Re: [GTh] Dating evidence.
- In a message dated 06/06/2002 17:30:31PM, jknee@... writes:
<< If good arguments can be made that the production of Thomas should best be
placed, say, 40-60 CE that is, at least to me, an interesting result and
says something about the diverse appropriations of the figure of Jesus at
that point. It may or may not also say something interesting about 'the
historical Jesus' but it would mean that, whatever arguments you wanted to
make, Thomas would have to be, so to say, 'factored in'.
Likewise if it can most plausible be placed, say 90-120 CE then that too is
of utility in understanding a little more about the uses that Jesus
traditions were put to and offering a perhaps rather different perspective
on the use of materials that turn up in Thomas in any work on 'the
>>John Moon Says
Of course the answer could be both. That is some of The material could be
current to the period of 33 AD to 50 AD, and some could be much later in the
90-112 AD period.
Then there is the possibility (I believe Davies mentioned) That some of
the material actually pre dates the Jesus movement.
That is most interesting. IF much of the material was pre existent.
Then 1) either the Historical Jesus Knew of it or 2) the Historical Jesus was
attributed with it.
( OR) Perhaps a mixture of the two possibilities.
Regards JOHN MOON
Springfield, Tenn. 37172
- In a message dated 6/13/2 7:41:00 AM, Mike wrote:
originally had five disciples is attested also in Jewish writings,
apparently independently, and among the five names there given is 'Mattias',
as I recall.>>
Most scholars I've read have discounted this list of disciples as being late.
Ill find some references and send em along later.