On dating the Gospels late e.g. 120CE

[Kapyong]

Gday Blood,

you don't have Paul and the pseudo-Pauls"

Yes I do. The Apostolikon is the Pauline epistles and pseudo-Paul are the Pastorals which I have in the list.

Firstly, let's by clear on terminology, here is what I call it :

Paulines :
•Galatians
•I Corinthians
•II Corinthians
•Romans
•I Thessalonians
•Philemon
•Philippians

Pseudo-Paul
•II Thessalonians
•Ephesians (which Marcion called Laodiceans)
•Colossians

Pastorals
•Titus
•I Timothy
•II Timothy

In this classification, the Apostolikon is the 10 letters of the Paulines and the pseudo-Paulines, but not the Pastorals.

Don't forget the Catholic epistles
•James
•1,2,3 John
•Jude
•1&2 Peter

Now let's be clear - you're arguing that the Marcionites wrote the Apostolikon around the 120s ?
And that it was later seen as canonical by Paul; and edited by the later church to suit ? After Luke/Acts was written ?

1. So how do you explain the difference between Paul and the pseudo-Pauls ?
Scholars usually list these as NOT by Paul :
•II Thessalonians
•Ephesians (which Marcion called Laodiceans)
•Colossians

2. How do you explain the silence in Paul of the Gospel stories and sayings ?


Now I understand why so many of your letters are late in your list - because of your late dating of the Paulines - that pushes other writings back e.g. 1 Clement which knows Paul well.

Well, we have something in common - you put Paul late, I put the Gospels late. I wonder if we can find a compromise

Kapyong

[theomise]

Here's the rough model I currently operate under:


Death of Tiberius to death of Nero (37-68)
- various Jewish-Christian apocrypha
- 'authentic core' of Pauline letters (?)

Death of Nero to death of Trajan (68-117)
- Josephus
- Revelation
- Didache
- Hebrews, Colossians, Ephesians
- 1 Clement
- James
- Shepherd of Hermas
- Barnabas
- 'authentic core' of Gospel of Mark*

Death of Trajan to death of Pius(117-161)
- 'authentic core' of Ignatius
- Polycarp
- Papias
- Marcion
- Pastoral Epistles
- 1 John, 1 Peter, Jude
- early apologetic works
- proto-Ebionite redaction of Josephus
- various components of what will become the canonical gospels are written - a portion of gJohn, multiple portions of gMatt, geneologies, etc.
- various non-canonical (but stylistically orthodox) gospels are written - Gospel of Peter, Infancy Gospel of James, Epistula Apostolorum, Apocalypse of Peter, Gospel of Thomas
- first tiny manuscript fragments palaeographically date from this period (e.g., P52)

Death of Pius to death of Aurelius (161-180)
- the first catholic versions of the Pauline letters are put together (interpolated with verses from Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, etc)
- the first drafts of the four canonical gospels are put together (doctrinal content drawn from the works of Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, etc)
- first draft of Acts of the Apostles is written
- Justin Martyr, Tatian, Irenaeus
- c.170s the orthodox church establishment for the first time publishes (i.e., circulates widely & openly) its (initial) versions of these Epistles, Gospels and Acts
- first lengthy manuscript fragments palaeographically date from this period (e.g., P46)

Death of Aurelius to First Council of Nicaea (180-325)
- the orthodox NT continues to undergo extensive revision
- many lengthy manuscript fragments palaeographically date from this period
- the surviving fragments tell us a lot about what was finalized at an early stage, but very little about what was still in flux, since most heterodox content was later destroyed or 'corrected' as a matter of policy.

c.325 - NT reaches (approximate) maturity as represented by Codex Sinaiticus & Codex Vaticanus.

----
* I generally assume doctrinal content originates in treatise or "epistle" form, and is only later interpolated into narrative structures. In a time when literacy in general is rare, (a) the ability to originate theological tracts is very rare, and (b) the ability to compose compelling written narratives is very rare, thus (c) the ability to do both is extremely rare indeed. Hence, I reckon that doctrinal content embedded in a narrative form did not originate there, but was either copied there by the storyteller from a pre-existing doctrinal source, or later interpolated there by a theologically-savvy editor.

[Kapyong]

Gday,

150-170 Hebrews
150-170 1 Clement (same author as Hebrews)
150-170 Barnabas

That seems very late.

You've stated that Hebrews must be early since there's little to no awareness of an "historical" Jesus ... but as I demonstrated above, this is not relevant, since only 2 of the 14 supposedly second century epistles mention the historical Jesus, and those are only brief one-line passages paraphrasing the gospels.

I point out that Hebrews has little about Jesus, in common with many other epistles as you note, but the reason I date it early is like Carrier - it assumes Temple sacrifice is still going on - no mention of the Temple Sacrifice Cult ending. This places it before 70CE. Carrier says 66.

I well note all the epistles have little about Jesus, so I date all the epistles before the Gospels - from 66 to 130 or so. That's one of the clue that dates the Gospels late I think - all these letters that say nothing of Jesus' life when so many had opportunities to.


Kapyong
ETA : Temple Sacrifice Cult 'ending'

[Kapyong]

Gday MrMacSon,

"you don't have Paul and the pseudo-Pauls"
Yes I do. The Apostolikon is the Pauline epistles and pseudo-Paul are the Pastorals which I have in the list.

the Apostolikon is the Marcion Canon (of 6(?) Pauline epistles)

The Apostolikon was apparently ten letters of Paul - what we call authentic Paul and the Pseudo or Deutero- Paulines nowadays.


Kapyong

[The Crow]

Here's the rough model I currently operate under:


Death of Tiberius to death of Nero (37-68)
- various Jewish-Christian apocrypha
- 'authentic core' of Pauline letters (?)

Death of Nero to death of Trajan (68-117)
- Josephus
- Revelation
- Didache
- Hebrews, Colossians, Ephesians
- 1 Clement
- James
- Shepherd of Hermas
- Barnabas
- 'authentic core' of Gospel of Mark*

Death of Trajan to death of Pius(117-161)
- 'authentic core' of Ignatius
- Polycarp
- Papias
- Marcion
- Pastoral Epistles
- 1 John, 1 Peter, Jude
- early apologetic works
- proto-Ebionite redaction of Josephus
- various components of what will become the canonical gospels are written - a portion of gJohn, multiple portions of gMatt, geneologies, etc.
- various non-canonical (but stylistically orthodox) gospels are written - Gospel of Peter, Infancy Gospel of James, Epistula Apostolorum, Apocalypse of Peter, Gospel of Thomas
- first tiny manuscript fragments palaeographically date from this period (e.g., P52)

Death of Pius to death of Aurelius (161-180)
- the first catholic versions of the Pauline letters are put together (interpolated with verses from Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, etc)
- the first drafts of the four canonical gospels are put together (doctrinal content drawn from the works of Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, etc)
- first draft of Acts of the Apostles is written
- Justin Martyr, Tatian, Irenaeus
- c.170s the orthodox church establishment for the first time publishes (i.e., circulates widely & openly) its (initial) versions of these Epistles, Gospels and Acts
- first lengthy manuscript fragments palaeographically date from this period (e.g., P46)

Death of Aurelius to First Council of Nicaea (180-325)
- the orthodox NT continues to undergo extensive revision
- many lengthy manuscript fragments palaeographically date from this period
- the surviving fragments tell us a lot about what was finalized at an early stage, but very little about what was still in flux, since most heterodox content was later destroyed or 'corrected' as a matter of policy.

c.325 - NT reaches (approximate) maturity as represented by Codex Sinaiticus & Codex Vaticanus.

----
* I generally assume doctrinal content originates in treatise or "epistle" form, and is only later interpolated into narrative structures. In a time when literacy in general is rare, (a) the ability to originate theological tracts is very rare, and (b) the ability to compose compelling written narratives is very rare, thus (c) the ability to do both is extremely rare indeed. Hence, I reckon that doctrinal content embedded in a narrative form did not originate there, but was either copied there by the storyteller from a pre-existing doctrinal source, or later interpolated there by a theologically-savvy editor.

And how exactly does a model like this help you? Not being sarcastic, would really like to know.

[Blood]

Now let's be clear - you're arguing that the Marcionites wrote the Apostolikon around the 120s ?

Yes.

And that it was later seen as canonical by Paul; and edited by the later church to suit ? After Luke/Acts was written ?

The basic idea is that the ten letters originated with the Marcion Church in the second century before Luke-Acts was written. Luke-Acts was a response to the Marcionites.

1. So how do you explain the difference between Paul and the pseudo-Pauls ?
Scholars usually list these as NOT by Paul :
•II Thessalonians
•Ephesians (which Marcion called Laodiceans)
•Colossians

None of them are by a historical Paul. There are a couple of different writers of the Apostolikon, but they both were involved with the Marcionite church.

2. How do you explain the silence in Paul of the Gospel stories and sayings ?

How do you explain the silence in all the other epistles of the Gospel stories and sayings? I'd guess that the churchmen regarded the epistolary form as requiring different rules of rhetoric than the gospel form, though all of this literature was conceived as sacred scripture.

What do you think?

[theomise]

And how exactly does a model like this help you? Not being sarcastic, would really like to know.

The 'model' simply reflects my current dating estimates, based on all the evidence I know of.

I call it a 'model' because chronology-related background assumptions strongly influence how one interprets other data points and evaluates explanatory frameworks in general.

Having said that, I am very much open to revising my assumptions if the evidence demands it. This seemed like a good thread to expose such 'assumed timelines' to critical scrutiny.

[Kapyong]

Gday Neil,

If I were going to date it late I'd go for the mid 130s earliest on the strength of the Mark 13 match with the events of Hadrian's time.

I don't buy the mind-reading arguments that claim to know what the author was thinking and what he wanted to avoid. All the imagery in Mark 13 is identical with the imagery in the OT that depicts God coming to save his people and overthrowing enemy powers in the past. God left his Jerusalem temple and set up a spiritual temple in the church. The destruction of 70 was the final judgment on the Jews. Mark is symbolic and parabolic through and through. It is a mistake to select this and that bit as literal in a text like this.

That's a good point - we don't really know the author's mind at all. It's possible to have come from the 130s.

OK then, I've put the G.Mark back to the 130s, and the latest list looks like this :


30-70s Sayings and Sories of a celestial Jesus are created from (from 'visions' and the Tanakh)
50s Paul : 1Thess., 1&2 Cor., Gal. Rom. Phill, Phil. - Stories, no historical detail
66 Hebrews, mentions some Jesus Stories
80s Colossians, 1 John, James - Stories, no historical details
90s Eph., 2 Thess., 1 Peter - Stories, no historical detail
90s Didache, knows the Lord's prayer
100s Jude - says very little about Jesus
100s Barnabas, knows a few Stories about Jesus
120s 2&3 John, Preaching of Peter, Quadratus - knows some Jesus stories
120s Pastorals - little info on Jesus
110-130 Ignatius, knows some stories of Jesus
130s Proposed creation of the first Gospel G.Mark
130s? Papias' clues of written Gospels come from Eusebius
130s Clement, knows G.Mark among some sayings of Jesus
130s Apocalypse of Peter knows Mark/Matthew
140s Proposed G/Matthew and G.Luke and Acts
140s Epistles of the Apostles talks about writing Gospels
138-161 Aristides mentions an un-named singular Gospel that is 'recently preached'
130s-140s Proposed G.John
150s Justin mentions memoirs called Gospels - no names of authors
140-160 Ptolemy knows G.John by text
150-200 Acts of Peter knows a written Gospel
170 Heracleon knows G.John by text
170-200 The Treatise on the Resurrection knows a written Gospel
170s The diaTessaron has four (un-named?) Gospels
180s Irenaeus quotes four Gospels by name

Marcion is missing from this list - still not sure what to do with him.


Kapyong

[Blood]

I point out that Hebrews has little about Jesus, in common with many other epistles as you note, but the reason I date it early is like Carrier - it assumes Temple sacrifice is still going on - no mention of the Temple Sacrifice Cult. This places it before 70CE. Carrier says 66.

But that's another red herring Kapyong. You have 1 Clement dated to 80-90, and this text also discusses temple sacrifices in the present tense.

We are dealing with highly imaginative, deliberative theological literature here, not spontaneous letters home to mum. Theological literature routinely writes in present and future tense. Nor should you assume the writer of Hebrews is Jewish and has any special information on a "temple sacrifice cult." The writer never left Rome for all we know and got all of his info on the temple from the LXX.

[Kapyong]

Gday theomise,

Here's the rough model I currently operate under:

Thanks for posting your timeline, it can only help to elucidate matters by seeing different views

A couple of quick comments before I delve in -

firstly - you seem to have missed Hadrian (between Trajan and Pius) 117-138 - instead you lump him with Trajan giving a 44 year bracket :
Death of Trajan to death of Pius(117-161)

secondly - emperors reigns are a good bracket, but can you give more specific dating on some items? e.g. 1 Clement, Hebrews, Paul, deutero-Paul, gospels especially.


Kapyong