

The preservation of the Jews is really one of the most signal and illustrious acts of divine Providence... and what but a supernatural power could have preserved them in such a manner as none other nation upon earth hath been preserved. Nor is the providence of God less remarkable in the destruction of their enemies, than in their preservation... We see that the great empires, which in their turn subdued and oppressed the people of God, are all come to ruin... And if such hath been the fatal end of the enemies and oppressors of the Jews, let it serve as a warning to all those, who at any time or upon any occasion are for raising a clamor and persecution against them.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Newton

The saga of German liberal theologians you listed continues. My advice is repost the list without German names from the 19th and early 20th century just to be on the safe side. Here is Ferdinand Christian Baur, who like many liberal Tübingen theologians believed the apostles were not the original authors and most of the NT was written by others in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries:

The theory is further developed in a later work (1835, the year in which David Strauss' Leben Jesu was published), Über die sogenannten Pastoralbriefe. In this Baur attempts to prove that the false teachers mentioned in the Second Epistle to Timothy and Epistle to Titus are the Gnostics, particularly the Marcionites, of the 2nd century, and consequently that the Pastoral Epistles were produced in the middle of the 2nd century in opposition to Gnosticism. He next proceeded to investigate other Pauline epistles and the Acts of the Apostles in the same manner, publishing his results in 1845 under the title Paulus, der Apostel Jesu Christi, sein Leben und Wirken, seine Briefe und seine Lehre. In this he contends that only the Epistle to Galatians, First and Second Epistle to the Corinthians and Epistle to the Romans are genuinely Pauline, and that the Paul of the Acts of the Apostles is a different person from the Paul of these genuine Epistles, the author being a Paulinist who, with an eye to the different parties in the Church, is at pains to represent Peter as far as possible as a Paulinist and Paul as far as possible as a Petrinist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Christian_Baur