I'm calling BS on your post. What, pray tell, are your particular qualifications to pontificate on this subject? I have a B.A. in Biblical Studies, a M.A in Theological Studies, and a Ph.D. in Theology (all earned). I have taught the historical background of the Bible on site in Israel where I lived for years, so I suppose I have a right to comment. How about you?
You are parroting old, long discredited Graf-Wellhausen theories about the origin of the New Testament that originated in the higher criticism theories of the 19th century. Yes, they are THAT dated.
Even many years ago, as I sat in graduate-level seminars (in a university that was NOT conservative), the higher-critical theories of the origin of the New Testament were recognized as specious. Do not pretend that the late-dating of the New Testament is "settled science."
Contrary to your assertions, there is every reason to believe with confidence that every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew before A.D. 70. This per the eminent New Testament scholar A. T. Robinson. His findings have withstood the judgment of history.
Why do you attempt to mislead those on this forum? Your "assured conclusions" are outdated and discredited. We have in our possession actual fragments of New Testament texts dating to the end of the 1st Century (i.e. the John Rylands Fragment), which given the fact that these are copies of earlier documents, indicate that the actual authorship was much earlier.
Your discredited views assume that the early Christians were idiots who believed made-up stories with no basis in fact or history. There is no basis for this assumption, or for the wholly specious view that the religion of Christianity revolutionized the world based upon lies.
[[I have a B.A. in Biblical Studies, a M.A in Theological Studies, and a Ph.D. in Theology (all earned). ]]
so in other words, you don’t have much experience? J/K
[[You are parroting old, long discredited Graf-Wellhausen theories about the origin of the New Testament that originated in the higher criticism theories of the 19th century. Yes, they are THAT dated.]]
Which fits the old adage that there’s nothing new under the sun
[[We have in our possession actual fragments of New Testament texts dating to the end of the 1st Century (i.e. the John Rylands Fragment), which given the fact that these are copies of earlier documents, indicate that the actual authorship was much earlier.]]
Thank you for setting the record straight- many reading Tjd’s words would not have known that information- including myself-
[[Your discredited views assume that the early Christians were idiots who believed made-up stories with no basis in fact or history.]]
While at the same time, the ones accusing Christians of being idiots and believing made up stories, are themselves heralding made up stories about the time periods of the 4 gospels- ironic actually
[[There is no basis for this assumption, or for the wholly specious view that the religion of Christianity revolutionized the world based upon lies.]]
Yet such a specious view will be pursued with vigor non-the-less, unfortunately- The anger towards Christianity and Jews is just too great to ever cede otherwise- hence the rehashing of old discredited views about the gospel time period
I have read several Biblical scholar/analysts who are strongly credentialed and knowledgeable in the field. They are very clear about the transcription errors, the edits, the editorial choices in translation, and the simple contradictions — and on the dating.
IN early Christianity, there was a wide range of beliefs, and there were numerous versions of the stories going around. They didn’t get written down for a while. It’s not as if Jesus and the Apostles had their own steno pool.