Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Redating the New Testament to 47-57 or 58 a.D. (-2,3 John)

Redating the New Testament to 47-57 or 58 a.D. (-2,3 John)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 104|Likes:
Published by Brianroy
An updated easier to read version of a book chapter I copyrighted in 2006, but did not send to press.
An updated easier to read version of a book chapter I copyrighted in 2006, but did not send to press.

More info:

Categories:Topics, Art & Design
Published by: Brianroy on Apr 13, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/13/2010

pdf

text

original

 
 
Redating the New Testamentto 47 - 57/58 A.D.(-2/3 John)
Issues with the Chronology of New Testament Dating using the Historical Methodat the same face value as any historical literary sources of antiquity demands thatwe date the entire New Testament, with the exception of 2 John, and 3 John towithin an approximate 11 to 12 year overall time frame.
 
P
reface: An early dating of the New Testament is grounded in the historicalanamnesis and witness of those of the generation, which saw, heard, and physically touchedJesus Christ. In contrast, it is those who choose to do what the scribes and
P
harisees did to themasses while Jesus taught or performed miracles -- to commit apodokimazo (Gr. "to activelykeep from proving"){
1
} -- to illegitimately and deceptively proclaim disbelief, which will potentially turn thousands upon thousands AWAY from Christ.
Part 1: Redating the extra-biblical 1 Clement to circa August/September of 64A.D.
In order to properly approach the dating of the New Testament, historical markers need to beestablished. The most essential historical markers in a proper dating of the New Testamentworks, is to properly date the deaths of the Apostles
P
eter and
P
aul; to establish the time of death of one of their successors, Mark, who carried on
P
eter¶s Gospel as he preached it in Rome(the Gospel of Mark); and to establish when the extra-biblical writing of 1 Clement was writtenin Rome to the Church at Corinth. Once these various points are established, they lay the proper foundation for the case to be made for historians to believe the witness that the book of Revelation was written while
P
aul was still alive, and prior to his arrest in Jerusalem in May of 54 A.D. under the procuratorship of Felix, then serving in his 7
th
year as Governor.
B
eginning with Clement (bishop at Rome 57 -100/101 A.D.)
Clement is the immediate successor to the Apostle
P
eter in Rome. He was preceded as Bishop by both Linus and Anencletus, who died in office while the Apostles
P
eter and
P
aul were stillalive and in Rome. We are not given the historical details related to the deaths of the first two bishops who died while
P
eter and
P
aul were jointly their apostolic overseers.In some legal proceedings, the immediate witnesses of an event are first sought for, followed bysecond and then third generation witnesses that can pass on a chain of custody witness testimony.Once it reaches a fourth generation oral telling, the information may or may not be rejected bythe courts.By looking first at Clement, I wish to bring you into the First Century from a more proper outside the New Testament perspective, so that you may see without the purple haze that ³Q´and other theories have placed upon the minds of those looking at the New Testament era.The bishop of Rome in the first centuries of Christianity was never a pontifex maximus (the top³high priest´) over Christianity, as Roman Catholicism has re-envisioned history to be. But thefact of the matter is that 1 Clement was written by Clement, who was THE HEAD of theChurches at Rome, who confessed more than once, that there was NO
P
A
P
ACY present.
1 Clement was written prior to A.D. 70
by the THIRD bishop of the Christian Churches at
 
Rome. Roman Catholicism incredulously calls him the third pope. If so, by his own words andcloseness to the apostles, Clement¶s own words should have the greater weight in our considerations of debating about the man. In
1 Clement, .34,
( by my reckoning dating to weeksor months just after the fire of Rome under Nero) we have the citation that could just as easily beattributed to Revelation 22:12 as to Isaiah 40:10, or 62:11. When the proper dating isaccomplished, possibilities like these must dealt with in the context of the most accuratetimeline, and properly addressed.1 Clement was most likely in the months following the persecutions by Nero Caesar followinghis burning of Rome.
There is some debate as to whether that July 18-19 burning of Romewas in A.D. 64. 1 Clement was most likely written between August and September in theweeks following the Great Fire of Rome, and the following persecutions and torching of thousands of Christians both living and visiting there
.{
2
}Sometime in the two months prior to the letter of 1 Clement, there was a tumult created by someone or two affluent persons who sought to engage in sedition against the
P
resbyters at Corinth.
1 Clement, .47
reads thus:
 ± It is disgraceful«and unworthy of your Christian profession that such a thing should be heard of as that the most steadfast and the*very* first* Church of the Corinthians should, on account of one or two persons, engage in sedition against its Presbyters. And this rumor has reached not only us, but those also who are unconnected (or differ) with us«.´
 One or two members had raised a sedition against the holy and blameless bishop over theCorinthian Churches, for no other reason perhaps, than just because they could. The point did notmatter in regards as to whether these men were pretenders of Judaism, Greek philosophy, or worshippers of Roman or Greek deities. What did matter is that the leaders had to have been menof great influence within the Church; and at Corinth, and that meant wealth. Whoever these twomen were, they had great wealth and were either great benefactors only, or both benefactors and
P
resbyters over their own large congregations. If 
P
resbyters, then as we read that word, weshould translate it as Chief Reverend or Rabbi, so that we might get the modern concept or understanding of this position. But in context, we come to find that earlier in the Epistle,Clement confesses of not being over all churches:
³Let us cleave, therefore, to those who cultivate peace with godliness, and not those whohypocritically profess to desire it«For Christ is of those who are humble-minded, and not of those who exalt themselves over His flock.´
{
3
}
«let us esteem those who have the rule over us; let us Honor the aged among us; let us train up the young men in the fear of G-D«.´
{
4
}

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->