Bart ehrman dating of the gospels
(2) What do we know about who wrote it and when it was written? (4) How does its account of Jesus fit with what we know from external sources about Jesus and his historical context?
The Texts An obvious question to ask about any book purporting to provide information about the past is how this book became available for us to read.
Our earliest complete copies of the Gospels in Greek are in the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, both produced in the fourth century.
The consensus among biblical scholars is that the four Gospels were all originally written in Greek, though Matthew may have drawn from an earlier source written in Hebrew or Aramaic.
Please note that the question we are asking the sources to answer is an historical one: What did the first-century Galilean Jew known as Jesus of Nazareth actually claim, teach, and do?
This is a different sort of question than asking how Jesus makes people feel, what he means to them personally in their own spiritual quests, or what their religion teaches about Jesus.
This is even true of the New Testament Gospels: They tell us something about the authors who wrote them and what they believed.In our collection, we have a wonderful collection of unpublished papyri. The earliest text of the Gospel of Mark, uh, came to my attention a month ago with a colleague, scholar, friend of ours Dirk Obbink from Oxford, and it is certainly, absolutely–dated by a person that has no agenda whatsoever–the earliest New Testament document in the world, and it is a of the Gospel of Matt–of Mark. And so there are many things like that that are coming up in our research and discovery, and it’s an absolute thrill to be a part of it.” So, in February of 2012, we have Carroll discussing the Mark fragment, a fragment of Luke, and “others” as “within our research scope,” but distinct from “our collection.” This seems to fit with the chronologies of the documents provided by Mike Holmes.That is, this purchase process began in 2012 and extended into 2013. I saw it in, um, at Oxford University, at uh, at uh, Christ Church College, and it was in the possession of an outstanding, well-known eminent classicist. Ah, there were some delays with its, ah, purchase and I was working at that time with the Green family collection which I had the privilege of organizing and putting together for the Hobby Lobby family and had hoped that they would at that time acquire it. We were preparing an exhibit for the Vatican Library and, um, I wanted this to be the show piece in that exhibit but it–“ Mc Dowell: “Who wouldn’t?And so, he’s already crying foul that he’s not had time to, uh, see the manuscript at all, but it’s fortunately in the hands of conservative scholars who usually don’t get an opportunity to work with these things, who are in the process of preparing them for publication. That’ll be major–While these other things may not be international news, that’ll be major international news when that’s published.And so, you heard it here first, and you heard it well in advance of its publication.” Setting aside Carroll’s blatant misrepresentation of the views of Bart Ehrman, what he says about the Mark fragment is interesting in light of this new information.
Now, if we jump ahead to a more widely known snippet from a recording of a question and answer session that Carroll conducted with the Christian apologist Josh Mc Dowell in a church that was posted online in 2015, after Carroll was no longer working for the Greens, we find a statement that Dirk Obbink had sold the manuscript: Carroll: “I first worked with the papyrus in 2012. ” Carroll: “I know, wouldn’t that have been awesome? But this was not the only time that Carroll spoke of the new owners of the papyrus.