He was preaching and he mentioned something that both me and my gf were repulsed by. He said since all authority is founded by God, that we all need to shut up and listen to the government: the same government that forced COVID down our throats, lies about everything, uses propaganda against its own people. Part of me wonders if he got paid off or was given a big break to spout this horse crap.
Part of me wonders if he's compromised or was given a bag of cash to spout this dogma
So Paul's letters are dated around 50-67 AD. The book of Luke is dated from around 80 traditionally. However, it's an interesting note. The line that Paul uses here is an amalgam of an old testament passage with an ending that is directly attributed to Jesus. The only known text to contain this is Luke. So this leads to an interesting question. Did Paul quoted Luke, or did Luke quote material that Paul had access to? Given this knowledge, it's reasonable to assume that other gospel pieces would exist as well Pre-Paul. Most noteworthy is Mark. The earliest Mark manuscript piece is from the dead sea scrolls, dated at 68AD. However these scrolls were hidden just prior to the Jewish temple destruction in 70ad, and were obviously widely enough spread that they had copies to stash away from the massacre. We know for a fact that Like quoted from Mark/Matthew (This gets hazy for other reasons), so this means that, in addition to a firm 68AD dating, when Luke was pulling sources for his gospel, these gospels existed. If Paul was citing a Jesus quote in a letter from the mid 50s, it's reasonable to assume that if Luke has not been written yet, he at least was pulling from another document we have not found. It's also reasonable to assume that, if we found a Mark manuscript from 68AD, it would have existed well before that as well. The language of both Mark, Matthew, Luke, and Paul all seem to indicate that it was written prior to Paul's death and prior to the Jewish temples fall. Thus, we can conclude that Mark, or a variation of the text, existed prior to Paul's death at the very least, and was drawn upon enough to be known scripture because Paul was quoting to other believers.
froggy 0 points 1.9 years ago
Ok, first I must apologize, it's been a few years since I read the work behind this. It was Luke that Paul cited.
http://www.rightreason.org/2015/paul-quoted-luke/
So Paul's letters are dated around 50-67 AD. The book of Luke is dated from around 80 traditionally. However, it's an interesting note. The line that Paul uses here is an amalgam of an old testament passage with an ending that is directly attributed to Jesus. The only known text to contain this is Luke. So this leads to an interesting question. Did Paul quoted Luke, or did Luke quote material that Paul had access to? Given this knowledge, it's reasonable to assume that other gospel pieces would exist as well Pre-Paul. Most noteworthy is Mark. The earliest Mark manuscript piece is from the dead sea scrolls, dated at 68AD. However these scrolls were hidden just prior to the Jewish temple destruction in 70ad, and were obviously widely enough spread that they had copies to stash away from the massacre. We know for a fact that Like quoted from Mark/Matthew (This gets hazy for other reasons), so this means that, in addition to a firm 68AD dating, when Luke was pulling sources for his gospel, these gospels existed. If Paul was citing a Jesus quote in a letter from the mid 50s, it's reasonable to assume that if Luke has not been written yet, he at least was pulling from another document we have not found. It's also reasonable to assume that, if we found a Mark manuscript from 68AD, it would have existed well before that as well. The language of both Mark, Matthew, Luke, and Paul all seem to indicate that it was written prior to Paul's death and prior to the Jewish temples fall. Thus, we can conclude that Mark, or a variation of the text, existed prior to Paul's death at the very least, and was drawn upon enough to be known scripture because Paul was quoting to other believers.