Christian Texts and History • Is it untenable?

Consider the following, all of which is disputed, some more than others:

• Paul wrote several letters in the mid-first century.
• Peter, with help from others such as the named Silvanus, wrote one letter around 65-70 CE.
• Peter relied on an interpreter named Mark, who wrote down some stuff about Jesus around 70 CE.
• An anonymous 1st century Greek text expanded Mark, but it was not by Matthew, who did not write in Greek.
• Luke, a physician who was a companion of Paul, wrote both the Gospel of Luke and Acts.
• John the elder, a Judean with a priestly background who knew Jesus when young, wrote the Gospel of John.
• John the elder also wrote three letters.

The above is a combination of what ancient Christians said with how some of that has been read by some scholars. I have allowed myself idiosyncracy with respect to the text of 1 Peter, suggesting a date contemporaneous to the war as an attempt to understand how it can refer to "Babylon," partly just to see if this hypothesis makes sense or if it is one that should be considered untenable.

So, are these things untenable?

It often seems to be treated that way, and certainly not everyone "tenables" these things. But as I've been thinking it over, I'm not sure that any of these points are truly untenable, i.e., that they are implausible or can be shown to be probably wrong. Thoughts?

Statistics: Posted by Peter Kirby — Mon Jun 10, 2024 11:06 pm

---