Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Probable Dates Of These Books

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Probable Dates Of These Books

    John--A.D. 80-90
    1 John--A.D. 90-95
    2 John--A.D. 90-95
    3 John--A.D. 90-95
    Revelation--A.D. 94-96

    I know it's been contested and said that Revelation was written earlier, but what about the other books written by John and what basis do you come to the conclusion the date they were written if they differ from the dates above.

    Thanks


    In Christ's Love
    Last edited by ClayInHisHands; Feb 14th 2010, 10:40 PM. Reason: Took out an instruction that didn't accurately explain what it was that I wanted to determine

  • #2
    Basically, you're making a thread to discuss when the five books of John were written, but you're forbidding people to actually disagree that the Revelation was written in the late date because God forbid it's true that it was written at an earlier date and it forces you to change your way of thinking.
    To This Day

    Comment


    • #3
      No, if you think the Date of Revelation has bearing on when The Gospel of John; 1, 2, and 3 John were written go ahead. I just meant that I know it's been discussed that Revelation was written earlier. So there was no point in explaining that because I have heard the argument for that, and I can see some valid points to it. But if Revelation has to be talked about to argue the other 4 books, then that would be fine. I'll go back and take that part out of the original post just in case people have read it and share your same sentiments. Maybe that's why no one else has replied. So by all means, you can.

      In Christ's Love

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm assuming then, with the exception of Revelation, that everyone agrees that the dates are basically correct in regards to JOHN, 1 JOHN, 2 JOHN, and 3 JOHN?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ClayInHisHands View Post
          I'm assuming then, with the exception of Revelation, that everyone agrees that the dates are basically correct in regards to JOHN, 1 JOHN, 2 JOHN, and 3 JOHN?
          Not really. J. A. T. Robinson suggested that John could have been written between 40 and 70. Others suggest 80-95. It depends on whether you think the last chapter was a later addition.

          Comment


          • #6
            John was written in A.D. 90 while in the city of Ephesus[sp].
            1 John A.D. 90
            2 John A.D. 90
            3 John A.D. 90
            Revelation A.D. 95 while at Patmos
            This is my opinion.

            Comment


            • #7
              I believe John left Jerusalem for Ephesus around 66 a.d. and in patmos in 67 a.d. therefore i believe these books would have a earlier date.

              Here's a link to show a time line. http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...m3Mq7emabBMbFw

              Comment


              • #8
                I believe that all of the books of the New Testament were written before 70 AD. The most immediate reason is that, while many of the books contain prophecies concerning an imminent pouring out of God's wrath, not a single one of them refers to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple in 70 AD as a past event... If mentioned explicitly it is always within a predictive context, and if mentioned vaguely it is always a generalized anticipation.

                Regarding the writings of John, their post-90 AD authorships can only be attributed to late (and contradictory) tradition, but not any real, credible evidence... especially not internal evidence. Working backwards:

                The case for the Revelation's pre-70 AD authorship is incredibly strong, especially in consideration of the internal evidence. Since, however, this has been discussed in several other threads, I'll merely summarize that the book is believed to have been written roughly 64-68 AD because of John's claim that he was "suffering in the tribulation", being the Neronian persecution he refers to later in the book.

                Regarding the epistles of John: None of them indicate knowledge, or even a subtle hint, of Jerusalem's destruction and the dispersement of the Jewish population in 70 AD, so this would point to a pre-70 AD authorship. Many of the arguments given for John's letters to have been written in the 90s AD rest upon his apparent references to the Gnostic-style beliefs that had seeped into the Church. The claim is that Gnostic-style beliefs only began spreading in the 90s AD, and no earlier. However, 2 Peter and Jude (both, obviously, writing before 70 AD) argue against proto-Gnostic beliefs [2 Peter 2.1; Jude 4], and what John says is merely a more elaborate argument against this same set of pre-70 AD proto-Gnostics. Hence, it is entirely possible that John wrote his letters before 70 AD. (Indeed, it seems that all three letters were written within a very short span of time: 1 John to a generalized Christian community, 2 John to a particular group of Christians in that community, and 3 John to a specific individual within that particular group.) However, like Jude and 2 Peter, none of John's letters describe a previous or present widespread persecution of Christians (aside from the generalized "the world will hate us"), which would seem to indicate an authorship before 64 AD (when the Neronian persecution of the Church began).

                As for the gospel of John: As before, not a single reference to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem as happening in the past is found in the gospel... one must know that following 70 AD, Christian literature abounded with references to the Jerusalem's destruction, so it seems remarkable that John's gospel doesn't contain even the slightest allusion to the historical event other than by prophetic prediction. In John 5.2, where John uses the present tense to describe the location of the Pool of Bethesda. He says "there is a place with five colonnades"... not "there was", but "there is". The "place with five colonnades" was still existent within Jerusalem at the time John was writing the gospel; this place would have been nothing more than a pile of rubble after 70 AD, and could only be described as "was", and not "is". The end of the gospel, however, clearly indicates that Peter had already died, so this would place its authorship at roughly 65-67 AD, after the letters. (There even seem to be some arguments that some portions of the gospel were specifically worded in certain ways by John because of particular arguments he made in his three letters.)

                So, to put it briefly:
                1. Letters: 60-64 AD
                2. Gospel: 65-67 AD
                3. Revelation: 64-68 AD
                To This Day

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                  I agree with markedwards dates.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                    Post edited.

                    Mod Note: Only Christians are allowed to post in the bible chat section of our forum. Please acquaint yourself with the rules here and restrict your posting to the allowed areas. BrianW.
                    Last edited by BrianW; Feb 19th 2013, 04:19 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                      Originally posted by raoul View Post
                      Post edited by BrianW
                      Can you prove your assertions?? I personally haven't studied this topic, but RabbiKnife and especially markedward have quite extensively.
                      Last edited by BrianW; Feb 19th 2013, 04:20 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                        Markedward responded in another thread to raoul's dates and what Markedward said in the other thread is correct. Even most critical scholars accept several of Paul's writings to be early and most of the NT to be before 70 A.D. Sure some don't, but that's not the majority nor the average scholarly critic. Also, as Markedward pointed out there are generally only a few that talked about as being very late and they some of the smaller epistles such as 2 Peter.

                        Here's a short bit from Wikipedia giving a little of the reasoning why late dates are largely abandoned now.

                        In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

                        Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

                        If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                          Originally posted by markedward View Post

                          As for the gospel of John: As before, not a single reference to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem as happening in the past is found in the gospel... one must know that following 70 AD, Christian literature abounded with references to the Jerusalem's destruction, so it seems remarkable that John's gospel doesn't contain even the slightest allusion to the historical event other than by prophetic prediction. In John 5.2, where John uses the present tense to describe the location of the Pool of Bethesda. He says "there is a place with five colonnades"... not "there was", but "there is". The "place with five colonnades" was still existent within Jerusalem at the time John was writing the gospel; this place would have been nothing more than a pile of rubble after 70 AD, and could only be described as "was", and not "is". The end of the gospel, however, clearly indicates that Peter had already died, so this would place its authorship at roughly 65-67 AD, after the letters. (There even seem to be some arguments that some portions of the gospel were specifically worded in certain ways by John because of particular arguments he made in his three letters.)


                          John 5:1 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
                          2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.

                          I'm not following your logic here. Why would it matter when John wrote this? It seems to me, the fact Jesus would have still been walking the earth at the time, at that time then, these porches would have been there. What does when he wrote this have anything to do with anything? It would be true no matter when he wrote this, that at the time, "When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?" in verse 6, those 5 porches would have indeed been there. Maybe not after 70 AD tho, but why would that matter anyway, the fact John was writing about the times Jesus lived in, historically speaking?

                          I have no clue if you are right or wrong about when this gospel was written. That's not even my point. I'm just trying to understand why you would argue it like that, that this somehow proves John had to have been written prior to 70 AD.


                          For the sake of argument, let's say John indeed wrote this after 70 AD. Would you then think he should have said the following perhaps?

                          John 5:1 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
                          2 Now there WAS at ONE TIME IN Jerusalem by the sheep market, WHICH IS NO LONGER THERE, a pool, which WAS called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.

                          If so, doesn't that seem odd, the fact this would no longer be an accurate historic account? At that time, it would have been untrue to write that in the past tense, because John was speaking in the present tense, the fact this is an historic account of what had taken place at that time. That would be my conclusion. Even if he wrote that after 70 AD, he still would have written it exactly the same way he did.

                          With that said, I personally would conclude he likely wrote this gospel prior to 70 AD. But not based on John 5:2. So like I indicated then, I'm basically trying to understand your logic here. Maybe I'm just missing your point big time? It wouldn't be the first time I've done that with anyone.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                            Markedward makes good points re the destruction of Jerusalem not being mentioned and I would agree that the Gospel of John would be written before 70 AD.
                            I don't have any problem though with it being written much earlier than the 67 AD. John is recording Jesus' words and there is but a hint that it was written after to tie in with Peter. Also at the suggested time of writing the Christians left Jerusalem so it would still have been mentioned as a prophecy or sign, yet John makes no mention of this, unlike the synoptic gospels. If the first copy was just prior to the destruction of the temple then as John was still alive, he could even have revised it or added to it as suggested was done for Peter. This wouldn't have been possible after it is already widely disseminated, so I go for an earlier authorship of the Gospel.
                            There is though circular reasoning around when Revelation was written. If it was about Neronian persecution then it would have been written before Nero died. However as I don't see that it is about Nero, then I also don't see a requirement for the earlier date. Remove the enforced view about the persecution being from Nero and evidence then shows a later date of 95 AD approximately.
                            The letters of John should be possible to tie in better. For me 2 John seems to be to one lady and her children who everyone should love who love the truth, from the children of her sister chosen by God. When I read this without any idea of time of authorship I immediately thought John was writing to Mary the mother of Jesus. This suggested to me that John was away from her but hoped to visit her soon. I believe she was in Ephesus and so he may have been in Patmos at the time of writing. However this is speculation and nothing concrete.
                            3 John suggests a time whilst he is still active enough to get about so possibly not long after 2 John.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Probable Dates Of These Books

                              Originally posted by Vakeros View Post
                              There is though circular reasoning around when Revelation was written. If it was about Neronian persecution then it would have been written before Nero died. However as I don't see that it is about Nero, then I also don't see a requirement for the earlier date. Remove the enforced view about the persecution being from Nero and evidence then shows a later date of 95 AD approximately.
                              Markedwards' paragraph taken by itself could be considered circular. However, Markedward doesn't go into detail stating that it's been discussed in detail in other threads.

                              In your paragraph, you state if we removed presupposition of it being Nero's persecution (a presupposition in this thread anyway), then the evidence shows a late date. However, you didn't provide any evidence. So in this thread, the 95 date is presupposed too, isn't it?

                              In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

                              Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

                              If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X