Page 1 of 1
When were the gospels written and by whom?
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:40 am
by Christian2
Hello,
As most Christians know there is some debate about when the gospels were written who wrote them. I think the following article makes a lot of sense and I would like some opinions, pro or con.
http://www.carm.org/evidence/gospels_written.htm
Also, can any of you make a logical case for an earlier date for the Gospel of John? Most scholars say this gospel was written 85-98 AD or there abouts. I do understand that some scholars now think that this gospel was written earlier--perhaps around 55-60AD. Does an earlier date have any merit?
Also, is there any evidence that the Apostle John actually wrote the Gospel of John? He doesn't name himself in this gospel and this passage is a bit strange:
John 21:24, "This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things, and
we know that his testimony is true."
Who is "we"?
Thank you.
Re: When were the gospels written and by whom?
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:25 am
by Believer
Christian2 wrote:John 21:24, "This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true."
Who is "we"?
I think "we" is referring to the disciples that were in agreement with John.
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:43 pm
by AttentionKMartShoppers
Actually, the consensus is John wrote the fourth gospel, but the question is which one. One long dead guy speaks of John the Apostle and John the elder, and they're not sure if it's two different people, or one person from two perspectives. (C4C)
And about dating-I have no bloody clue how they do that, does anyone know how they date?
Also, why do we need an earlier date? If a skeptic is trying to drown the gospels by saying they're written so late that they're full of legend and myth...they'd have to drown every historical thing that we know about, because the height at which the bar must be raised for the Gospels to fail....is leaps and bounds above other documents. Heck, Alexander the Great was written about 500 years after his death, and nobody considers the stuff full of legend and myth (later stuff is crap though).
TO HelpMeGod
Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:16 am
by Christian2
Hi Brian,
I think "we" is referring to the disciples that were in agreement with John.
To me, it looks like someone else, like a secretary, wrote this verse. Gospel writers did use secretaries--I think Paul did once or twice. It doesn't matter. I was just curious.
In fact many of the disciples couldn't write so in order for their testimony to be put down on paper, they had to have someone else do it for him.
Thanks.
TO: AttentionKMartShoppers
Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:26 am
by Christian2
Hello AttentionKMartShoppers,
I will have to do a little research on John the Apostle and John the elder. If we have an elder John, there must be a "younger" as well.
If a skeptic is trying to drown the gospels by saying they're written so late that they're full of legend and myth...
No, that's not it. I think that it is believed that the gospels were written so soon after Jesus died that it was way too early for myth to creep into them. The myths came later--Jesus speaking as a baby, making clay birds that flew, stuff like that.
However some skeptics question whether the writers of the gospels were actual eyewitnesses. I thought that the article I cited made sense and I have read similar reports in books.
What I was really after is for someone to knock down the arguments in the article. I like to read the pros and the cons.
Thanks.
Re: When were the gospels written and by whom?
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:28 am
by BavarianWheels
Christian2 wrote:Also, is there any evidence that the Apostle John actually wrote the Gospel of John? He doesn't name himself in this gospel and this passage is a bit strange.
Socrates wrote some "books"...did he name himself as the writer of his books...yet no one disputes the books he didn't name himself.
What's the point? What matters (in the end) is the content of the book.
.
.
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:03 am
by Deborah
I read that john was written by the disciple that jesus placed with his mother (not sure how else you would explain it) Don't remember where i read it though
Re: When were the gospels written and by whom?
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:23 am
by PHIL121
Christian2 wrote:
Also, is there any evidence that the Apostle John actually wrote the Gospel of John? He doesn't name himself in this gospel and this passage is a bit strange:
John 21:24, "This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true."
Matthew 21:2 lists all who were present at the 'Breakfast by the Sea', Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathaniel,the Sons of Zebedee (James and John); and two others. One of them is obviously the author of the book.
The book of John is quite noticeably written toward Believers, as opposed to the other three Gospels. It's quite possible thatJohn wrote it as an attempt to clearup discepencies in doctrine that had arisen from the the first three Gospels.
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 11:02 am
by Christian2
To all,
Please take a look at this:
The Muratorian Canon, circa 170AD
http://www.bible-researcher.com/muratorian.html
Clip:
9) The fourth of the Gospels is that of John, [one] of the disciples. (10) To his fellow disciples and bishops, who had been urging him [to write], (11) he said, 'Fast with me from today to three days, and what (12) will be revealed to each one (13) let us tell it to one another.' In the same night it was revealed (14) to Andrew, [one] of the apostles, (15-16) that John should write down all things in his own name while all of them should review it. And so, though various (17) elements [3a] may be taught in the individual books of the Gospels, (18) nevertheless this makes no difference to the faith of believers, since by the one sovereign [3b] Spirit all things (20) have been declared in all [the Gospels]: concerning the (21) nativity, concerning the passion, concerning the resurrection, (22) concerning life with his disciples, (23) and concerning his twofold coming; (24) the first in lowliness when he was despised, which has taken place, (25) the second glorious in royal power, (26) which is still in the future. What (27) marvel is it then, if John so consistently (28) mentions these particular points also in his Epistles, (29) saying about himself, 'What we have seen with our eyes (30) and heard with our ears and our hands (31) have handled, these things we have written to you? [4] (32) For in this way he professes [himself] to be not only an eye-witness and hearer, (33) but also a writer of all the marvelous deeds of the Lord, in their order.
"On the same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should narrate all things in his own name
as they called them to mind."
They?
When his fellow-disciples and bishops entreated him, he said, "Fast ye now with me for the space of three days, and
let us recount to each other whatever may be revealed to each of us."
It was revealed to Andrew that John should narrate, but the effort looks very much to be a group effort.
If it was a group effort then that would explain this verse:
John 21:24, "This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true."
The "we" is Andrew and the other disciples who decided that John should write the Gospel of John.
Any comments?
Shalom
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 1:13 pm
by PHIL121
Interesting that a Biblical text supposedly from 170 AD would be written in Latin instead of Greek.
It certainly calls into question it's validity.
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:25 pm
by Deborah
Gospel of John was written about 110 Ad.
Testified to by Irenaeus the theologeon being a disiple of Polycarp (bishop of Smyrna) who was a disiple of John son of Zebadee and Brother of James.
John wrote the letters of 1, 2 and 3 John and while exiled he recieved Revelation from jesus while in what is now known as the cave of the Aplcalypse on Patmos.
It is said that polycarp carried Johns message to another age.
From my notes that were gathered and checked by various sources.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:48 am
by Christian2
PHIL121,
Interesting that a Biblical text supposedly from 170 AD would be written in Latin instead of Greek.
It certainly calls into question it's validity.
It is believed that the copy we have in Latin was translated from Greek.
Also called the Muratorian Fragment, after the name of the discoverer and first editor, L. A. Muratori (in the "Antiquitates italicae", III, Milan, 1740, 851 sq.), the oldest known canon or list of books of the New Testament. The manuscript containing the canon originally belonged to Bobbio and is now in the Bibliotheca Ambrosiana at Milan (Cod. J 101 sup.). Written in the eighth century, it plainly shows the uncultured Latin of that time. The fragment is of the highest importance for the history of the Biblical canon. It was written in Rome itself or in its environs about 180-200; probably the original was in Greek, from which it was translated into Latin
Source:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10642a.htm
Shalom
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2005 8:45 am
by PHIL121
Looking at little closer now, I see it is thought to have been translated from Greek.
Interesting to see the Apocalypse of Peter was excluded from the early Canon, yet, from the sound of it, the church of the Middle ages adopted alot of its imagery.