Dating Acts

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Ulan
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by Ulan »

John2 wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 6:58 pm As for me (and feel free to ignore it, as I've said it a number of times before elsewhere), I've been stuck on the idea that Acts was written c. 95 CE...
That's pretty much the standard dating. Most New Testament scholars date the text between 95 and 100. If you want to include nearly everyone, it's 80-115.
ABuddhist
Posts: 593
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by ABuddhist »

Ulan wrote: Sat Jul 30, 2022 11:24 am
John2 wrote: Fri Jul 29, 2022 6:58 pm As for me (and feel free to ignore it, as I've said it a number of times before elsewhere), I've been stuck on the idea that Acts was written c. 95 CE...
That's pretty much the standard dating. Most New Testament scholars date the text between 95 and 100. If you want to include nearly everyone, it's 80-115.
In order to prove that my asking John T for citations is not discriminatory, would you be kind enough to give to me any citation?
John2
Posts: 3873
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Dating Acts

Post by John2 »

For me it's easy to dispense with any date earlier than c. 90 CE, since I am absolutely convinced that the author of Acts (whoever they were) used Josephus' Antiquities, which were published around then. If Epaphroditus wrote Acts, I suppose I could push the date back a little, since he could have had an advanced copy (or a draft or notes) or gotten information by talking with Josephus before 90 CE.

But even if we date Acts to c. 80 CE, I don't see much difference between that or 115 CE. I was alive in 1980 and I was still alive in 2015 (and now in 2022). So in my view, the same person could have written Acts in 80 CE or 115 CE (or 122 CE). Or even earlier than 80 CE.

Let's say that Woody Guthrie was Jesus and he died in the 1930's and recorded nothing. And let's say that Bob Dylan was Epaphroditus (or whoever else wrote Acts) and he only knew about Woody Guthrie and heard his songs in the 1960's from people who had known him (like Peter and James) or people who knew people who had known him (like Paul). And Bob Dylan is still alive today. So for me, the same person could have written Acts in the 60's CE or in 122 CE. But a post-90 CE date makes the most sense to me given the apparent use of Josephus.
Last edited by John2 on Sat Jul 30, 2022 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1943
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by Charles Wilson »

Second Attempt (First attempt didn't Post for some reason):

Acts 18: 24 -26 (RSV):

[24] Now a Jew named Apol'los, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, well versed in the scriptures.
[25] He had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John.
[26] He began to speak boldly in the synagogue; but when Priscilla and Aq'uila heard him, they took him and expounded to him the way of God more accurately.

Acts 19: 1 - 6 (RSV):

[1] While Apol'los was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples.
[2] And he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said, "No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
[3] And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" They said, "Into John's baptism."
[4] And Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus."
[5] On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
[6] And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.

This a bit bizarre since the Holy Spirit is known and has been:

John 1: 2 - 3 (RSV):

[2] He was in the beginning with God;
[3] all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.

Acts 10: 38 (RSV):

[38] how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.

This isn't Benny Armanni we're talkin' about, so unless this was all kept from "Jesus" - by whom all things were created - the HS was known from the beginning. Yet, the HS is not known by certain TRUE BELIEVERS. Supposedly, the Baptism of the HS supplants the Baptism of John when the Baptism of John is barely 50-ish years old.

HUH?

"No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."

If we look at Historical Counterparts to this, the Roman Thesis appears almost immediately:
The Father: Vespasian.
The Son: Titus.
The Holy Spirit: Domitian, recipient of (to use the Medieval term...) Damnatio Memoriae. The HS is invisible with no bodily parts visible, similar to Domitian post-death Damnatio.

The Procurator of Syria, Mucianus, loves Titus and apparently begins to write of the deification of Titus. Domitian poisons Titus and appropriates the deification process. Domitian wants to hold the pen last and that dates the process to 95 - 100. After his death, the Roman Court begins the rewrite.

Mark appears no earlier than around 110 and this is the earliest Acts could appear. If the fragment of John is reliably dated to around 125, this would promote the idea that Acts is authored from around 115 to around 125 as well. The Gospels and Acts look back but not that far back.

Seems reasonable.

CW
Ulan
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by Ulan »

ABuddhist wrote: Sat Jul 30, 2022 11:39 am In order to prove that my asking John T for citations is not discriminatory, would you be kind enough to give to me any citation?
Sure. if you look into a standard introduction to the New Testament for students of theology, you get this for Udo Schnelle, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 8. edition (2013) p. 385: "As considerations for the Gospel of Luke resulted in a date around 90 AD, we can place Acts of the Apostles between 90-100 AD."
As references for this date are given (sorry for the partial references, but the book abbreviates commonly used references; for dates outside of 90-100, the numbers are mentioned following a colon):
J. Roloff, Apg, 5
G. Schille, Apg, 41
G. Schneider, Apg I, 121
A. Weiser, Apg I, 40f: 80-90
W. Schmithals, Apg, 17: 90-110
C. K. Barrett, Acts II, XLII: "late 80s or early 90s"
J. Jervell, Apg, 86: 80-90
R. v. Bendemann, Lukas, 659: "in the 90s"
C.J. Hemer, Book of Acts, 408f: 62
R. I. Pervo, Dating, 346 or Acts, 5: 115
P. Pilhofer, Das neue Testament und seine Welt, 364: around 90 for all of Luke-Acts

Spot the outlier.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 809
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by StephenGoranson »

Chrales Wilson, above, this thread:
{....}
If we look at Historical Counterparts to this, the Roman Thesis appears almost immediately:
The Father: Vespasian.
The Son: Titus.
The Holy Spirit: Domitian, recipient of (to use the Medieval term...) Damnatio Memoriae. The HS is invisible with no bodily parts visible, similar to Domitian post-death Damnatio.

The Procurator of Syria, Mucianus, loves Titus and apparently begins to write of the deification of Titus. Domitian poisons Titus and appropriates the deification process. Domitian wants to hold the pen last and that dates the process to 95 - 100. After his death, the Roman Court begins the rewrite.

Mark appears no earlier than around 110 and this is the earliest Acts could appear. If the fragment of John is reliably dated to around 125, this would promote the idea that Acts is authored from around 115 to around 125 as well. The Gospels and Acts look back but not that far back.

Seems reasonable."
***
[SG]: Does not seem reasonable, nor plausible, to me. FYI
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1943
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by Charles Wilson »

That's alright, SG.
I ask only that you consider the material. You'll note that I mention Mark and the year 110. Why?
The Gospels tell a somewhat different History than Acts. Why?

Tell us your History here, plz.
'N who was Verginius Rufus and what does he have to do with the Empty Tomb Stories?

Best,

CW
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1392
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Dating Acts

Post by John T »

John2 wrote: Sat Jul 30, 2022 12:57 pm For me it's easy to dispense with any date earlier than c. 90 CE, since I am absolutely convinced that the author of Acts (whoever they were) used Josephus' Antiquities, which were published around then. If Epaphroditus wrote Acts, I suppose I could push the date back a little, since he could have had an advanced copy (or a draft or notes) or gotten information by talking with Josephus before 90 CE.
That's fine. We have now gone from 250 CE to 90 CE.

Now, let's see how much further we can go back without stretching credulity.
User avatar
Sinouhe
Posts: 240
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2021 1:12 pm

Re: Dating Acts

Post by Sinouhe »

John T wrote: Sat Jul 30, 2022 6:55 am
schillingklaus wrote: Sat Jul 30, 2022 5:59 am Hoistorical names/places.events can be painlessly forged and faked at any later point.
That is; everything the mythicists don't like in the Books of Acts was forged.
You mean historicists right ?
0CD18D12-0F25-40E0-B550-8248FA333239.jpeg
0CD18D12-0F25-40E0-B550-8248FA333239.jpeg (299.23 KiB) Viewed 221 times
https://www.westarinstitute.org/seminar ... e-apostles
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3959
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Dating Acts

Post by Bernard Muller »

http://historical-jesus.info/75.html
Did the author of 'Acts' knew about Paul's epistles, as the Westar Acts Seminar contends?

http://historical-jesus.info/76.html
Arguments against "Luke" knowing Paul's epistles and a late dating of 'Acts'

Cordially, Bernard
Post Reply