School of Theology and Ministry
In relation with the feeding of the Lk9: Because those are sayings “logias” only, I do not see here any relation with GMatthew, more so owing to “compiled” rather than “composed” , as shown in most copies of Eusebius’ work HC. Furthermore, the fact that “Matthew” was attributed a collection of sayings therefore emphasizing Jesus as a sage is supported by the gospel of Thomas: Matthew said to him, “You are like a wise philosopher. Irenaeus, ‘Against Heresies’, V, And he says in addition, “Now these things are credible to believers.
Gospels, dating through the combined external and internal evidence
James-Translation and Notes Oxford: Clarendon Press, Introduction The older testimonies about this book have been given already. I now present the three principal forms of it, as given by Tischendorf: The few Greek manuscripts are all late. The earliest authorities are a much abbreviated Syriac version of which the manuscript is of the sixth century, and a Latin palimpsest at Vienna of the fifth or sixth century, which has never been deciphered in full.
by Matt Slick. Dating the gospels is very important. If it can be established that the gospels were written early, say before the year A.D. 70, then we would have good reason for believing that they were written by the disciples of Jesus himself. If they were written by the disciples, then their reliability, authenticity, and accuracy are better substantiated.
Do you even know every challenge that might be offered? Historical challenges are often complicated, nuanced and detailed, and while it is nearly impossible to remember all the data related to every objection, there are four overarching principles of witness reliability appropriate to the task. I used this template to evaluate the Gospels when I was an unbelieving skeptic, and these four principles will help you assess any challenge offered against the Gospel accounts: Make Sure the Witnesses Were Present in the First Place There are times in cold case investigations when a witness emerges with a story, even though he or she was not involved in the case when it occurred.
When it comes to the Gospel accounts, we have to ask a similar question: Were the gospels written early enough to have been written by true eyewitnesses? If the accounts were written and circulated early , the possibility of an errant or deceptive inclusion is greatly reduced. Early authorship allows the accounts to be fact-checked by those who were present and could expose the accounts as a lie.
When were the Gospels written? Subscribe to our Question of the Week: It is important to understand that the dating of the Gospels and other New Testament books is at best an educated guess and at worst foolish speculation. For example, suggested dates for the writing of the Gospel of Matthew range from as early as A. This wide range of dates from scholars indicates the subjective nature of the dating process. Generally, one will find that the presuppositions of the scholars greatly influence their dating of the Gospels.
(Back to page of Answers to Questions) Question: I have been searching for an explanation of why the New Testament was written in Greek instead of Hebrew.
Did Jesus and the Apostles Speak Greek? Several sects and churches claim that Jesus Christ and the apostles only spoke Hebrew or Aramaic, and that the original monographs of the New Testament were all written in Hebrew, and later translated into Greek. They consider Greek to be a pagan language. What is the real truth of the matter? Did Jesus speak Greek? The September-October issue of Biblical Archaeology Review contains several fascinating articles which bear heavily on the questions posed for this article.
For centuries, scholars have believed — assumed — that very few Jews of the first century spoke Greek. They have believed, and taught, that ancient Judea was a “backwater” area of the Roman Empire, and the people were ignorant as a whole of the Greek language, although it is admitted that Greek was the “lingua franca” and “language of commerce” throughout the Roman Empire. Today, however, new archaeological discoveries have undermined the speculations of scholars and brought into clear light the fact that Greek was well known among the Jews, especially the priesthood, leadership class, and the merchant class.
History of the Bible
Are the New Testament Gospels Reliable? Part 1 of series: Part 11 of series: Unmasking the Jesus Seminar Posted on Monday, September 26, This post serves as a bridge between two different blog series.
Printed from Dates and Authorship of the Gospels. In French. It’s a most basic set of questions to ask: Who wrote the Gospels?
Blomberg, The Case for Christ 26 Because of the lack of original texts, it has been very difficult to date the canonical gospels as to when they were written or even when they first emerge in the historical record, as these two dates may differ. According to this scholarship, the gospels must have been written after the devastation because they refer to it. However, conservative believers maintain the early dates and assert that the destruction of the temple and Judea mentioned in the gospels constitutes “prophecy,” demonstrating Jesus’s divine powers.
The substantiation for this early, first-century range of dates, both conservative and liberal, is internal only, as there is no external evidence, whether historical or archaeological, for the existence of any gospels at that time. Nevertheless, fundamentalist Christian apologists such as Norman Geisler make misleading assertions such as that “many of the original manuscripts date from within twenty to thirty years of the events in Jesus’ life, that is, from contemporaries and eyewitnesses.
Moreover, even the latest of the accepted gospel dates are not based on evidence from the historical, literary or archaeological record, and over the centuries a more “radical” school of thought has placed the creation or emergence of the canonical gospels as we have them at a much later date, more towards the end of the second century.
Anonymous and Pseudonymous Authors Based on the dating difficulties and other problems, many scholars and researchers over the centuries have become convinced that the gospels were not written by the people to whom they are ascribed. As can be concluded from the remarks of fundamentalist Christian and biblical scholar Dr.
List of Gospels
The other two books were written by Mark and Luke, close associates of the apostles. These writers had direct access to the facts they were recording. At the time of their writing, there were still people alive who had heard Jesus speak, watched him heal people and perform miracles. So the early church readily accepted the four gospels because they agreed with what was already common knowledge about Jesus’ life.
PDF. History of the Bible – Who wrote the Bible? The Bible was written over a span of years, by 40 writers. Unlike other religious writings, the Bible reads as a factual news account of real events, places, people, and dialogue.
It’s a most basic set of questions to ask: Who wrote the Gospels? When were they written? And generally, is there any reason to suspect that they are full of fabrications? The Gospels are anonymous documents; we cannot know who wrote then. The Gospels are all late documents, written between AD, or some say even in the 2nd century AD.
The Gospels are the product, in various places, of their authors’ imaginations. We shall find in our investigation to follow that these assertions are unwarranted, and are counter to the evidence available. We assert in turn that: There are excellent reasons for maintaining the traditional ascriptions of Gospel authorship, when standard tests for such determinations are applied; There is no reason to date ANY of the Gospels later than 70 AD, although such dating may be permissible in the case of John; There is no reason to suppose that the Gospel authors took creative liberties with the events they recorded, to the point of fabrication.
We will examine and dispose of the common arguments for dating the Gospels late, and for rejecting their traditional authorship. With this, I will also offer two caveats:
Are the New Testament Gospels Reliable
Vintage Books, New York: The many documents mentioned by Dr. Pagels in this introduction are all in the Gnostic Society Library — we have added links to the specific documents where they are first mentioned in the text.
“STM takes formation – intellectual, spiritual, pastoral, and personal – very seriously. Such formation is not an end in itself, however. Indeed, the study of theology is ultimately about transformation. We want our graduates to be leaders and agents of transformation in the Church and in the.
The Authorship and Dating of the New Testament  Before we can talk about what the New Testament says, we have to justify that what it says can be trusted. We must understand as much as we can about the authors of the New Testament and when they wrote it. The authors must have clear links to the eyewitnesses or be eyewitnesses to reduce the possibility of communication mistakes.
We will learn that even in the most pessimistic, but rational, reading of the data, we come to the understanding that the authors of the New Testament are close enough to the events to be able to give an accurate picture of historical events. Much will be uncertain; but this we will know; and this is what we need in order to continue our investigation of scripture and Christian history. Much of the information we have about the authors of the New Testament comes from the church fathers, the leaders of the church in the post-apostolic age.
There is an unbroken chain of writers discussing the New Testament that goes back to soon after the Gospels were written. The writings of the church fathers are referred to as “the tradition” or as “patristic sources” in most discussions of this subject. For my purposes I will look at the most relevant information from before A.
All information from after this time either depends on earlier available sources or is suspect because we are unable to determine what the earlier sources are. Unfortunately, the questions of New Testament authorship and dating are not cut and dried. The church fathers did not have the current understanding of history and authorship. They did not use footnotes or copyright dates. They rarely list their sources.
The Gospel Dates
The Apocrypha and the Church Name and notion Etymologically, the derivation of Apocrypha is very simple, being from the Greek apokryphos, hidden, and corresponding to the neuter plural of the adjective. The use of the singular, “Apocryphon”, is both legitimate and convenient, when referring to a single work. When we would attempt to seize the literary sense attaching to the word, the task is not so easy. It has been employed in various ways by early patristic writers, who have sometimes entirely lost sight of the etymology.
Thus it has the connotation “uncanonical” with some of them. Naturally, Catholics refuse to admit such a denomination, and we employ “deuterocanonical” to designate this literature, which non-Catholics conventionally and improperly know as the “Apocrypha”.
Gospel originally meant the Christian message itself, but in the 2nd century it came to be used for the books in which the message was set out. The four canonical gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — were written between AD 70 and , and are the main source of information on the life of Jesus. All four are anonymous (the modern names were added in the 2nd century), and none were.
If it can be established that the gospels were written early, say before the year A. If they were written by the disciples, then their reliability, authenticity, and accuracy are better substantiated. Also, if they were written early, this would mean that there would not have been enough time for myth to creep into the gospel accounts since it was the eyewitnesses to Christ’s life that wrote them. Furthermore, those who were alive at the time of the events could have countered the gospel accounts; and since we have no contradictory writings to the gospels, their early authorship as well as apostolic authorship becomes even more critical.
Destruction of the temple in A. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said “As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down. This prophecy was fulfilled in A. The gold in the temple melted down between the stone walls; and the Romans took the walls apart, stone by stone, to get the gold.
Such an obvious fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy most likely would have been recorded as such by the gospel writers who were fond of mentioning fulfillment of prophecy if they had been written after A. Also, if the gospels were fabrications of mythical events, then anything to bolster the Messianic claims–such as the destruction of the temple as Jesus said–would surely have been included.
But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written before A. Similarly, this argument is important when we consider the dating of the book of Acts which was written after the gospel of Luke and by Luke himself. Acts is a history of the Christian church right after Jesus’ ascension.
Acts also fails to mention the incredibly significant events of A.