Bart ehrman dating of the gospels
See the examples cited in my response to the Ehrman/Mc Grew exchange.We also have evidence for pre-Irenaean testimony outside of Irenaeus, which I also cited in that previous post.But for now, my point is that despite what people might commonly think, the books are anonymous.I pointed out yesterday that even though the author of Luke does not tell us his name, he does write in the first person (“I”/ “we”) in the opening of his Gospel.Bart Ehrman and Richard Bauckham recently discussed the gospels on Justin Brierley's Unbelievable? The first part has been posted, and the second should be available later this week.Neither scholar holds a traditional view of the gospels, but Bauckham is much closer to a traditional perspective.
Bart Ehrman explains he is not going into details here, and one can find in the literature more nuanced arguments for relative and other dates assigned to the gospels.
I discussed the sources in the comments section of a thread at another blog here.
Go to that page and use the Ctrl F feature on your keyboard to search for my last name.
It would be too complex a discussion in this context, and it is enough that Ehrman has at least stated that there are “reasons” and it is not just a whimsy.
But the key point to notice is that Ehrman uses this relative date of Mark (relative to the other gospels) to assert that Ehrman is presenting the standard dating method found in most basic texts that treat the subject.
After listening to the podcast, I decided that it would be useful to come back to the subject in writing, re-emphasize and say more about some points Tim made, and make some additional points.