[QUOTE=chuckj;181375]Bob,

I think it's important to make the distinction between when the canon was closed vs. when the first canons appeared.  The Muratorian fragment is from 180 CE.  (I've pasted it below, mainly because I find it a fascinating read.)  That does not allow the time you mentioned to coordinate oral traditions.  The books on this list existed as written documents in 180.  If they were written in the second century, the creativity you rightly mentioned would have to have been accomplished in an astonishingly brief period of time.

Chuck


That, too, is funny, Chuck... Look below at what, for instance, Tertullian wrote in about a 15 year period. Some of these are voluminous, compared to the Christian Testament. After seeing what this one person accomplished in about 15 years, you think the Christian Testament, composed over maybe 70 years, was anything????
Dennis


from : http://www.tertullian.org/chronology.htm


The dating of Tertullian's works is controversial.  This page contains the 'standard' chronology, from CCL II pp. 1627-8.  This in turn quotes Harnack, A., Die Chronologie der Altchristlichen Litteratur, II, Leipzig, 1904, pp.256-296.  Monceaux, P., Histoire littéraire de l'Afrique chrétienne, I, Paris, 1901.  However Barnes has offered a radically different view and reviews all the evidence afresh, but his conclusions have not all been accepted.
Before Ad Nationes and Apologeticum:
Ad Martyras1
After 19 February 197:
Ad nationes2
A little later:
Apologeticum
A little later:
De testimonio animae
After 198AD but before the Montanist period:3
De praescriptione
[First edition of Adversus Marcionem]
De spectaculis
De baptismo
[Adversus Iudaeos?]
De patientia
De paenitentia
De cultu feminarum
Ad uxorem
Adversus Hermogenem
After 204AD, with Montanist tendencies
[De ecstasi]4
[De spe fidelium]5
[De paradiso]6
AD 207-8
Adversus Marcionem, second edition containing books I, II and III 7
AD 208-212, having converted to Montanism
Adversus Marcionem, books IV and V - 3rd edition.
De pallio 8
Adversus Valentinianos
[De censu animae adversus Hermogenem] 9
[De fato] 10
De anima 11
[Adversus Apelleiacos] 12
De carne Christi
De resurrectione mortuorum
De corona
Scorpiace
De idololatria 13
After the solar eclipse of 14th August 212:
Ad Scapulam 14
After the breakdown of relations with the 'Psychici' (=carnal), around 213AD
De fuga
Adversus Praxean
De virginibus velandis 15
De monogamia 16
De ieiunio
De pudicitia 17


(The numbers are footnotes.)

[QUOTE=chuckj;181316]Dennis,

Thanks for supplying my first out-loud laugh of the day.

Here's the first verse of I Clem:

"The Church of God which sojourneth at Rome, to the Church of God which sojourneth at Corinth, to them that are called and sanctified in the will of God through our Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you from Almighty God through Jesus Christ. "

Chuck[/QUOTE]

Here is the first sentence from another "letter," Chuck. It should give you another laugh.

You have noticed that the human being is a curiosity. In times past he has had (and worn out and flung away hundreds and hundreds of religions; today he has hundreds and hundreds or religions, and launches not fewer than three new ones every year."
Letters from the Earth, Letter 3, Mark Twain

Not everything that says it is a correspondence is a correspondence... Or were you the one who bought the Eiffel tower?
Dennis

[QUOTE=chuckj;181479][QUOTE=MisterC;181445]

Well, yes, Dennis, I do.

Since the documents, in this scenario, were not written by their purported authors or in their purported settings.

Since they invented a new religion, including its namesake and its main proponent.

Since they were written in many different voices and literary styles.

Since somehow the authors tricked the creator of the Muratorian fragment into believing they were first century documents.

And since all of this would be an incredibly oblique way to start a religion.

Yes, I do.

Chuck[/QUOTE]


Then, Chuck, it sounds like you disagree with the JS on the dating for Luke and Acts, many others about John being at the turn of the second century, as well as Revelation. Since you believe all of these are first century works, you probably need to just quote Eusebius and be done with it. Wait! You haven't cracked a book. You are using apologetic logic, without any information whatsoever. Using the same logic, 5% of the 7000 Christians there would have been by 100 (app. 35) (I cited that earlier) could have easily have used different voices, literary styles and improved on Mark to create Matt, Luke, gone gnostic with John, etc.
Dennis

[QUOTE=chuckj;181513][QUOTE=MisterC;181495]

Dennis,

Yes, logical historical scenarios are what I'm interested in.  As you well know, the question in this thread is whether *all* of the NT was written in the second century.  Is there anything in your post you'd like to retract and apologize for in light of that?

Chuck[/QUOTE]

Chuck,

This is getting away from the subject, but I'm moving, based on various readings, to the conclusion that there is very little logical history in Christianity or most other religions for that matter.  I'm very close to viewing Christianity as my preferred vehicle for delivery of a reasonable ethical and moral philosophy.:)

"I think it's important to make the distinction between when the canon was closed vs. when the first canons appeared. The Muratorian fragment is from 180 CE. (I've pasted it below, mainly because I find it a fascinating read.) That does not allow the time you mentioned to coordinate oral traditions. The books on this list existed as written documents in 180. If they were written in the second century, the creativity you rightly mentioned would have to have been accomplished in an astonishingly brief period of time.
Chuck"


That is interesting. You have a time of roughly 50-95 (if you accept conventional, pre-JS dating), or 45 years for the writing of this material. The time I give is from 70-150, or 80 years, a far longer time for the development and one that can be followed through a progression of Messiah to envoy of God. So, indeed, it seems that if they were written in the first century, there wasn't as much time for "development" as therewould've been with my time frame.
Dennis