GROUNDBREAKING Discovery on the REAL Dates of the Gospels

Summary

The video script discusses the contentious nature of dating the New Testament gospels, highlighting the wide range of scholarly opinions and the late first-century consensus. It critiques the reliance on church tradition and the influence of ideology on scholarship, emphasizing the need for critical analysis. The speaker promotes Dr. David Litwa's course on gospel dating, which offers a deep dive into scholarly methods without apologetics, aiming to clarify the complexities behind dating ancient texts.

Takeaways

• 📚 Bart Ehrman's 'The New Testament: A Historical Introduction' presents a consensus on late first-century dating for the four canonical gospels, despite wide-ranging scholarly opinions.
• 🕎 Mainstream academic dating places Mark's Gospel after 70 AD, with Matthew and Luke around 80-100 AD, and John around 100 AD, but some scholars propose dates as early as 45 AD or as late as 145 AD.
• 🎓 The lack of academic courses focusing on the dating of the gospels suggests a barrier to understanding the scholarly methods and debates around these dates.
• 🏛 Conservative Bible colleges tend to uphold traditional views without critically engaging with the dating question, perpetuating the myth of apostolic authorship.
• 🔍 Dr. David Litwa offers a course, 'Redating the Gospels Without Apologetics,' aiming to provide a deep dive into the scholarly methods used to date ancient gospel texts.
• 🏫 The decline of biblical literacy and the shift towards business models in higher education have led to the closure of many religion and biblical studies departments, impacting the study of the Bible.
• 💼 The study of the Bible is increasingly dominated by seminaries and religious schools with conservative ideologies, which may not align with historical critical scholarship.
• 📜 Conservative scholars often use handwriting analysis of papyri to date gospel texts, but this method is subjective and can lead to unreliable conclusions.
• 📖 The titles 'According to Matthew,' 'According to Mark,' etc., are later additions and do not indicate the actual authors of the gospels, reflecting the uncertainty around their origins.
• 🗝️ Early church tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers are not reliable historical sources for dating the gospels, as they are influenced by the desire to link the texts closely to Jesus and the apostles.
• 📝 The process of dating ancient texts like the gospels is complex and involves internal datable references rather than a single scientific method, leading to ongoing scholarly debate.

Q & A

Why do Christian apologists and Mainline Scholars of the New Testament often disagree on the dating of the gospels?

Christian apologists and Mainline Scholars often disagree on the dating of the gospels due to varying methodologies, biases, and the wide range of possible dates based on internal and external evidence, which can span from the 40s to the 60s AD.

What is the significance of the late first-century dating of the four gospels in modern academic consensus?

The late first-century dating of the four gospels has become modern academic orthodoxy, indicating a broad agreement among scholars. However, this consensus masks the wide range of possible dates and the ongoing debates about the exact timing of their composition.

What does Bart Ehrman's edition of the New Testament: A Historical Introduction contribute to the dating debate?

Bart Ehrman's edition provides updated perspectives on the dating of the New Testament documents, suggesting that Mark is dated after 70 AD, Matthew and Luke around 80 to 100 AD, and John around 100 AD, which aligns with the late first-century dating consensus.

Why is there such a wide range of dates proposed by scholars for the Gospel According to Mark?

The wide range of dates for the Gospel According to Mark, from 45 AD to 145 AD, reflects the lack of concrete evidence and the reliance on subjective scholarly judgments, as well as the influence of ideological and religious beliefs on scholarly interpretations.

What factors contribute to the difficulty in dating the texts of the gospels and the New Testament more broadly?

Factors contributing to the difficulty in dating the texts include the lack of internal datable references, the subjective nature of handwriting analysis, the influence of political and religious ideologies, and the scarcity of early manuscripts.

Why is there a scarcity of academic courses focusing on the dating of the gospels?

There is a scarcity of academic courses on the dating of the gospels because the subject is often considered too specialized, and there may be resistance from institutions that prefer to maintain traditional views or are influenced by religious ideologies.

What is the 'wave model of gospel scholarship' mentioned by David Litwa, and how does it relate to dating ancient documents?

The 'wave model of gospel scholarship' is a concept introduced by David Litwa that encourages thinking about the dating of ancient documents, such as the gospels, in new ways. It likely involves considering various waves of scholarly thought and evidence to arrive at a more nuanced understanding of dating.

How does the study of the Bible in public universities and colleges in America reflect the broader trends in religious education?

The study of the Bible in public universities and colleges in America has been influenced by broader trends in religious education, including the decline in biblical literacy and the shift towards business models in higher education, which has led to a focus on subjects that are seen as more profitable or relevant to contemporary society.

Why are traditional historical critical scholars of the Bible often unable to find jobs in academia?

Traditional historical critical scholars of the Bible often struggle to find jobs in academia due to the dominance of seminaries and religious schools that support conservative faith-based ideologies, which may be in opposition to their critical scholarship.

What is the role of internal datable references in dating ancient texts like the gospels?

Internal datable references are crucial in dating ancient texts like the gospels because they provide specific historical or contextual clues that can help scholars estimate when the text was written, in the absence of definitive external evidence.

How do conservative apologists use the concept of 'eyewitness memory' to support their dating of the gospels?

Conservative apologists use the concept of 'eyewitness memory' to argue that the gospels are based on the memories of those who were present during the life of Jesus, thus supporting their claim that the gospels were written close to the time of Jesus, reinforcing their view of the gospels' reliability and truthfulness.

What is the significance of the titles 'According to Matthew,' 'According to Mark,' etc., in the context of the gospels' authorship?

The titles 'According to Matthew,' 'According to Mark,' etc., are significant because they are later additions to the texts and do not necessarily indicate authorship by the named individuals. Instead, they reflect the Church's tradition and the mythologizing of the gospels' origins.

Why is the dating of early gospel papyri based on handwriting analysis controversial?

The dating of early gospel papyri based on handwriting analysis is controversial because it is inherently subjective and can lead to significant discrepancies in dating. Additionally, the earliest papyri often resemble handwriting from the 3rd and 4th centuries rather than the late 1st century, complicating efforts to date them accurately.

What is the 'telephone game' analogy used to illustrate the issues with the transmission of ancient texts?

The 'telephone game' analogy is used to illustrate how small changes made early in the transmission of a text can have significant effects on its meaning over time, much like how a message can change as it is passed from person to person in the game.

How does the Church tradition's use of mythology affect the historical understanding of the gospels?

Church tradition's use of mythology affects the historical understanding of the gospels by creating narratives that are more ideologically driven than historically grounded. This can lead to the perpetuation of myths about the gospels' authorship and dating, which may not align with critical scholarly analysis.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Disagreements Among Scholars on Gospel Dating

This paragraph discusses the wide range of scholarly opinions on the dating of the New Testament gospels, particularly focusing on the late first-century consensus despite significant variations in estimated dates. It highlights the publication of Bart Ehrman's 'The New Testament: A Historical Introduction' in 2024 and the ongoing debate between critical scholars and conservative scholars. The paragraph emphasizes the difficulty in finding academic courses on gospel dating and criticizes the reliance on traditional scholarship and the church fathers' narratives. It introduces a course called 'Redating the Gospels' taught by David Litwa, which aims to explore the dating of ancient gospel texts without the influence of apologetics.

05:01

🏛 The Impact of Ideology on Biblical Scholarship

The second paragraph delves into the influence of political and religious ideologies on New Testament scholarship. It describes how the study of the Bible has been affected by the decline in biblical literacy and the economic pressures faced by educational institutions. The paragraph points out the shift towards business models in academia and the dominance of seminaries and religious schools in biblical studies. It also addresses the challenges faced by critical scholars in finding positions in confessional schools with restrictive social norms and the thriving of church-funded scholars who uphold religious myths.

10:06

🔍 The Challenge of Dating Ancient Texts

This paragraph examines the complexities involved in dating ancient texts, such as the gospels. It criticizes the methods used by conservative scholars to date the gospels, including the use of handwriting analysis and carbon-14 dating, which are subjective and imprecise. The paragraph also discusses the lack of early manuscripts and the reliance on later additions to the texts, such as the titles 'According to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.' It emphasizes the need for critical analysis and the importance of understanding the historical context in which these texts were written.

15:06

🗝️ The Myth of Apostolic Authorship

The fourth paragraph challenges the traditional belief in the apostolic authorship of the gospels. It argues that the gospel writers did not identify themselves as apostles or eyewitnesses, contrary to what is often claimed by conservative apologists. The paragraph discusses the late addition of the titles to the gospels and the lack of evidence supporting the idea that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. It also critiques the use of church tradition and mythology as a basis for dating the gospels, suggesting that these traditions are not reliable historical sources.

20:08

📖 The Evolution of the Gospels and Their Textual History

The final paragraph explores the development of the gospels and the challenges in understanding their textual history. It discusses the lack of stability in the gospel texts and the absence of early witnesses, creating a 'black hole' period in the textual transmission of the gospels. The paragraph also addresses the Telephone Game effect of scribal errors and the impossibility of matching ancient manuscripts perfectly to their authors' original writings. It concludes by promoting Dr. M David Litwa's course 'Redating the Gospels without Apologetics' as a means to educate oneself on the methods used by critical scholars to date the gospels.

Keywords

💡Christian apologists

Christian apologists are individuals who defend and advocate for Christianity through argumentation and discourse. In the context of the video, they are contrasted with critical scholars, as they often support traditional views of the dating of New Testament texts, such as the Gospels, which are closer to the time of Jesus. The video suggests that apologists may use historical arguments to support their faith, rather than critically examining the evidence.

💡Mainline Scholars

Mainline Scholars refers to academics who follow traditional scholarly methods and are often associated with more liberal or moderate religious views. They are mentioned in the video as having differing opinions on the dating of the Gospels, with some suggesting later dates than those proposed by Christian apologists. The term highlights the diversity of scholarly opinion and the lack of consensus on the historical dating of biblical texts.

💡New Testament

The New Testament is the second part of the Christian Bible, containing the Christian gospels, Acts, Epistles, and the Book of Revelation. The video discusses the dating of the Gospels, which are a significant part of the New Testament. The dating of these texts is crucial for understanding their historical context and the development of early Christianity.

💡Gospels

The Gospels are the books of the New Testament that describe the life, work, and teachings of Jesus. The video focuses on the debate surrounding the dating of the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and how different scholars assign different dates to them, which can affect the perceived reliability and historical context of these texts.

💡Dating of texts

Dating of texts refers to the process of determining the age of written documents, which is a central theme in the video. The video discusses the wide range of dates proposed for the Gospels and the factors that scholars consider when dating ancient texts, such as internal datable references and manuscript analysis.

💡Conservative Bible College

A Conservative Bible College is an educational institution that adheres to traditional religious beliefs and interpretations of the Bible. The video suggests that such institutions may not critically examine the dating of biblical texts and instead rely on traditional church teachings, which can influence their approach to biblical scholarship.

💡Church Fathers

The Church Fathers were early Christian theologians and bishops who influenced the development of Christian doctrine. The video mentions that some scholars rely on the Church Fathers' teachings, such as Irenaeus, to support traditional dating of the Gospels. However, the video also implies that these traditional views may not be based on critical historical analysis.

💡Papyri

Papyri are documents written on papyrus, an ancient writing material. The video discusses the use of papyri in dating the Gospels, noting that the earliest Gospel papyri are not reliably dated earlier than the late 2nd Century. It also highlights the subjective nature of dating papyri based on handwriting analysis and the limitations of carbon-14 dating.

💡Apostolic eyewitnesses

Apostolic eyewitnesses refers to the idea that the Gospels were written by individuals who were direct witnesses to the events of Jesus' life or by their close companions. The video challenges this notion, suggesting that the Gospels were not written by the Apostles themselves but rather by later authors who were influenced by Church tradition and ideology.

💡Historicizing rhetoric

Historicizing rhetoric is the practice of using language or arguments to create a sense of historical authenticity. The video points out that some early Christian writings use this rhetoric to establish their authority and connection to the Apostles, even though there is no concrete evidence to support these claims of authorship.

💡Church tradition

Church tradition refers to the beliefs, practices, and stories passed down through the Christian Church over time. The video critiques the reliance on Church tradition for dating the Gospels, arguing that it is not a reliable historical source and is more akin to mythology than factual history.

Highlights

Christian apologists and Mainline Scholars of the New Testament often disagree on the dating of the gospels except for the consensus that they were written after 70 AD.

Bart Ehrman's 2024 edition of the New Testament: A Historical Introduction maintains late first-century dating for the four gospels, despite wide-ranging academic opinions.

The dating of the gospels is influenced by scholarly biases, with some suggesting Mark was written as early as 45 AD and others as late as 145 AD.

Academic courses focusing on the dating of the gospels are rare and can be ideologically driven, reflecting the biases of the institutions offering them.

David Litwa's course 'Redating the Gospels' offers an in-depth exploration of dating methods for ancient gospel texts without the influence of apologetics.

The study of the Bible in public universities has declined due to financial and ideological pressures, leading to an increased influence of seminaries and religious schools.

Conservative apologists often use historical arguments to support their faith, aiming to date the gospels as close to Jesus' time as possible.

The titles 'According to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John' are later additions to the gospels and not original, reflecting the uncertainty of their authorship.

Early gospel manuscripts are mostly fragments, making it difficult to establish a precise dating through handwriting analysis alone.

Church tradition and the early church fathers' writings are often used to support early dating of the gospels, but these are considered mythology rather than reliable historical evidence.

The process of dating ancient texts like the gospels relies heavily on internal datable references due to the lack of scientific methods providing definitive answers.

The myth of apostolic eyewitnesses to Jesus is upheld by church-funded scholars, despite the lack of evidence that the gospels were written by Apostles or their companions.

Ancient biographies, like those of Homer and Aesop, were often based on their works rather than independent historical evidence, similar to the gospels' authorship myths.

The instability of ancient texts due to scribal errors and variations makes it challenging to determine the original content of the gospels.

The 'telephone game' analogy illustrates how small changes in ancient texts can lead to significant differences in later manuscripts.

The lack of witnesses to the gospels' text in the earliest period creates a 'black hole' in understanding the development of the gospels' text.

Myth Vision promotes Dr. M. David Litwa's course as an opportunity for individuals to educate themselves on the tools and methods used by historical critical scholars to date the gospels.

Transcripts

how is it that Christian apologists and

Mainline Scholars of the New Testament

can disagree on everything about the

gospels except when they were

written Bart armman published his eth

edition of the New Testament a

historical introduction in

2024 a lot has changed in the book but

not the

dates mark is still after 70 AD Matthew

is 80 to 100 AD as is Luke John finally

is around 100 the other gospels such as

the gospels of Peter and Thomas we are

told are quote much later than the

events they narrate and are highly

legendary in

quote what's really going on here a is a

critical scholar but he's supporting

dates that conservatives can happily

live with this late first century dating

of the four gospels has become modern

academic

Orthodoxy this consensus hides the fact

that date ranges for the gospels are

incredibly wide reaching anywhere from

the 40s to

the60s how is it that one scholar can

date The Gospel According to Mark to 45

ad and another to

145 what goes into dating the texts of

the gospels and those of the New

Testament more broadly you can search

far and wide for an academic course

focusing on The Dating of the gospels

you might find a seminary Divinity

School or theology Department willing to

teach you gospel

scholarship you can saw off your leg

then your arm to get into the course if

it's a conservative Bible College you

can leave your brain at the door as well

because they're just going to give you

more rehash from the church fathers

about mythical Apostolic figures names

Matthew Mark Luke and John the books you

can get on redate the New Testament are

typically by traditional Scholars or

evangelicals using the same old myths

that irenaeus used in the late 2 Century

have you ever really wanted to take a

deep dive into the dating question to

really understand how Scholars come up

with the date of an ancient gospel text

have you ever truly wanted to understand

why a text that pastors and pundits

place next to Jesus is really closer to

Justin Martyr and irus in the 2 Century

well as of this moment you have

available to you a very rare opportunity

in the course redating the gospels

without

apologetics taught by the prolific

scholar of New Testament and Gnostic

Christianity David litwa Dr litwa will

go deep into how Scholars can reliably

date an ancient document he won't just

focus on canonical texts either but

he'll bring in figures like marcian to

help you think in new ways about what he

calls the wave model of gospel

scholarship you can take Dr lit's course

anytime anywhere there's an internet

connection without moving house or

taking out a second mortgage let's step

back for a moment some people want to

present New Testament scholarship as a

kind of science with assured results

the fact is the discipline is shot

through with political and religious

ideology even when people are aiming to

seem objective if you don't understand

the role of money and politics in this

field you will inevitably fail to

understand the fragility of its assured

results America is the great experiment

in religious

education after the second world war it

tried out something that had not been

widely implemented before it fostered

the study of the Bible in public

universities and colleges Across the

Nation between about 1960 and

2010 biblical studies flourished in

secular Departments of religion here the

forces of favoritism privileging

Christianity were though never

completely overcome at least tamed the

study of the Bible was seen as important

in America because the Bible was a

cultural icon and understanding it is

important for understanding Western Art

literature film law and so on in the

pre- and post covid world and across

America and the world public and private

schools unaffiliated with churches have

been shutting down their religion and

biblical studies departments because

frankly biblical literacy is declining

and these departments do not make money

for the school colleges and universities

have long been shifting to business

models instead of focusing on public

service what does all this mean it means

that the study of the Bible is

increasingly dominated by seminaries and

religious schools that openly support a

conservative faith-based ideology in

subtle or open opposition to historical

critical scholarship like it or not

bigname colleges and universities care

more about Progressive ethics than they

do about history and

language this means that traditional

historical critical Scholars of the

Bible cannot find jobs and are forced to

drop out of the

academy frankly critical Scholars do not

want jobs in confessional schools where

either public statements of Faith or

silent social norms determine what they

can and cannot say about the Bible at

the same time Church schools and church

presses are thriving because they are

propped up by Church budgets these

churches have statements of faith and

Mission that determine what can and

cannot be said about the Bible thus

someone interested in the Bible whether

churched formally churched or unchurched

is asked to spend thousands of dollars

getting an ideological education in a

brick and mortar Seminary or church

school it's no wonder that most

religious Seekers are turning to the

internet to meet their education needs

YouTube is great but most of the content

on YouTube is patchy and at best only

provides an introduction inviting people

to go deeper into the study study of the

Bible ancient Judaism and ancient

Christianity let's just face it

conservative apologists support an

ideology which supports their faith by

and large they're not interested in

history as history but they use history

as a tool to argue for the truth of

their faith Christianity is the only

historical religion they say therefore

it must be true they claim that the

gospels are based on us eyewitness

memory to support this ideology they are

always motivated to move the gospels as

close as they can to Jesus they will use

every strategy in the book every method

and every rationale to convince you that

the gospels appeared no more than a

generation after Jesus what is at stake

for them is their truth a truth that

uses historicizing rhetoric even win

good history and good Historical Method

is against them Church funded Scholars

uphold a religious myth which the church

has been trying to uphold for centuries

the myth of apostolic eyewitnesses to

Jesus but if the gospels were written by

Apostles or their companions that would

be the very first thing that gospel

writers would say about themselves just

compare Josephus almost the very first

thing he does in his history of the

Jewish war is establish his authority as

an eyewitness Josephus has a right to

write about the Jewish War and why

because he was there and he tells you he

was there and he tells you what he saw

and heard sometimes in the first person

none of the gospel writers act this way

none of the gospel writers say who they

are tell you their names or identify

themselves as

Apostles the preface to Luke uses

historicizing rhetoric but it is not an

exception it identifies its Patron

Theophilus but refuses to say who

actually is authoring the text and why

is that the simplest answer is because

the authors or editors were not Apostles

for if they were they would have said so

this is not about humility this is

simply about common sense an Apostolic

eyewitness to Jesus who refused to

identify himself is more stupid than

humble but what about the names

virtually all the translation s of the

gospels print the titles according to

Mark according to Matthew according to

Luke never bothering to tell you who

these people actually are are they

historical humans or fictional

characters made up in church

tradition the first thing to know is

that every single one of these titles is

a later addition to the text an addition

not attested until the very late 2

Century 150 years after Jesus lived this

is about as much time between presidents

Lincoln and

Obama as between Obamacare and the

American Civil War that's a long time

and what does according to even mean it

apparently doesn't mean written by

technically not even the church claims

that The Gospel According to to Matthew

was written by a guy named Matthew

whoever he was and yet somehow the

religious imagination still imagines

that a guy named Matthew sat at his desk

and wrote a gospel with stylus and Inc

this myth is perpetuated by the bad but

Universal habit of referring to gospel

texts by proper names Matthew Mark Luke

and and John conservative apologist and

secular Scholars use these shorthand

names without ever telling you that this

is not how the gospels refer to

themselves one might think that gospel

manuscripts would solve the problem but

no complete Bibles have been found that

date earlier than about the mid fourth

Century more than 300 years after Jesus

apologists boast that the New Testament

is the best attested text in Antiquity

but they don't tell you that in the

earliest period the manuscripts are

mostly scraps of

Papyrus sometimes no bigger than a

credit card with a paper that looks like

it passed halfway through a shredder

with holes the size of quarters and not

a single one of these gospel papy have

dates they are all dated by handwriting

and inherently subjective Judgment of

inherently subjective Scholars so here

is the game that conservative Scholars

play with the papy they know that the

so-called original copies of the gospels

have all perished so they need to get

the Papi as close to Jesus as they can

thus they scour the other books of

published Papi for early and datable

examples which they can then compare

with gospel papy then they say that the

handwriting of the early papy looks like

the handwriting of the gospel

papy and voila they move the gospel papy

as close to the late first century as

they can what they don't tell you is

that gospel papii better resemble

handwriting samples from the 3D fourth

and later centuries making it impossible

to place a papyrus in the early period

with any certainty

Carbon 14 dating does not come to the

rescue because it does not give a

precise date but a date range that is

often as long or even longer than 100

years and sometimes the date of the

Papyrus is much older than the ink but

in the dating game it's actually the

date of the ink that's important because

that alone tells us when a document was

written so conservative apologist can

look smart with their smiles and suit

coats they can overwhelm you with the

smoke screen of footnotes and their

amazing philological knowledge while at

the same time publishing unmixed and

apologetic ideology not history the

truth is no Papyrus of a gospel which

was later canonized not a single one is

reliably dated earlier than the very

late 2nd Century

not a single one and this explains why

Scholars can't agree on the dates of the

gospels no scientific method provides

the Smoking Gun in the dating game the

only reliable way to date these ancient

texts is by looking at internal datable

references what about church tradition

doesn't the early church tell us when

the gospels were written and by whom let

me ask you a question

if you were trying to study Church

ideology and mythology why would you use

Church myth to tell you when a document

was written Church tradition isn't

history it's mythology written by the

first Christian apologist who are doing

the same thing that modern apologists do

trying to get the gospels as close to

Jesus as they can let's use an analogy

if you were studying the religion of an

obscure African tribe

would you automatically believe

representatives of the tribe when they

told you that their holy books were

written by one of their inspired sages

named mmu who buried himself alive 2,000

years ago wouldn't you use comparative

African history language and literature

to understand the sacred text on their

own terms to use an example perhaps

closer to home if you were studying The

Book of Mormon and wanted a fully

understand its Origins would you

automatically accept the Mormon

tradition that the text originated from

writing on Golden Plates buried in

Palmyra New York wouldn't you ask for

the plates themselves or try to find

them and if you couldn't find them you

would use comparative 19th century

literature and linguistic analysis to

determine when and how the texts were

written and by whom the same applies to

the text of the Gospels but let's play

the apologist game for a moment because

you'll quickly find that appealing to

church tradition is like gasping water

just imagine it you take a time machine

back to the year 185 to Leon France

ancient

lugdunum here you meet irus who is

writing an apologetic work against a

Christian sect he does not like the

valentinians in the course of his attack

irus wants to prove that the four

gospels are early and they all go back

to the apostles he has surprisingly

little more than oral tradition to prove

it but he does have this obscure author

named papius who supposedly wrote in the

early 2nd

Century now papus says that there was a

guy named Mark and Mark knew the Apostle

Peter and without Peter's knowledge or

permission he wrote up a story based on

Peter's sermons and that story became

the Gospel According to mark this sounds

like an amazing external witness to The

Gospel According to Mark right it's

probably just a myth based on internal

references to what became the New

Testament itself papius or his Source

probably read the letter now called

First Peter and believing it was

actually written by Peter found an

interesting reference to quote my son

Mark end quote in chapter 5 verse 13 he

then inferred that Mark was a disciple

of Peter and thus a carrier of the

petrine Gospel

Traditions there is no tradition that

Peter himself wrote a gospel but there

was a tradition also unconfirmed that

Peter died in Rome thus an ancient

author could infer that Peter had a

disciple Mark in Rome and this Mark

wrote up Peter's sermons in a gospel

notebook which would explain why it has

a rough character and why it has Latin

terminology is any of this myth

necessarily historical no is it even

probable no because there is nothing

whatsoever backing it up apart from the

fact that it is constantly repeated by

Church funded apologist and historians

whoever made Church myths about

Apostolic authorship did the same thing

that other writers in Antiquity did when

they wanted to write biography of a

famous person people who wanted to write

the biography of Homer for instance used

data from Homer's epics to write it

never mind that Homer is probably a

mythical person and people writing 800

years after his supposed life had no

other historical source to write their

biography than the epics themselves

likewise the biography of Ides didn't

know independent Traditions about

ureides so they used his plays to

reconstruct his life they did the same

with asop another mythical figure who

was given a biography based on the

content of his fables in actual fact

these fables were probably created by

many ancient storytellers and editors

who refined them and gathered them into

collections around the fth century BCE

something similar happened with the

gospels the gospels are books in search

of authors and once authors were

determined by Church myth Pious

Christians sought for the biography of

these authors and what did they use as

sources the documents of the New

Testament themselves that is to say they

used bits and pieces from Pauline

letters from the book of Acts from other

named figures in random letters and they

concocted four four stable authors of

gospels gospels which themselves were

never stable in the first place

unfortunately the myth of the stable

author has perpetuated itself based on

Modern presuppositions of how books are

written in the modern world people write

books and send the final draft to a

publisher the publisher then types sets

the final draft runs it through the

printing press and forms a complete book

that can be released on on a definite

date that's just not how books were

written in Antiquity over a thousand

years before the printing press and

almost 2,000 years before the copy

machine no copy of an ancient book

perfectly matched what its author

actually wrote scribal mistakes

intentional or unintentional are

inevitable and a single mistake made

early in the tradition can completely

change the meaning of a sentence later

down the line it's sort of like the

telephone game where one small change

made at the beginning has huge Rippling

effects at the end this is what

apologists never tell you we may have

over a 100 New Testament Papi from the

late 2nd to 5th Century but none of them

say the same things even when they

overlaping content not a single one the

text is never the same and there are no

witnesses to the text in the earliest

period which means that there is a

century long black hole separating the

initial text of the Gospel and the

earliest witnesses to them that black

hole period is the most important period

for understanding the gospels but

Scholars have next to no idea what

happened to the texts assuming they

existed between say 50 and 150 CE this

is the bane of gospel scholarship and

it's why you need to educate yourself

about the tools and methods that good

historical critical Scholars use to date

the Gospels this is your opportunity to

invest in yourself take Dr M David L's

course redating the gospels without

apologetics I know I will be taking this

course as well the course link is in the

description you can sign up today be

sure to do so it helps us here at myth

Vision as well as we are Affiliates of

Dr M David litwa I know for a fact this

is important information especially with

the current dialogue with apologist and

those like myself who are critical of

them please check it out and don't

forget like this video comment your

thoughts about this documentary and be

sure to share it I hope you will never

forget we are myth vision