Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - Re: [GMark] Comments on George Young's reply to Tanna Brodbar

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Richard Harris" <rhh1 AT nildram.co.uk>
  • To: "Kata Markon" <gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [GMark] Comments on George Young's reply to Tanna Brodbar
  • Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 19:04:17 +0100

If for the sake of argument, we assume that
the Gospel of Mark is the underlying WORD that the
Galatians heard/read/experienced ...
given the above and several other data, it does seem
appropriate to me to date the Gospel somewhere between
35-45 AD.

___________

Have I misunderstood something, or have you just made up this dating? You say 'If for the sake of argument ... ' and then move on to claim 'it does seem appropriate to me ... ' as though you have made some deduction, reaching a conclusion by analysis. In fact, the conclusion is just a restatement of the initial premise.

It seems to me that you cannot ignore the evidence in Mark that many scholars argue leads to a date circa 70. Mark 13:1-2 is one example. I would be interested in an argument that suggests writers such as Kloppenberg are wrong. But I have never seen one.

With good wishes

Richard Harris







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page