Dating Paul and his Letters

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 7135
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:44 pm

Jax wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 6:14 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:08 pm
robert j wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:10 pm
Reliable internal time-markers for dating Paul’s letters are lacking. Paul’s story in 2 Corinthians of his escape from the ethnarch in Damascus under a King Aretas is fraught with uncertainties. Using broader time markers, one might place Paul’s letters between the restoration of Corinth in the mid-1st C BCE and the Roman-Jewish war in 66-73 CE.
Corinth was refounded in 44 BC. The mention of "Caesar's household" in Philippians 4.22, of Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions in 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, and of Illyricum in Romans 15.18-19 suggests 27 BC as a more specific terminus post quem.

I would be interested in your take on Lane's attempts to date the Pauline epistles to century I BC rather than AD.
Thank you for the plug and I hate to quibble but I believe that Achaea and Macedonia were distinct regions as far back as the middle of the 1st millennium BCE. In 27 BCE Augustus simply made Achaea a Senatorial province taking the province of Macedonia for himself. It was simply a power play where the Senate got provinces that didn't need much military support and he got the ones that needed the most military. This way Augustus had legitimate reason to directly command the bulk of the Roman military while making it look like the Senate was still relevant.

I'm happy to be shown wrong but I believe that this is correct.

Lane
Yes, the districts existed, but the full thought originated with Andrew Criddle many moons ago, and it focuses on the way in which Paul refers to Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions, with Corinth as a prominent place in Achaea in particular (refer to 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, for example), suggesting the likelihood that it was written after Augustus appears to have split southern Greece from Macedonian administrative control to (re)establish the province of Achaea with Corinth as its capital. I myself would add that this observation coheres with Paul's apparent emphasis on Roman provinces: by far most of the areas or districts that he names, if they are part of the Roman empire at all, are actually provinces in their own right during the time frame to which Paul is customarily dated: Achaea, Asia, Galatia, Hispania, Illyricum, Judea, Macedonia. Likewise, about half of the cities he mentions are provincial capitals: Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Rome, Thessalonica. Two more essentially bear the status of free cities: Athens, Philippi. The impression all of this gives me is that Paul thought in terms of Roman administrative units (especially provinces) while organizing or planning his mission.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Jax » Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:44 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:44 pm
Jax wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 6:14 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:08 pm
robert j wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:10 pm
Reliable internal time-markers for dating Paul’s letters are lacking. Paul’s story in 2 Corinthians of his escape from the ethnarch in Damascus under a King Aretas is fraught with uncertainties. Using broader time markers, one might place Paul’s letters between the restoration of Corinth in the mid-1st C BCE and the Roman-Jewish war in 66-73 CE.
Corinth was refounded in 44 BC. The mention of "Caesar's household" in Philippians 4.22, of Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions in 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, and of Illyricum in Romans 15.18-19 suggests 27 BC as a more specific terminus post quem.

I would be interested in your take on Lane's attempts to date the Pauline epistles to century I BC rather than AD.
Thank you for the plug and I hate to quibble but I believe that Achaea and Macedonia were distinct regions as far back as the middle of the 1st millennium BCE. In 27 BCE Augustus simply made Achaea a Senatorial province taking the province of Macedonia for himself. It was simply a power play where the Senate got provinces that didn't need much military support and he got the ones that needed the most military. This way Augustus had legitimate reason to directly command the bulk of the Roman military while making it look like the Senate was still relevant.

I'm happy to be shown wrong but I believe that this is correct.

Lane
Yes, the districts existed, but the full thought originated with Andrew Criddle many moons ago, and it focuses on the way in which Paul refers to Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions, with Corinth as a prominent place in Achaea in particular (refer to 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, for example), suggesting the likelihood that it was written after Augustus appears to have split southern Greece from Macedonian administrative control to (re)establish the province of Achaea with Corinth as its capital. I myself would add that this observation coheres with Paul's apparent emphasis on Roman provinces: by far most of the areas or districts that he names, if they are part of the Roman empire at all, are actually provinces in their own right during the time frame to which Paul is customarily dated: Achaea, Asia, Galatia, Hispania, Illyricum, Judea, Macedonia. Likewise, about half of the cities he mentions are provincial capitals: Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Rome, Thessalonica. Two more essentially bear the status of free cities: Athens, Philippi. The impression all of this gives me is that Paul thought in terms of Roman administrative units (especially provinces) while organizing or planning his mission.
Hi Ben, I remember when Andrew made that statement on my first post on this subject. And really, I'm not opposed to 2 Corinthians 9:1-2 thru Romans being post 27 BCE. A dating for Romans between 29 BCE (beginning of the Cantabrian wars) and 10 CE (mention of Illyricum instead of Dalmatia) is acceptable with perhaps the refinement of no later than 19 BCE as being the end of the Cantabrian wars with Romans 16 (if original to Paul) being no later than 17 BCE when Herod brought his sons back to Judea from Rome.

This still allows my model of the rest of Paul's letters being written from the reestablishment of Corinth in 44 BCE on to remain possible with the refinement of post battle of Phillipi in 42 BCE being more likely. 42 BCE to 17 BCE gives us a window of 25 years with perhaps 41 BCE thru 19 BCE being a better refinement.

I personally like 1 Thessalonians 2:2 for mention of the battle of Phillipi and really like 2 Corinthians 1:8-11 for Paul perhaps being part of Antony's Parthian campaign. And while contested, Romans 15:24 seems to work with the Cantabrian wars and Romans 16 seems to work with Herod's sons being in Rome.

I still have no clue about Galatians, and 2 Corinthians 11:33 becomes problematic the further we place Paul towards the 1st century CE, however, sign me up for 41-19 BCE.

Lane

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 7135
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:59 am

Jax wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:44 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:44 pm
Jax wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 6:14 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:08 pm
robert j wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:10 pm
Reliable internal time-markers for dating Paul’s letters are lacking. Paul’s story in 2 Corinthians of his escape from the ethnarch in Damascus under a King Aretas is fraught with uncertainties. Using broader time markers, one might place Paul’s letters between the restoration of Corinth in the mid-1st C BCE and the Roman-Jewish war in 66-73 CE.
Corinth was refounded in 44 BC. The mention of "Caesar's household" in Philippians 4.22, of Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions in 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, and of Illyricum in Romans 15.18-19 suggests 27 BC as a more specific terminus post quem.

I would be interested in your take on Lane's attempts to date the Pauline epistles to century I BC rather than AD.
Thank you for the plug and I hate to quibble but I believe that Achaea and Macedonia were distinct regions as far back as the middle of the 1st millennium BCE. In 27 BCE Augustus simply made Achaea a Senatorial province taking the province of Macedonia for himself. It was simply a power play where the Senate got provinces that didn't need much military support and he got the ones that needed the most military. This way Augustus had legitimate reason to directly command the bulk of the Roman military while making it look like the Senate was still relevant.

I'm happy to be shown wrong but I believe that this is correct.

Lane
Yes, the districts existed, but the full thought originated with Andrew Criddle many moons ago, and it focuses on the way in which Paul refers to Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions, with Corinth as a prominent place in Achaea in particular (refer to 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, for example), suggesting the likelihood that it was written after Augustus appears to have split southern Greece from Macedonian administrative control to (re)establish the province of Achaea with Corinth as its capital. I myself would add that this observation coheres with Paul's apparent emphasis on Roman provinces: by far most of the areas or districts that he names, if they are part of the Roman empire at all, are actually provinces in their own right during the time frame to which Paul is customarily dated: Achaea, Asia, Galatia, Hispania, Illyricum, Judea, Macedonia. Likewise, about half of the cities he mentions are provincial capitals: Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Rome, Thessalonica. Two more essentially bear the status of free cities: Athens, Philippi. The impression all of this gives me is that Paul thought in terms of Roman administrative units (especially provinces) while organizing or planning his mission.
Hi Ben, I remember when Andrew made that statement on my first post on this subject. And really, I'm not opposed to 2 Corinthians 9:1-2 thru Romans being post 27 BCE. A dating for Romans between 29 BCE (beginning of the Cantabrian wars) and 10 CE (mention of Illyricum instead of Dalmatia) is acceptable with perhaps the refinement of no later than 19 BCE as being the end of the Cantabrian wars with Romans 16 (if original to Paul) being no later than 17 BCE when Herod brought his sons back to Judea from Rome.
I guess I am still not sure what you are associating with AD 10 with respect to Illyricum, which the epigraphy shows existed as a provincial name until at least AD 61.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Jax » Sun Dec 01, 2019 10:26 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:59 am
Jax wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:44 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:44 pm
Jax wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 6:14 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:08 pm


Corinth was refounded in 44 BC. The mention of "Caesar's household" in Philippians 4.22, of Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions in 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, and of Illyricum in Romans 15.18-19 suggests 27 BC as a more specific terminus post quem.

I would be interested in your take on Lane's attempts to date the Pauline epistles to century I BC rather than AD.
Thank you for the plug and I hate to quibble but I believe that Achaea and Macedonia were distinct regions as far back as the middle of the 1st millennium BCE. In 27 BCE Augustus simply made Achaea a Senatorial province taking the province of Macedonia for himself. It was simply a power play where the Senate got provinces that didn't need much military support and he got the ones that needed the most military. This way Augustus had legitimate reason to directly command the bulk of the Roman military while making it look like the Senate was still relevant.

I'm happy to be shown wrong but I believe that this is correct.

Lane
Yes, the districts existed, but the full thought originated with Andrew Criddle many moons ago, and it focuses on the way in which Paul refers to Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions, with Corinth as a prominent place in Achaea in particular (refer to 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, for example), suggesting the likelihood that it was written after Augustus appears to have split southern Greece from Macedonian administrative control to (re)establish the province of Achaea with Corinth as its capital. I myself would add that this observation coheres with Paul's apparent emphasis on Roman provinces: by far most of the areas or districts that he names, if they are part of the Roman empire at all, are actually provinces in their own right during the time frame to which Paul is customarily dated: Achaea, Asia, Galatia, Hispania, Illyricum, Judea, Macedonia. Likewise, about half of the cities he mentions are provincial capitals: Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Rome, Thessalonica. Two more essentially bear the status of free cities: Athens, Philippi. The impression all of this gives me is that Paul thought in terms of Roman administrative units (especially provinces) while organizing or planning his mission.
Hi Ben, I remember when Andrew made that statement on my first post on this subject. And really, I'm not opposed to 2 Corinthians 9:1-2 thru Romans being post 27 BCE. A dating for Romans between 29 BCE (beginning of the Cantabrian wars) and 10 CE (mention of Illyricum instead of Dalmatia) is acceptable with perhaps the refinement of no later than 19 BCE as being the end of the Cantabrian wars with Romans 16 (if original to Paul) being no later than 17 BCE when Herod brought his sons back to Judea from Rome.
I guess I am still not sure what you are associating with AD 10 with respect to Illyricum, which the epigraphy shows existed as a provincial name until at least AD 61.
I seem to remember this coming up before. Could you please refresh my memory?

Lane

Joseph D. L.
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Joseph D. L. » Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:10 am

2) GMark is the earliest of our extant NT Gospel stories and was written sometime after the first Roman-Jewish War, and the author was dependent on Paul’s letters for crafting his story.
How do you know this?

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 7135
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:58 am

Jax wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 10:26 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:59 am
Jax wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:44 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:44 pm
Jax wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 6:14 am


Thank you for the plug and I hate to quibble but I believe that Achaea and Macedonia were distinct regions as far back as the middle of the 1st millennium BCE. In 27 BCE Augustus simply made Achaea a Senatorial province taking the province of Macedonia for himself. It was simply a power play where the Senate got provinces that didn't need much military support and he got the ones that needed the most military. This way Augustus had legitimate reason to directly command the bulk of the Roman military while making it look like the Senate was still relevant.

I'm happy to be shown wrong but I believe that this is correct.

Lane
Yes, the districts existed, but the full thought originated with Andrew Criddle many moons ago, and it focuses on the way in which Paul refers to Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions, with Corinth as a prominent place in Achaea in particular (refer to 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, for example), suggesting the likelihood that it was written after Augustus appears to have split southern Greece from Macedonian administrative control to (re)establish the province of Achaea with Corinth as its capital. I myself would add that this observation coheres with Paul's apparent emphasis on Roman provinces: by far most of the areas or districts that he names, if they are part of the Roman empire at all, are actually provinces in their own right during the time frame to which Paul is customarily dated: Achaea, Asia, Galatia, Hispania, Illyricum, Judea, Macedonia. Likewise, about half of the cities he mentions are provincial capitals: Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Rome, Thessalonica. Two more essentially bear the status of free cities: Athens, Philippi. The impression all of this gives me is that Paul thought in terms of Roman administrative units (especially provinces) while organizing or planning his mission.
Hi Ben, I remember when Andrew made that statement on my first post on this subject. And really, I'm not opposed to 2 Corinthians 9:1-2 thru Romans being post 27 BCE. A dating for Romans between 29 BCE (beginning of the Cantabrian wars) and 10 CE (mention of Illyricum instead of Dalmatia) is acceptable with perhaps the refinement of no later than 19 BCE as being the end of the Cantabrian wars with Romans 16 (if original to Paul) being no later than 17 BCE when Herod brought his sons back to Judea from Rome.
I guess I am still not sure what you are associating with AD 10 with respect to Illyricum, which the epigraphy shows existed as a provincial name until at least AD 61.
I seem to remember this coming up before. Could you please refresh my memory?

Lane
Sure: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3780&p=80815#p80815.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

robert j
Posts: 714
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by robert j » Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:36 pm

Joseph D. L. wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:10 am
2) GMark is the earliest of our extant NT Gospel stories and was written sometime after the first Roman-Jewish War, and the author was dependent on Paul’s letters for crafting his story.
How do you know this?
I don't know that. I set that statement as a basic assumption for my discussion in the OP because I didn't want to take-up space elaborating, and I'm not interested at this time in engaging in a further back-and-forth on those aspects of GMark.

In my studies, I have found that solution for GMark to be the strongest. YMMV.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6624
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Dec 02, 2019 9:37 pm

robert j wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:36 pm
In my studies, I have found that solution for GMark to be the strongest. YMMV.
Holy words! I agree fully.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Jax » Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:08 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:58 am
Jax wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 10:26 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:59 am
Jax wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:44 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:44 pm


Yes, the districts existed, but the full thought originated with Andrew Criddle many moons ago, and it focuses on the way in which Paul refers to Achaea and Macedonia as distinct regions, with Corinth as a prominent place in Achaea in particular (refer to 2 Corinthians 9.1-2, for example), suggesting the likelihood that it was written after Augustus appears to have split southern Greece from Macedonian administrative control to (re)establish the province of Achaea with Corinth as its capital. I myself would add that this observation coheres with Paul's apparent emphasis on Roman provinces: by far most of the areas or districts that he names, if they are part of the Roman empire at all, are actually provinces in their own right during the time frame to which Paul is customarily dated: Achaea, Asia, Galatia, Hispania, Illyricum, Judea, Macedonia. Likewise, about half of the cities he mentions are provincial capitals: Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Rome, Thessalonica. Two more essentially bear the status of free cities: Athens, Philippi. The impression all of this gives me is that Paul thought in terms of Roman administrative units (especially provinces) while organizing or planning his mission.
Hi Ben, I remember when Andrew made that statement on my first post on this subject. And really, I'm not opposed to 2 Corinthians 9:1-2 thru Romans being post 27 BCE. A dating for Romans between 29 BCE (beginning of the Cantabrian wars) and 10 CE (mention of Illyricum instead of Dalmatia) is acceptable with perhaps the refinement of no later than 19 BCE as being the end of the Cantabrian wars with Romans 16 (if original to Paul) being no later than 17 BCE when Herod brought his sons back to Judea from Rome.
I guess I am still not sure what you are associating with AD 10 with respect to Illyricum, which the epigraphy shows existed as a provincial name until at least AD 61.
I seem to remember this coming up before. Could you please refresh my memory?

Lane
Sure: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3780&p=80815#p80815.
Thank you I remember that now. Oh well, so much for that.

Joseph D. L.
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Dating Paul and his Letters

Post by Joseph D. L. » Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:26 pm

robert j wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:36 pm
Joseph D. L. wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:10 am
2) GMark is the earliest of our extant NT Gospel stories and was written sometime after the first Roman-Jewish War, and the author was dependent on Paul’s letters for crafting his story.
How do you know this?
I don't know that. I set that statement as a basic assumption for my discussion in the OP because I didn't want to take-up space elaborating, and I'm not interested at this time in engaging in a further back-and-forth on those aspects of GMark.

In my studies, I have found that solution for GMark to be the strongest. YMMV.
Your studies need work then. Not only is there no evidence for a first century Mark, there is evidence that is derived from an earlier Gospel.

Post Reply