What about the argument based on synagōgē to date the gospels in the second century?

[Giuseppe]

Ellegard argued for the presence of the term synagōgē in the gospels to prove that the gospels are second century products.

What has been about this argument? Was it confuted? Did it persuade the scholars?

Was it simply ignored?

[Giuseppe]

More precisely the argument is that synagōgē is used in the sense of 'building' in the gospels, whereas it is used in the sense of 'community' in the Pauline epistles.

[Secret Alias]

FWIW I have always felt the same thing especially with the opening of the gospel. Jesus allegedly descends from heaven (in the Marcionite text) and immediately enters into a synagogue. A service is apparently on going which Jesus interrupts and drives a demon out of the main speaker. I've always been partial to the opening we see from Syriac sources (a descent into Judea rather than Galilee) because it makes more sense for Jesus to ultimately end up in Jerusalem where we know a temple existed which performed sacrifices. While the sacrifices have been removed from the story I feel it is very likely that the timing of the descent was Yom Kippur. The reason being the link with Isaiah 61 which was clearly the daily reading on Yom Kippur. I've also repeatedly noted (to deaf ears) that Yom Kippur was the traditional date that "evangelists" were sent out from Jerusalem to herald the coming of the Jubilee hence the name of the Jesus story "evangel." Whatever the case it is by no means clear in my mind that the synagogue had the importance at the beginning of the Common Era to be the focal point of the Jesus narrative. If the Marcionites were "anti-Jewish" or at least presented an "anti-Judaism" message one would expect the descent again to be at the Jerusalem temple. Clearly the reason Jesus was being hunted down by the Jews was his proclamation that he would destroy or was able to destroy the temple. This was said in John at the beginning of his ministry rather than being a "misunderstanding" that arose among the Jewish enemies of Jesus (as all the synoptics have it). Why does John preserve a different beginning and a different laying out of the chronology for the crucifixion? One school of thought of course is that there were already existent "divisions" within the gospels used by the various communities. But I think the orthodox editors of the gospel were actively obscuring elements in the Marcionite gospel. The descent into Judea, the initial visit to the Jerusalem temple to declare that it would be destroyed presumably by Jesus were all elements obscured by Irenaeus (presumably). The replacement narrative put a synagogue as the focus of Jesus's announcement or initial deed because the editor, living in the second century, was looking out his window and saw Jews gather in "synagogues," calling their leaders "rabbi," using "denarii," and debating "hand washing" and the like.

[StephenGoranson]

Reportedly, there were second temple period synagogues, for example, in Migdal/Magdala, Galilee.

[Secret Alias]

But would they have had the gravitas for a extra terrestrial visit to open the gospel a new or second Torah developed around the accusation that Jesus said he would destroy the temple. Or does John preserve something closer to the original opening. Why did the orthodox permit an opening so at odds with the synoptics.

[Secret Alias]

The gospel as it is now deliberately lacks grandeur. Instead of Gone with the Wind it's an ABC after-school special.

[Secret Alias]

For me "Bethsaida" is the demon pool where Jesus naturally brought out the demon at his first miracle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pool_of_Bethesda

[Giuseppe]

Reportedly, there were second temple period synagogues, for example, in Migdal/Magdala, Galilee.

So an archaeological evidence is used against textual evidence (=the fact that in Paul and other pre-Gospel texts the term is never used to mean a building).

[andrewcriddle]

More precisely the argument is that synagōgē is used in the sense of 'building' in the gospels, whereas it is used in the sense of 'community' in the Pauline epistles.

Could you give the references in Paul's letters please ?

Andrew Criddle

[Giuseppe]

More precisely the argument is that synagōgē is used in the sense of 'building' in the gospels, whereas it is used in the sense of 'community' in the Pauline epistles.

Could you give the references in Paul's letters please ?

Andrew Criddle

I should correct my point above: the term doesn't occur at all, according to Ellegard, in Paul, in Didachē, in Hermas, in 1 Clement, in Hebrews, in Revelation.