Yahya Snow writes:
Oxford University Professor Mark Edwards gives historical information which proves the Trinity belief did not come from Jesus or his followers, rather it came from church philosophy (church tradition) centuries after. The belief of the 3-self Trinity is a 3 in 1 concept which teaches God is tri-personal (Father, Son, Spirit). It’s obvious the Trinity belief was unheard of by Jesus and his disciples. It’s effectively church tradition in that it’s a philosophy that culminated in the late 4th century – a philosophy to try and make sense of the collection of books church fathers 200 years after Jesus began declaring to be “inspired”. In order to try and make sense of what appeared to be contradictory writings they came up with the Trinity belief through an evolution of thought which eventually culminated in the 3-self Trinity belief in the 4th century (NOT at the council of Nicea, it was after that although this council was part of the evolution process).
Categories: Bible, Biblical scholarship, Christianity, God
Blogging Theology 
This clearly proves historically, that when Rabbi Jesus (PBUH) recited the Shema Yisrael in Mark 12: 29 he did not believe the Holy Spirit to be coequal and co-eternal with the Father in the Trinitarian formulation, but rather as John 17: 3 re-states the Father alone was regarded as the Deity. The Jewish Scribe agreed in Mark 12: 28-32 with the concept of God as announced by Jesus, which was plucked straight from the Torah. As the Jewish Scribe was a Unitarian, so was Jesus, and is obvious from the Shema. Now, even Dr William Craig Lane admitted that ”if you approach this question (of the Trinity) simply on the basis of the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament than one would not come to believe that God is a Trinity”. In other words, the Torah is clearly not Trinitarian, but Unitarian. Since Jesus only reaffirmed the concept of God as presented in the Torah, he was clearly a Unitarian. Furthermore, Jesus could have clearly, explicitly expounded on this doctrine, had it been true or necessary for Salvation. The fact that he did not, means it was unimportant at the very least.
LikeLike
By the Way, Paul, could you help Yahya Snow, improve and upgrade his website? It would be really excellent to get it to the same standard as yours!
LikeLiked by 1 person
To Paul:
Since the article where I began commenting will soon become part of page 2 of your blog,I thought it better to answer your questions here:
Where in the texts of the Gospels does the author say he is Mark,Matthew,etc.?Nowhere,so they are anonymous
If Pitre thinks Jesus in John exactly said the words in that Gospel?
By anonymous it is not meant that the author nowhere mentions himself in the text itself by name.
Many Greek and Roman writers never mention their name as the author in the text. But their name is attached to the title.
Technically speaking,anonymous means the title itself does not have the author’s name attached. One example,is the Anglo-Saxon epic poem Beowulf,it has no author’s name next to the title.
Another reason Beowulf is anonymous is that no later writer has given a name,has said,the author was a Scandinavian poet called Siegfried.
Later early Christian writers,when they gave a name,always said Mark,Matthew,Luke,John. You don’t find a text saying,we don’t know the author
LikeLike
Regarding Brant Pitre,I assume,he would say,since it is a known fact,that in ancient times,before tape recorders,readers were ok with historians paraphrasing the ideas of historical figures.As long as the basic idea was preserved.John preserves the basic ideas of Jesus,but paraphrased.
I don’t remember if it is Pitre or not,but the supreme example are the words used by Jesus in the Last Supper when he created the New Alliance.
Mark,Luke and Matthew have it and even thought Luke and Matthew copied from Mark,the words for the New Alliance are never exactly the same,essentially:This wine
is my blood,this bread is my body,of the New Alliance.
St Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23 repeats an oral tradition of the words used by Jesus regarding the New Alliance.It is also slightly different.Four different versions,but the same basic idea.
LikeLike
About the NT collection,I am not against eliminating what would be forgeries,but it is less simple.
From memory,the letters considered to be forgeries are Ephesians,Colossians,1 and 2 Timothy,and Titus.
While 2 Thessalonians is hotly disputed,50/50 for and against,,the style is like the letters universally considered to be by St Paul.
Ephesians and Colossians are similar in style,and I think scholars say 1 and 2 Timothy,Titus are similar also,but different from the authentic letters of Paul(among them 2 Corinthians).
An adjective describes things,a noun is a word (other than a pronoun)used to identify any of a class of people, places, or things.
A Gospel or biography of Jesus is a thing,not a place or person.A noun.
Gospel as a noun means a thing,being famous in a book(a noun) means either your name is in the text itself or part of the title,like “The Gospel according to Luke”.
Pitre,on page 47 of “The Case for Jesus”(2016) says:
“Even more intriguing,Origen asserts that the Gospel of Luke was written while Paul was still alive.
When Origen says that “Luke wrote….the Gospel(Greek euangelion) that was praised by Paul,”he is referring to a line from 2 Corinthians,in which Paul speaks about a companion of his who is famous in all the churches:
“With him[Titus] we are sending the brother who is famous in the Gospel among all the churches
and not only that,but he has been appointed by the churches to travel with us in this gracious work which we are carrying on,for the glory of the Lord and to show our good will”(2 Corinthians 8:18-19)
Although many English Bibles translate this line as “famous among all the churches for his preaching of the gospel,”
the original Greek is actually a noun:famous in the gospel(Greek: en to euangelio)(2 Corinthians 8:18).
Origen,a native Greek speaker,interpreted these words of Paul as a reference to the written Gospel that made Luke famous in all the churches in which his book had circulated(Eusebius,Church History 6.25.3,6.
For what it’s worth,in the late fourth century AD,Saint Jerome interpreted Paul’s words in the same way:
“Luke,a physician from Antioch,indicated in his writing that he knew Greek and that he was a follower of the apostle Paul and the companion of all his journeying;
he wrote a gospel about which the same Paul says.”We have sent with him a brother whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the churches”(2 Corinthians 8:18),(Jerome,Lives of Illustrious Men,7).”
LikeLike
the four gospels do not say who the authors are in the gospels themselves.
It is only towards the end of the 2nd century that the traditional authors names were attached to the 4 gospels.
Most scholars do not think that the disciple Matthew wrote Matthew, or the apostle John wrote John. No one knows who wrote them.
That is the consensus of critical scholarship.
LikeLike
Greetings Paul:
I was going to get to your pt about the consensus,that the Synoptics are post 70 AD,from 70-85 AD.
Pt A:Thus the Synoptics were written 2 or 3 generations after Jesus’ generation,so couldn’t have been of the generation of Mark,Matthew and Luke, and:
Pt B:Were all at first anonymous.Pt A is the technicality for saying they are really anonymous,since because of pt A,the authors couldn’t have been the real Mark,Matthew and Luke.
Pt C:Or 4 charlatans wrote them,and attributed them to people of Jesus’ generation.
Pt D:Or both pt B and C.
I forgot to add that in the authentic letter by St Paul,called Philemon,he mentions Luke as a fellow worker,and Mark,they really existed:
Philemon 1:23-24:
“Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, greets you,
as do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, Luke, my fellow workers.“
LikeLike
Where is your evidence that the apostle Matthew wrote Matthew?
LikeLike
Setting aside for a while the case for the Synoptics being pre 70 AD, I had said the Catholic church’s power has been exaggerated.
Not always,in 1076 the Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV was excommunicated by the Pope. It was a disaster for the emperor,he was forced to humiliate himself on his knees waiting for three days and three nights before the entrance gate of the castle in Canossa,where the pope was, while a blizzard raged in January 1077.
Case 1
Pope Clement V was forced to dissolve the Knights Templar in 1312 by the French king,who wanted their property,the Grand Master was burned.They were innocent,and in 2001 they discovered the Chinon Parchment(1308), by Barbara Frale, an Italian paleographer at the Vatican Secret Archives.
In it the pope absolved the last Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, and the rest of the leadership of the Knights Templar of being guilty.
Case 2
The pope was powerless to prevent the expulsion of the Jesuits from:
Portugal and Brazil in (1759), France (1764), the Two Sicilies, Malta, Parma,Spain and the Spanish Empire (1767),
and finally forced to suppress them totally in 1773.
Case 3
Pope Pius VII excommunicated Napoleon but that didn’t prevent Napoleon from capturing the pope,holding him a prisoner for several years and in exile(1808-1814).
Case 4
Henry VIII divorced and married Anne Boleyn. Henry VIII was excommunicated but the king just announced himself head of the Church of England.A new church was born.
Case 5
In 1570 Pope Pius V excommunicated Queen Elizabeth I,declaring “Elizabeth, the pretended Queen of England and the servant of crime”, to be a heretic and releasing all her subjects from any allegiance to her, even when they had “sworn oaths to her”, and excommunicating any that obeyed her orders.It didn’t work.
Case 6
In 1324 the Pope John XXII excommunicated the new elected Holy Roman Emperor Louis IV of Bavaria.The pope told his subjects to rebel against Louis IV,but Louis IV of Bavaria went to Rome,crowned himself and set up an antipope, Nicholas V.
LikeLike
Greetings Paul:
Just read:”Where is your evidence that the apostle Matthew wrote Matthew?”
First the case for the Synoptics being pre 70 AD has to be given,if the Gospel of Matthew is 80-85 AD,it can’t be by Matthew,one of the 12 disciples.
The text itself says Matthew was one of the 12 apostles in Matthew 10:1-4 and calls him “Matthew,the tax collector”.
Matthew 9:9 says “As Jesus passed on from there,he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office,and said to him,”Follow me”.”
Tax-collectors had to be literate,they wrote tax receipts,
as Brant Pitre points out on page 27(“The Case for Jesus”),even Bart Ehrman,in “Misquoting Jesus”(page 38)(2005) says:
“Throughout most of antiquity,most people could not write,there were local “readers” and “writers” who hired out their services to people who needed to
conduct business that required written texts:tax receipts,legal contracts,licenses,personal letters,and the like.”
The argument that the disciple Matthew could not have written the Gospel of Matthew because he was illiterate is not true.
LikeLike
Deuteronomy 6:4 – The Shema
“Hear O Israel, the LORD our God the LORD is one.”
– The Shema
Proof of the Trinity Error
The fact that Jesus was born under the Law and was required to observe the Law, demonstrates to us precisely WHO this passage is identifying: the God of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The Evidence
The LORD is three
While the text says that the LORD is one, Trinitarians would have it that we can also imagine a different idea into this passage, “Hear O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is three,” or, “Hear O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is three yet one.” Or, they alternatively imagine the text to be saying, “Hear O Israel, the LORD our God the LORD is one [divine nature].
We Jews worship what we know
Jesus’ God was not any different than the God of Israel. As a Jew under the Law, he was obligated to obey the Law and Jesus’ God could not be any different than the God of Israel. His God was one person and one person alone, his Father alone. If his God was one person then so was the God of Israel.
Trintiarians claim that the Jews did not know they had been worshiping a three-person-being all along until it had been revealed to them in New Testament times. However, Jesus declared the opposite. In the context of worshiping God in Jerusalem, Jesus declared that the Jews worshiped what they knew (John 4:20-22). Trinitarians are nullifying Jesus’ words for the sake of their tradition. Not only so, they fail to see the implications of Jesus’ words, WE worship what WE know. Jesus is including himself among all Jews and saying that all the nation of Israel knew what they worshiped just as he himself knew what he worshiped. Jesus knew who he worshiped as the God of Israel: his Father alone. But Jesus used the word “WE” indicating that ALL Jews knew this and not just he himself.
Yahweh OUR God
The Shema says “OUR God “not “MY God.” These words referred to the God of EVERY Israelite and that included Jesus. Jesus could not have interpreted the Shema to mean one thing while it really meant something else for the rest of the Jewish nation (even if they didn’t realize it as Trinitarians claim). He could not have interpreted the Shema to refer to one person while it actually really meant three persons for every other Jew. Such a proposition is absurd. Jesus could not have possibly interpreted the Shema to refer to only his Father, which he did, while at the same time it referred to three persons for every other Israelite. The Shema says “OUR” God.
The LORD is one single “He”
At Mark 12:28-34, Jesus and a Jewish scribe agreebly conclude that the Shema is the foremost command. They also agree that the words “the LORD is one” mean “He is one and there is no other but He. In this account, Jesus shows us that the Shema means “the LORD is one HE.” So we know for certain that Shema means that the LORD is one HE, one WHO, while Trinitarians read the notion, “the LORD is one WHAT” into the text ignoring and nullifying the testimony of Jesus concerning the meaning of the Shema.
Even further, we know with absolute certainly how Jesus identified that one single HE of the Shema. He did not identify this HE as a Triune being. The way Jesus observed the Shema was to recognize and serve his Father alone as the one God of Israel.
Reasonable people further understand that the word “HE” or “HIM” are words used to refer to a single person. That is the very purpose of using singular personal pronouns. Hence, at Mark 12:28-34, Jesus’ witness shows us that the Shema is referring to one person. And the proof is in the pudding when we honestly regard how Jesus obeyed the Shema. He observed the Shema command by recognizing and serving only one person as the God of Israel, his Father alone.
The God of Jesus – His Father Alone
Throughout the New Testament, we find that the God of Jesus was the Father alone. His God was not a Triune being; his God was only his Father.
Jesus’ God was one person: his Father. Jesus’ God was a one person being. A one-person God is not the same God as a three-person God and for that reason we cannot say that Jesus’ God was a three-person-being. A three-person-God is not the same thing as a one-person-God. Trinitarians testify themselves that if you do not serve a three-person-God as they do, they you serve another God, a different God.
Now since Jesus was born under the Law, and required to observe the Law, he was therefore required to observe the Shema, “Hear O Israel, Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one. You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength.” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5). Simply ask yourself how Jesus was expected to obey this command. Ask yourself who Jesus identified as his one God in order to obey this command. It is quite simple to see that Jesus’ God was the God of the Shema and Jesus’ God was his Father alone. It was his Father alone who he loved with all his heart and all his soul and all his strength. If we suppose the God being identified at Deuteronomy 6:4 is a Triune being, then Jesus disobeyed the Law since he did not worship or serve this Triune being nor did he love this Triune being “with all his heart and all his soul and all his strength.” Either Jesus knowingly disobeyed the Shema or the Shema is not referring to a Triune God. It is one or the other. Else Jesus did not know his God was Triune in which case, Jesus cannot possibly be the one God.
Conclusion
Should any of us reasonably suppose that when Jesus heard his brothers (Mary’s sons) citing the Shema that he was secretly thinking, “There they go talking about me again.” It is ridiculous. Or shall we reasonably suppose that Jesus, like all his Jewish brethren, interpreted the Shema in the same way – by recognizing and obeying only his Father as his only God? And indeed, at John 4:2-22, Jesus indicates to us that Jews had been worshiping the Father in Jerusalem, worshiping what “we know.”
It should be quite clear to anyone that Jesus’ God was the Father alone and no one else. It should also be quite clear that Jesus was required to obey the Law and the Shema. It was not a Triune being which Jesus loved with all his heart and all his soul and all his mind. It was his Father alone. And if he indeed obeyed the Shema by serving and worshiping his Father alone as the only true God, then it should also be quite clear that only the Father is the one true God. Otherwise, Jesus knowingly disobeyed the Law and you are dead in your sins.
Jesus identified the one God of the Shema for us. And the way he did that for us is by showing us who someone under the Law must worship as his God: his Father alone. If Jesus worshiped the Father alone as his God but the God of the Shema was a Triune being, then Jesus misinterpreted and disobeyed the foremost command of the Law. Either that, or Jesus had it right and Trinitarians are disregarding the testimony of Jesus on the matter.
LikeLike
Utter Destruction of the Trinity
LikeLike
One reason given that the Synoptics are pre 70 AD, that convinced me, is the internal information:all three have a man cut off an ear of one of the men sent to arrest Jesus,yet don’t say who the offender was.
But John gives the name:Peter.
Peter,James,brother of Jesus,and Paul were the three most famous leaders.The silence was to protect Peter.
The external evidence is that Acts is a continuation of the Gospel of Luke,both dedicated to a Theophilus.
Luke 1:3-4:
” I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.”
Acts 1:1:
“In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach.”
Acts ends in chapter 28 with St Paul still alive,in Rome.
Luke always notes the persecution and deaths of famous Christians in Acts,as proof of their sincerity:
Death of Stephen:Acts 7:54-8:2
Death of James,brother of John:Acts 12:2
Stoning of Paul,left for death,who survived:Acts 14:19
Imprisonement of Peter:Acts 12:3-4
It is totally illogical Acts would have left out of the deaths of James,brother of Jesus,in Jerusalem,in 62 AD,or Peter and Paul in 64 AD,by Nero,in Rome.
Another external evidence for pre 70 AD is found in Q,collection of some 50 sayings of Jesus,written around 50 AD.
LikeLike
And why do you think Matthew is by the apostle?
LikeLike
I believe the Gospel of Matthew is pre 70 AD and that Matthew is a possibility,
one reason is that the earliest Christian writings we have,and that have survived,that say the name of the author mention Matthew as having written about Jesus:Papias(120 AD) and Ireneus(170 AD).
None of the non-Christian writings about Jesus that survive contest the authorship.
Already by 100 AD a writer quotes from Matthew,not saying the name,and says in ”The Didache”,a Church manual:
“as the Lord commanded in his Gospel.”
“The book was probably written around 100 C.E…”
(Bart Ehrman, The New Testament and Other Early Christian Writings, Oxfor University Press, p.313)
The writer of the Didache quotes from Matt.6:5, and 6:9-13.
Ch.8:2
“And do not pray as the hypocrites, but as the Lord commanded in his Gospel,
pray thus: “Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name, thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, as in Heaven so also upon earth; give us to-day our daily bread, and forgive us our debt as we forgive our debtors, and lead us not into trial, but deliver us from the Evil One, for thine is the power and the glory for ever.”
It is from:
Matt.6:5
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.
Matt.6:9-13
“This, then, is how you should pray:
“Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. ”
Source:
http://jesusevidences.com/authorshipntgospels.php
Justin Martyr in 150 AD Justin Martyr calls the gospels the “memoirs of the apostles” He gives clear quotes from three of the Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
Justin Martyr c.150
“For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them…” (there follows the institution of the Lord’s Supper) (1st Apology 66).
Justin Martyr c.150
“On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.” (1st Apology 67)
a) Justin quotes from Matthew’s Gospel
From Trypho 100
“For I have showed already that Christ is called both Jacob and Israel; and I have proved that it is not in the blessing of Joseph and Judah alone that what relates to Him was proclaimed mysteriously,
but also in the Gospel it is written that He said: `All things are delivered unto me by My Father; ‘and, `No man knows the Father but the Son; nor the Son but the Father, and they to whom the Son will reveal Him.’”
It is from:
Matt.11:27
“All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
From Trypho 100
“Hence, also, among His words He said, when He was discoursing about His future sufferings: `The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the Pharisees and Scribes, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again.’”
You find those words in:
Matt.16:21
“From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.”
http://jesusevidences.com/authorshipntgospels.php
LikeLike
There is a judgement of Jerusalem in Q,collection of some 50 sayings of Jesus,written around 50 AD.
Here is the content of Q:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q-contents.html
Both the gospels of ,Matthew and Luke have Q,while Mark does not,nor John,.In those days it was the custom to have a collection of the sayings of famous teachers.
The most famous example is the Enchiridion,by Arrian,in 135 AD,who collected the sayings of his teacher,Stoic philosopher and ex-slave Epictetus(52 sayings):
http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html
Q has Matthew 23:37-39:
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.
Look, your house is left to you desolate.
For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord'”
Q has Luke 13:34-35:
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.
Look, your house is left to you desolate.
I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord'”
Jerusalem,your house is either the destruction of Jerusalem in general,the Temple or both.
It is evident there was a pre 70 AD oral tradition that Jesus talked about the destruction of Jerusalem in general,the Temple or both.
LikeLike
There is more to the pre 70 AD theory for the Synoptics,Brant Pitre in the chapter “Dating the Gospels” of “The Case for Jesus”(2016) gives the technical reasons scholars say the Synoptics are post 70 AD.
At best one can affirm the Synoptics were written by contemporaries of Jesus,but not that they were Luke,Mark and Matthew.
The evidence for that is not 1st century,it is 2nd century documents written 100-150 years later.
But dating Luke-Acts and Matthew to around 60 AD,before the deaths of James,Peter and Paul makes Mark be from around 50 AD.
Some scholars think John copied from the Synoptics,others don’t,so since the consensus is that Luke-Acts and Matthew are from 80-85 AD, then to please all it is said John is from 90-95 AD.
And the Synoptics being pre 70 AD would move John down from 90-95 AD to 65-75 AD automatically.
John mentions the death of Peter in chapter 21,so it is post 64 AD,year of Peter’s death.
LikeLike
I like to use 1st century documents,but they can confirm or not what is in 2nd century documents.
Brant Pitre says the main reason scholars say the Synoptics are post 70 AD is that Jesus predicts the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem,that he could not have known.On page 92 of his book “The Case for Jesus” he wrote:
“In fact,Jesus of Nazareth apparently wasn’t the only Jew in the first century AD who was using the Old Testament to warn that the Temple would be destroyed.
According to Josephus,around 66 AD,a man named “Jesus the son of Ananias” also drew on the book of Jeremiah to predict that Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed(Josephus,Jewish War,6.301;compare Jeremiah 7)”
Josephus book is 1st century,and the Q saying about the house of Jerusalem being left desolate is 1st century and pre 70 AD.
Colossians and 2 Timothy are forgeries,though I have doubts,but they are 1st century,no doubt.
Philemon is authentic,by Paul,and scholars say it was written in Rome,where Paul was a prisoner:
Philemon 1:1:
“Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother,
To Philemon our dear friend and fellow worker”
Philemon 1:9-10:
” It is as none other than Paul—an old man and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus that I appeal to you for my son Onesimus,who became my son while I was in chains. ”
Philemon 1:13:
“I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel. ”
Notice that it says Luke and Mark are also with Paul,therefore in Rome,and apparently Luke and Mark knew each other.
Philemon 1:23-24:
“Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings.And so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers.”
LikeLike
Philemon 1:24 confirms the 2nd century writers who heard the oral tradition that Luke and Paul were together in Rome.
It also confirms the 2nd century writers who say Mark was in Rome.They say he was there as Peter’s interpreter.
Colossians,1st century,even though written after Paul’s death,confirms that Mark and Luke was famous for being associated with Paul:
Colossians 4:10-14:
” My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark, the cousin of Barnabas. (You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him.)
Jesus, who is called Justus, also sends greetings. These are the only Jews among my co-workers for the kingdom of God, and they have proved a comfort to me. Epaphras, who is one of you and a servant of Christ Jesus, sends greetings. He is always wrestling in prayer for you, that you may stand firm in all the will of God, mature and fully assured.I vouch for him that he is working hard for you and for those at Laodicea and Hierapolis.
Our dear friend Luke, the doctor, and Demas send greetings. ”
From the text Mark and Luke apparently knew each other.
2 Timothy,1st century,written after Paul,also confirms the tradition that Mark and Luke were famous:
2 Timothy 4:11:
“Only Luke is with me.
Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry.”
LikeLike
I prefer to refer to 1st century documents,it is strange that Acts,if it is post 70 AD(80-85 AD),does not mention the deaths of Paul and Peter as martyrs.
Some say it was not to irritate the Roman government,but that still doesn’t explain why Acts doesn’t mention the death of James,brother of Jesus,head of the Jerusalem church,who was killed by the Jews,not the Romans,in 62 AD.
One 1st century document that tells of Peter and Paul’s martyrdom is 1 Clement(95 AD),supposedly by Clement,bishop of Rome.In chapter 5 he says:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/1clement-roberts.html
“Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death.
Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours, and when he had finally suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him.
Owing to envy, Paul also obtained the reward of patient endurance, after being seven times thrown into captivity, compelled to flee, and stoned.
After preaching both in the east and west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west, and suffered martyrdom under the prefects.”
The other 1st century document is John 21,John is by 2 or 3 authors,and John 21 is not by the one who wrote John 1-20,there are two conclusions.
John 21:17-19 mentions the martyrdom of Peter:
“Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Feed my sheep. Very truly I tell you, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted;
but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.”
Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, “Follow me!”
LikeLike
There is a passage in John 21 that could be interpreted to hint that the Beloved Disciple,who is credited in John 21 as having written John chapters 1-20,lived a long time,longer than most.
John 21:20-23:
“Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”
When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?”
Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.”
Because of this, the
rumor spread among the believers that this disciple would not die.
But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?””
LikeLike
I think Brant Pitre is correct in his dating of the Synoptics.About John it is post 65 AD,since John 21 records Peter’s death.But is it really 90-95 AD?
One argument,said by John A.T. Robinson,author of “Honest to God”(1963),with its “Death of God” theology,is that John 5:2 shows John was written before 70 AD since it refers to the Pool of Bethesda in the
present tense,as though it still existed.
The Pool of Bethesda was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD.It was a gigantic pool complex situated near the walls of Jerusalem.
LikeLike
John 5:1-2:
“Some time later, Jesus went up to Jerusalem for one of the Jewish festivals.
Now there is(present tense) in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool,
which in Aramaic is called(present tense) Bethesda and
which is surrounded(present tense) by five covered colonnades.”
A counter-argument is that John is post 70 AD because in John 11:17-19 the town of Bethany,near Jerusalem
is referred to in the past tense,since it was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD.
“On his arrival, Jesus found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb for four days.
Now Bethany was(past tense) less than two miles from Jerusalem,
and many Jews had come to Martha and Mary to comfort them in the loss of their brother.”
LikeLike
The siege and destruction of Jerusalem was in 70 AD,and the Temple was destroyed in late July or early August 70 AD,at least that is what is said in the Talmud(The Mishnah,Taanith 4:6:”On the 9th of Ab…the Temple was destroyed the first(586 BC) and the second time,and Beth-Tor was captured and the city was ploughed up.”
A third possibility is that John chapters 1-20 were written exactly in 70 AD,the author had written or dictated 5 chapters in 70 AD and the Pool of Bethesda was still in existence(or he thought it still was).
And when he had finished chapter 11 he had heard that Bethany had already been destroyed.
LikeLike