By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Slimebeast on 11 April 2013
Edit Thread
Mazty said:
Slimebeast said:

Where on earth did you read that nonsense?

The New Testament

The following table gives the most widely accepted dates for the composition of the New Testament books, together with the earliest preserved fragment for each text.

Book Dates determined by scholars Earliest Known Fragment
Gospel of Matthew 60-85 CE[10] 𝔓104 (150–200 CE)
Gospel of Mark 60-70 CE 𝔓88 (350 CE)
Gospel of Luke 60-90 CE 𝔓4, 𝔓75 (175–250 CE)
Gospel of John 80-95 CE 𝔓52 (125–160 CE)
Acts 60-90 CE 𝔓29, 𝔓45, 𝔓48, 𝔓53, 𝔓91 (250 CE)
Romans 57–58 CE 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
Corinthians 57 CE 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
Galatians 45-55 CE 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
Ephesians 65 CE 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
Philippians 57–62 CE 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
Colossians 60 CE +[citation needed] 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
1 Thessalonians 50 CE[2] 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
2 Thessalonians 50-54 CE[11][12] 𝔓92 (300 CE)
Timothy 60-100 CE[citation needed] Codex Sinaiticus (350 CE)
Titus 60-100 CE[citation needed] 𝔓32 (200 CE)
Philemon 56 CE[citation needed] 𝔓87 (3rd century CE)
Hebrews 63-90 CE[citation needed] 𝔓46 (late 2nd century or 3rd century CE)
James 50-200 CE[citation needed] 𝔓20, 𝔓23 (early 3rd century CE)
First Peter 60-96 CE[citation needed] 𝔓72 (3rd/4th century CE)
Second Peter 60-130 CE[citation needed] 𝔓72 (3rd/4th century CE)
Epistles of John 90-110 CE[13] 𝔓9, Uncial 0232, Codex Sinaiticus (3rd/4th century CE)
Jude 66-90 CE[citation needed] 𝔓72 (3rd/4th century CE)
Revelation 68-100 CE[citation needed] 𝔓98 (150–200 CE)

As you can see, the majority of NT books were written 30-60 years after the death of Jesus, and the apostle Paul even started to write his letters to the young Christian churches around the world in less than 20 years after Jesus. About this there is no debate, science is settled on this matter.

The canon and its development - namely the question of which already existing Christian writings were seen as inspired or not is an entirely different thing. But the canonization process was quite robust long before emperor Constantine, as evident from the writings of the first Christian Church fathers around 150-200 AD that show that there was agreement about the majority of the books, but at that time there was still some dispute about a few of the books on wether they could be considered authentic and/or inspired (and for those particular books there still is dispute to this day about their authenticity).

Constantine had little, if any, influence on the canonization process.

Not sure where you got that, but it's not right:
 For many reasons scholars today believe otherwise—for example, the gospel is based on Mark, and "it seems unlikely that an eyewitness of Jesus's ministry, such as Matthew, would need to rely on others for information about it"[7]—and believe instead that it was written between about 80–90 AD by a highly educated Jew (an "Israelite", in the language of the gospel itself), intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, standing on the boundary between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values.[1]

Can you please respond to the issue we're discussing?

The thing you're quoting about the gospel of Matthew doesn't put in question anything I said. Instead it's another confirmation that the New Testament is written <50 years after the event instead of the 300 years like you ridiculously claimed.