Redating the New Testament - J.A.T Robinson
This work is cited in nearly every discussion of New Testament books that have disputed dates. J.A.T Robinson argues on the basis that the fall of Jerusalem is never mentioned in the New Testament writings as a past fact, that the books of the New Testament were written before A.D. 70.
This work is very important, and with the change of views of many New Testament scholars recently, is seeming like a precursor to many modern changes of view.
Comments
-
Agree it would be good to have, but it's quite an old book now. Are you aware of Jonathan Bernier's recent critique and reworking of Robinson's book which also addresses a number of its weaknesses? It is available in Logos:
2 -
No, I was not aware of that, thanks for sharing!
0 -
Bernier’s book is more up to date.
0 -
It seems like based on the description, Bernier's book would cover mostly the same content. Would I be missing out on anything by reading Bernier's book and skipping Robinsons? I want to make sure before I devote time to reading it. How similar are these two books, and how do they differ? Do they come to any different conclusions?
0 -
I tried to read Robinson cover to cover years ago, but I gave up after some time. He tries to unfold assumptions often taken for granted or to be self-evident in dating the NT and other christian writings from the first century A.D. At the end of the work, he presents a table with possible date ranges according to his reasoning for each book.
Bernier explicitly tries to update Robinson's efford. Maybe you look into a preview, but I think you don't have to work through Robinson in order to understand Bernier.
0
