Timeline for Could Luke have interviewed Mary for his gospel? (Luke 1:2)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24 at 18:55 | vote | accept | Jason_ | ||
| Feb 24 at 18:49 | comment | added | Jason_ | +1. I enjoyed learning from you here. I appreciate the well ordered answer! | |
| Feb 24 at 2:12 | comment | added | Hold To The Rod | @DanFefferman thanks. I doubt even heavyweights like Herodotus, Thucydides, Appian, or Dio Cassius would pass muster as a master's thesis today. | |
| Feb 23 at 15:50 | comment | added | Dan Fefferman | + 1 - I don't entirely agree with your conclusion but I appreciate a your well-reasoned argument. The reason I don't entirely agree is that I think Luke did use eyewitnesses whenever he could but he does not claim to use them exclusively. IMO he could have used not only second hand accounts (from people who listened to Mary) but also stories circulating in the church at the time of his writing. He was a reliable historian by the standards of his time, but his account would not pass muster as even a master's thesis in a history faculty today. | |
| Feb 23 at 9:16 | comment | added | Olde English | All of what you have said here speaks to a well rounded appreciation of Luke. I can certainly go with your conclusion. + 1. | |
| Feb 23 at 4:03 | history | edited | Hold To The Rod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
addressed a popular counterargument and provided links for further reading
|
| Feb 23 at 3:53 | history | edited | Hold To The Rod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
expanded post, improved formatting
|
| Feb 23 at 3:38 | history | edited | Hold To The Rod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added references
|
| Feb 23 at 1:37 | history | edited | Hold To The Rod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 212 characters in body
|
| Feb 23 at 1:27 | history | answered | Hold To The Rod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |