Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: How Do We Know the New Testament Books Are Genuine?

  1. #11

    When Were the Gospels Written? Luke
    By Guillermo Gonzalez Published on March 6, 2021
    When Were the Gospels Written? Luke | The Stream

    The Christian faith rests on the truth of the Gospels. Liberal New Testament scholars and theologians have put that in doubt in many ways. One is by dating Luke's writing of Acts in the range 80-110 AD. In part 2 of this series I explained why the evidence shows it should (must!) be dated to 60-62 AD. This gives us confidence that legendary ideas haven't crept into the text.

    In addition, archeologists and historians have shown that Luke was a first rate historian. A.N. Sherwin-White, a leading expert on ancient Roman law, wrote, "[T]he confirmation of historicity [of Acts] is overwhelming...any attempt to reject its historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted." (Roman Society and Roman Law, p. 173).


    The Gospel of Luke and Acts — A Two-Volume Set

    There is an immediate and obvious connection between Acts and the Gospels. New Testament scholars consider the Gospel of Luke and Acts as a two-volume set. Luke wrote both books, and he addressed them to the same person, Theophilus (Luke 1:3, Acts 1:1). How much earlier did he write his Gospel?

    While we can't be certain, the apparent continuity between the end of Luke and the beginning of Acts implies only a short time interval between them. Unlike Mark and Matthew, Luke makes no mention of Jesus' post-Resurrection appearance in Galilee near the end of his Gospel. Instead he focuses on Jerusalem:

    Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high. (Luke 24:46-49).

    This parallels Acts (1:8), "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth."

    Other similarities between the end of Luke and the start of Acts (the Ascension, the return to Jerusalem) strengthen this link. If Acts was written in 60 AD, then we can reasonably conclude that the Gospel of Luke was completed about 59 AD.


    The First Epistle of Clement (1 Clement)

    Before you go thumbing through your copy of the Bible looking for it, note that 1 Clement is not one of the 27 books of the New Testament. Still, a number of early Christians in various regions did regard this letter as canonical. There was nearly unanimous agreement about its authenticity. Clement was a Christian leader in Rome writing to Christians in Corinth. He became bishop of Rome in the last decade of the first century. There is also a tradition among early church fathers that he had close personal contacts with Peter and Paul. Most scholars have dated the writing of 1 Clement to 92-98 AD. As is the case with Acts, however, the evidence doesn't support such a late date. We'll see shortly how important this is.

    Even the liberal New Testament scholar John A.T. Robinson argued for an early date of 1 Clement in his 1976 book Redating the New Testament (full pdf here). He noted, "Not only is the author not writing as a bishop, but the office of bishop is still apparently synonymous with that of presbyter (42.41f.; 44.1,4f.; 54.2; 57.1), as in the New Testament and all the other writings we have examined." (p. 328) This would place 1 Clement prior to the 90s.

    In 1988 Fr. Thomas J. Herron completed a deeper analysis on 1 Clement. It was published in a more accessible form in 2008 (4 years after his death) as Clement and the Early Church of Rome: On the Dating of Clement's First Epistle to the Corinthians. In the first chapter Herron gives 11 lines of internal evidence for an early dating. He also lists several external evidences. I only have space to cover a couple cases.

    The first example is based on a fact that I discussed in part 2 — the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD. Not only is this event not mentioned in 1 Clement, but in 41.2, Clement writes, "Not in every place, brethren, are the continual daily sacrifices offered, or the freewill offerings, or the sin offerings or the trespass offerings, but in Jerusalem alone. And even there the offering is not made in every place, but before the sanctuary in the court of the altar; and this too through the high-priest and the aforesaid ministers." In this passage he is clearly speaking in the present tense of temple offerings in Jerusalem.

    1 Clement begins with the statement, "Owing to the sudden and repeated misfortunes and calamities which have befallen us." Earlier scholars had assumed this description referred to the persecution of Christians under Emperor Domitian in the late 90s. But, the case for this rests on very flimsy evidence. Instead, Herron (following earlier scholars) links this passage to the chaotic political situation in Rome in 69 AD, the "Year of Four Emperors." These two constraints, together, imply that 1 Clement dates from the first months of 70 AD.


    Applying 1 Clement to the Gospels

    Why even bother with 1 Clement, though? It's simple — Clement quotes from or refers to about 13 books of the New Testament (Clement of Rome's New Testament). In particular, he quotes from both Luke and Matthew, in chapters 13 and 46. Not only must these gospels predate 70 AD, but they must do so by at least a few years to allow time for their widespread distribution. This gives an upper limit of the mid-60s for their composition. This is consistent with the earlier date for Luke I quoted above.

    Can we be more specific on Mark and Matthew? And what about John? These are the topics of my next installments.



    Guillermo Gonzalez received his Ph.D. in astronomy from the University of Washington, Seattle in 1993. He has also held positions at The University of Texas at Austin, Iowa State University, Grove City College, and Ball State University. Dr. Gonzalez has published over 80 peer-reviewed research papers on topics related to astrobiology and quantitative stellar spectroscopy. He is co-author of the second edition of Observational Astronomy, a widely used undergraduate textbook. He is also co-author, with Jay W. Richards, of The Privileged Planet: How our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery.











    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to GodismyJudge For This Useful Post:

    diakonos777 (04-01-2021)

  3. #12
    Part Four

    When Were the Gospels of Matthew and Mark Written?
    By Guillermo Gonzalez Published on March 13, 2021
    When Were the Gospels of Matthew and Mark Written? | The Stream


    In part 3 of this series, I covered the dates for the composition of the Gospel of Luke. I made the case that a letter known as 1 Clement, which quotes from Luke, had to have been written before 70 AD. We also have strong evidence from Luke itself that it was written prior to 60 AD.


    Matthew

    Luke never mentions the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, which happened in 70 AD. As I remarked in both part 2 and part 3, that argues powerfully for date before 70 AD. The same goes for Matthew. This Gospel records Jesus's prophecy of the Temple's destruction, in Matthew 24:1-2. Yet, it says nothing of the prophecy's fulfillment. This means even more in view of Matthew's fondness for noting fulfilled prophecy. A post-70 AD date would also make the statement in 24:20 unneeded: "Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a sabbath." Why exhort the Christians to pray if the event already took place?

    That much is clear enough, but there's more.

    Today, nearly all New Testament scholars believe Mark was written before Matthew. The early church fathers differed. They all believed Matthew was written first. Eusebius, the early church historian, said Matthew was written in 41 AD. The church fathers also said it was originally written in Aramaic or Hebrew. These claims remain controversial today. If there was originally a Hebrew version of Matthew and it was written prior to Mark, then it might even date to the 30's. It's controversial, though, so I won't suggest we base the dating of Matthew on that. Keep in mind, though, that the dates scholars quote for Matthew are for the Greek version (the only version we have).

    There are additional clues. Matthew's Gospel is much more focused on Jewish than Gentile Christians. This tends to place it earlier in the first century, given the initial growth of the Church among the Jews. Matthew doesn't obviously cite Paul's letters, which must have been completed prior to Paul's execution in Rome around 64 AD.

    One final observation about Matthew. He claims to have been an eyewitness to the life of Jesus. Why would Matthew wait decades to write his gospel, and quote from the second hand report of Mark, when he had heard Jesus speaking himself? Taken together, this means we can tentatively assign a date range in the 40s to 50s AD.


    Mark

    We learn about a John Mark in Acts (12, 13, and 15). Luke tells us he accompanied Paul and Barnabas on their missionary journeys. Most New Testament scholars equate John Mark with Mark the evangelist and author of the gospel bearing his name. We also know from 1 Peter 5:13 that Mark was with Peter during his ministry in Rome. The early church father Papias related testimony that Mark became the interpreter of Peter and carefully wrote down his remembrances. Several other early church fathers also support this.

    Scholars believe that 1 Peter was written shortly before Nero started persecuting Christians in 64 AD. Mark says nothing of Peter's martyrdom (around 65 AD) in his gospel. No book in the New Testament mentions it. We would have expected the New Testament authors — and especially Mark! — to have spoken about Peter's martyrdom, but the earliest mention (and Paul's) is in 1 Clement 5:2-4. From this, we can set an upper limit near 65 AD for the completion of Mark's Gospel.

    We can do even better, though. Luke quotes extensively from Mark. This may not be proof that Luke had access to a complete Gospel of Mark, but it's certainly the most likely explanation. So that sets an upper limit on Mark's Gospel at about 59 AD (and likely a few years earlier).

    In Acts 12:12 we learn that Peter visits the house of Mark's mother after he miraculously escapes from prison. This probably happened in about 43 AD, just before the death of King Herod Agrippa. It looks as if Peter must have been already well known to Mark and his family at this time. Therefore we can conclude Mark had begun interacting with Peter at least a few years prior. Perhaps Mark began "interpreting" Peter around 40 AD. So far, we have a date range of around 40 to 59 AD for Mark's Gospel. Note that this date range doesn't necessarily mean that Mark took 20 years to write his gospel.


    Additional Subtle Clues

    There's more. We have additional subtle clues that point to an early date for Mark. Mark refers to "the high priest" (14:53) and Pilate (15:2) without elaboration. Matthew and Luke go into detail, identifying the high priest as Caiaphas (Matt. 26:3; Luke 3:2) and Pilate as the governor (Matt. 27:11; Luke 3:1). It appears Mark felt no need to elaborate, which makes sense if his audience still has fresh memories of them. Caiaphas and Pilate each occupied their offices until 36 AD. We don't know when they died. It's not surprising that Luke would have to remind his audience about them if he wrote his gospel around 59 AD.

    We could be even more precise with the dating, but only at the cost of more complexity. James G. Crossley, co-founder of the Jesus Seminar, makes a book-length case (The Date of Mark's Gospel: Insight from the Law in Earliest Christianity) for placing Mark in the late 30s to early 40s AD. His basic argument is that the various gospel writers showed varying degrees of sensitivity to Jesus' statements about Jewish laws. The difference reflects changing attitudes toward these laws through the decades of the mid-first century. In each case, Mark is more consistent with earlier attitudes. Examples include the plucking of grain on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28), when divorce is permitted (Mark 10:1-12), and hand washing and food laws (Mark 7:1-23).

    In summary, the overall evidence places Mark early, probably near 40 AD. Matthew is harder to pin down, but the 50s seems the most likely.

    Next time, we'll cover the fourth gospel.


    Guillermo Gonzalez received his Ph.D. in astronomy from the University of Washington, Seattle in 1993. He has also held positions at The University of Texas at Austin, Iowa State University, Grove City College, and Ball State University. Dr. Gonzalez has published over 80 peer-reviewed research papers on topics related to astrobiology and quantitative stellar spectroscopy. He is co-author of the second edition of Observational Astronomy, a widely used undergraduate textbook. He is also co-author, with Jay W. Richards, of The Privileged Planet: How our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery.








    Last edited by GodismyJudge; 03-14-2021 at 09:36 AM.
    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to GodismyJudge For This Useful Post:

    diakonos777 (04-01-2021)

  5. #13
    Part 5...


    When Were the Gospels Written? The Challenge of Dating the Gospel of John
    By Guillermo Gonzalez Published on April 1, 2021
    When Were the Gospels Written? The Challenge of Dating the Gospel of John | The Stream


    Is Jesus for real? Can we believe in the resurrection? We have plenty of historical testimony, but as you would expect, plenty of challenges, too. One of the main ones over the past century or so has been, "The Gospels were written so long after Jesus' time, they're filled with fables and legends." That's not true, as I've written in previous articles on Matthew, Mark, and Luke. But what about John?

    Opinions on the Fourth Gospel cover a huge range. Skeptics have dated the it as late as 170 AD, while some scholars would put it as early as the 40s AD. (Details in this pdf.) The most popular date range is 80-100 AD. Both liberal and conservative scholars support this range.

    Now, I've argued that there's real room for confidence that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke date prior to 70 AD. I would actually place them even earlier; but there's good reason to say 70 AD is the absolute limit. Can we have the same confidence in dating the Gospel of John?


    The External Evidence

    John's Gospel is more challenging. Unlike the other three, it contains no clear chronological indicators. We have to rely on subtle arguments and external evidence. One significant example, is the papyrus fragment labeled "P52," found in Egypt and containing part of John 18:31–33, 37–38. It's been dated to the second century AD. This places the original text several decades prior, and all but eliminates the later (second century) dates from consideration.

    The early Church fathers Clement of Rome and Irenaeus both wrote that John's was the last Gospel written. This is consistent with the fact that the other Gospels evidence no knowledge of it. The letter known as 1 Clement, most likely written in early 70 AD, has no quotes in it from John. This would argue that John likely wasn't written much earlier than 70 AD.

    That sets a loose range for us, but when exactly did John write his Gospel?


    A Late Date?

    Scholars who date John late in the first century often use arguments based on the state of the Church. These include the Gospel's highly developed view of Christ, its mention of people being put out of the synagogues, and "the Jews" as a separate and hostile group.

    None of these observations, however, is unique to John, or even require late dating. John's view of Jesus' deity is similar to Paul's. Persecution of Jewish Christians in synagogues was present from the earliest days of the Church, starting with Jesus and often seen in Paul's ministry in Acts. Matthew, Acts, and several of Paul's letters refer to "the Jews" as a separate and often hostile group. So these are weak arguments.

    Some see hints that John was an old man when he wrote his Gospel. Irenaeus, Eusebius and Jerome wrote that he lived to an old age, but this doesn't mean he wrote his Gospel near the end of his life. John 21:22-23, where Jesus says to Peter, "If it is my will that [John] remain until I come, what is that to you?" suggests to some he was an old man, or even already dead (and someone else wrote this passage).

    But it could be instead that John simply wanted to dispel a rumor about himself — that he would "remain" until Jesus' return. He may have been especially motivated to do so right after the death of Peter (around 65 AD) and the increasing persecution of Christians under Nero.

    So maybe the passage does imply John was an old man. Suppose it does. By first century standards, he could have been considered an old man in the 60s AD, so it still doesn't necessarily put us in the 80s or 90s AD.


    The Pool of Bethesda and the Destruction of the Temple

    In John 5, we learn about Jesus healing a paralyzed man by the pool of Bethesda.
    Jesus asks him "Do you wish to get well?" The man answers, "Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, but while I am coming, another steps down before me." Notice what John is assuming here: that the reader knows the tradition that an angel sometimes stirs the waters, and when this happens, the first one in is healed.

    Furthermore, John 5:2 describes the pool in Jerusalem as having five porticos and located near the sheep gate by the Temple. Archaeologists have confirmed those details. This supports the reliability of John's account by showing his familiarity with Jerusalem.

    I believe this passage also helps set an upper limit of 70 AD for his writing of the Gospel, and not just because of what he expected his readers to know at the time. John 5:2 describes the sheep gate in the present tense, even though the sheep gate was wiped out when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and possibly the pools were buried then as well.

    Does this mean they were still there when he wrote? Opinions vary. Some New Testament scholars note that here John could be using the "historical present," where he is recalling a past event that he was witness to using the present tense.

    Daniel Wallace, however, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary and arguably the world's chief scholar of New Testament documents, disagrees. He argues forcefully that John 5:2 is simply present tense, not historical present. He concludes that scholars "would do well to not neglect what seems to be the obvious indication as to the time of writing of this Gospel."

    Furthermore
    , John makes no mention of the destruction of the Jerusalem and the Temple, which happened in AD 70. This could mean he wrote before it happened. W. Hall Harris III, also professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, thinks so. He writes, "But of all the NT writings with the exception of Hebrews and Revelation, the Fourth Gospel is the most likely to contain an allusion to the fall of Jerusalem. The focus of the gospel is on the rejection of Messiah by 'his own' (John 1:11). The visitation and rejection must mean divine judgment."

    Harris has more to say on the subject: "The strong Palestinian influence throughout the gospel also suggests an early date. After John left for Ephesus and lived there for many years, such details would tend to fade and blur in memory."


    Peter's Martyrdom

    Young's Literal Translation of John 21:19 reads, "And this he said, signifying by what death he shall glorify God." Here, Jesus was speaking about Peter's martyrdom as if it were yet future. Jimmy Akin argues in The Bible is a Catholic Book, "It appears translators have so long assumed that John's Gospel was late that they've missed the fact the text indicates it was written before Peter's death around 66 AD. That would allow us to propose a date around 65 AD for the Gospel of John."


    The Final Verdict

    So, what does all this mean?
    Even if we concede that the Gospel of John was written as late as 80-100 AD, there's no reason to doubt John wrote it. If He was about 20 years old at Jesus's crucifixion near 30 AD, then he would have been about 70 years old in 80 AD. That's old for a man living in the first century but hardly unheard of.

    Yet I find no compelling arguments in favor of a late first century date for John's Gospel. In contrast, a few moderately strong arguments favor a pre-70 AD date. Admittedly, the evidence doesn't permit us to be as firm on this as we were with Acts and the first three Gospels. But an early date is certainly defensible.

    Either way,
    there's no need to jump to skeptics' conclusion that the Gospel is filled with legend and fables. John was, as he wrote at the end of the book, "The disciple who is bearing witness to these things, and who has written these things."



    Guillermo Gonzalez received his Ph.D. in astronomy from the University of Washington, Seattle in 1993. He has also held positions at The University of Texas at Austin, Iowa State University, Grove City College, and Ball State University. Dr. Gonzalez has published over 80 peer-reviewed research papers on topics related to astrobiology and quantitative stellar spectroscopy. He is co-author of the second edition of Observational Astronomy, a widely used undergraduate textbook. He is also co-author, with Jay W. Richards, of The Privileged Planet: How our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery.










    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to GodismyJudge For This Useful Post:

    diakonos777 (04-01-2021)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Has your Kia Forte warranty expired? Get a fast online quote from CarWarrantyUS today. Enjoy the open road and leave the repairs to us.