James Crossley's blog Contact: jgcrossley10 - AT - yahoo - DOT - co - DOT - uk

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

More date of Mark stuff

Well it seems that there is a mild concern for the date of Mark's gospel. XTalk has had loads of posts on the matter. Even the very late date (early C2) has been raised. This always puzzled me. there are serious problems dating agospel that late which predicts the kingdom of God within the life time of Jesus' audience (Mk 9.1) and that the second coming would come within a generation (Mk 13.30). There are none of the problems found with such imminent eschatology in what are clearly later texts like 2 Peter 3 and John's gospel (esp. ch.21). It seems extremely unlikely that a second century gospel writer would leave Mk 9.1 and Mk 13.30 unedited.


Anonymous Christopher Shell said...

Yes. Ive sometimes wondered whether there is some significance in the choice of the word 'generation', given that AD 70 was exactly one generation later -one of the reasons I incline to an early-seventies dating.

September 22, 2005

Blogger James Crossley said...

But Jesus' predictions in Mark do not have much degree of precision (as say some attempts at Qumran or the end of Daniel) and are always left as to not-quite-knowing when these things will take place. I would say the best we can do on dating on the basis of such predictions would be an upper dating of around (say) the 70s CE.

September 23, 2005

Anonymous Christopher Shell said...

Good point! Maybe he had learnt from experience to hedge his bets.

October 06, 2005


Post a Comment

<< Home