17
There are two common answers to this question:
A. Inspiration
All scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Tim. 3:16)
On this view the authors learned of these details by revelation from God, much like Peter learned of Jesus' identity in this way, as recorded in Matthew 16: 15-17
B. These people talked to each other
1. Nicodemus - we learn in John 19:39 ...
15
For an early date
Among the arguments in favor for an early date (i.e. during emperor Nero) is:
A temple seems to exist in Rev 11, but the temple was destroyed in AD 70. The counter argument is of course that this temple is a part of a symbolic vision and should not be mixed up with the physical temple.
Revelation addresses the tension between the Jews and ...
14
I did look into this for a paper on Revelation and First Enoch (The Canonicity of Apocalyptic Literature). Whenever it was written, Revelation aims to encourage Christians during an imperial persecution.
Arguments for a Late Date (A.D. 96)
As external evidence they point to the early church writers like Iraneus (Against Heresies 5.30.3), Victorinus of ...
11
While before the 20th century there was common agreement on common authorship between the Gospel and Epistles of John, there is, as you mention, no such agreement today. At the same time, we are quick to note, however, that John and 1 John share a vocabulary of words and thought forms to such an extent that no one has mounted a serious proposal that they are ...
10
The traditional view
As OP notes, Jeremiah was traditionally regarded as the author of the collection of five poems we know as "Lamentations". This claim is already found in the superscription to the Septuagint version (Brenton translation):1
And it came to pass, after Israel was taken captive, and Jerusalem made desolate, that Jeremias sat weeping, and ...
10
While reading links to add to this question, I ran across Gesenius’ explanation (§129 c.), which seems to be too much of an answer to incorporate into the question. I therefore offer it as an answer, although I have a sense that it’s up for disputing, and I’d love to see other answers incorporating more recent scholarship.
Gesenius labels this lamed ...
9
The Muratorian fragment isn't simply a list of books included in the canon, but also a description of them. It's description of the Gospel of Luke makes it very clear that they believed it was written by Luke:
The third book of the Gospel [is that] according to Luke. Luke, "the" physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him as ...
9
One of the critical scholars who believe the attribution to Paul is clearly fictional is Burton L. Mack, who says (Who Wrote the New Testament, p206) the language, style and thought of Titus is thoroughly un-Pauline. He says the ‘personal’ references to particular occasions in the lives of Timothy, Titus, and Paul do not fit with reconstructions of that ...
9
Bibliographic Postscript
This is offered as a supplement to Soldarnal's fine answer.
Probably the most thorough (one is tempted to say "exhaustive") account of the internal evidence bearing on the question of the common authorship of gJohn and 1 John is found in A.E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (Edinburgh, 1912), ...
9
James 1:1
In James 1:1 we read:
James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the
twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings. (Jam 1:1 NKJ)
This introductory greeting informs the readers that the writer is called 'James' and he considers himself to be a slave of both God and the Lord Jesus Christ. In itself, this greeting ...
9
In a 2013 interview with Dr Peter Flint, who is an editor on the Isaiah scroll, he had the following to say about the issue:
Many scholastic studies tell us that the book of Isaiah was divided into two parts: First Isaiah by Isaiah of Jerusalem (chapters 1–39)
and Second Isaiah by a writer living after the Hebrews returned from
captivity in Babylon (...
8
Although the gospel accounts generally evidence the fact that Jesus was fully literate, including this account in John:
6This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin ...
8
Although my initial reaction to this question was (not unlike the response in another answer here) that obviously this day-of-the-week superscription (DWS) reflects the Jewish liturgical background of the translator, this conclusion depends on several assumptions:
The phrase "τῆς μιᾶς σαββάτων" is original to the Old Greek translation of the Psalms ("LXX")....
7
This was not, perhaps, Leon Morris's finest moment (quote is on p. 17, originally published 1974), although he certainly wasn't alone in assuming this datum. Neither Howard Marshall, nor John Nolland make mention of Marcion in their circumspect discussions of the attribution of authorship of the third (canonical) gospel -- simply to cite two subsequent "...
6
P66, a manuscript from ca. 200 AD, contains the first nine verses of John 21, indicating that if it was an addition, it was a very early addition. Thus the addition of this chapter cannot have been motivated by Catholic theology of the pope, which was not developed until much later. In fact, Nestle Aland (the most used critical edition of the New Testament)...
6
The most important arguement for a late date is that if Daniel were written in the 6th Century BC, it would mean that predictive prophecy had occurred, an astounding thing. Other less significant arguments are related to Darius the Mede not being attested to in history, and other less significant issues.
Evidence for an early date are these:
Daniel ...
6
Christian tradition holds that John did live to be 80 or 90.
We know from Polycarp, that John was still active in Ephesus, and baptised him directly. Following Schaff:
It is safe, then, to say that the apostle John, with other disciples of Christ, came from Palestine to Asia Minor. If Polycarp, on the day of his death (Feb. 23, 155), was looking back ...
6
The New Bible Dictionary states:
For centuries both Judaism and Christianity accepted without question
the biblical tradition that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. Ben-Sira
(Ecclus. 24:23), Philo (Life of Moses 3. 39), Josephus (Ant. 4.326),
the Mishnah (Pirqê Abôth 1. 1), and the Talmud (Baba Bathra 14b) are
unanimous in their acceptance of the ...
5
Concerning the accuracy of the gospel
The introduction to Luke's gospel is in "high" Greek, as was common in historical writing at the time. Moreover, the author claims to have researched events well. We know that the author had gained access to Mark, and claims to have utilized several additional sources until he got "perfect knowledge" of the events ...
5
Further argument for a late date
Not only does Daniel seem able to prophesy events close to the time of 167 BCE accurately, although not the relevant events that occurred shortly after this time, but its narrative around the chronology of the Exile seems flawed. Chapter 8 is in the time of Babylonian rule, then Daniel 9:1 is the first year of Darius, son of ...
5
In Hebrew, ל as a prefix can mean "to" in the sense of "I am walking to the park." But it can also be used to make a noun the indirect object (i.e. beneficiary) of a sentence, in the sense of "I gave the cookie to David" or "I opened the door for David."
By attaching ל to a noun, we can make it the indirect object of a sentence. (If we want to do this in ...
4
[OP] Who is the "we" in 1 John 1:1?
A decent case can be made that the "we" of 1 John 1 is "editorial"; that is, it is a rhetorical device to refer to the author's self. This usage, related to the "royal 'we'", remains current, even if it now has a certain whiff of whimsy (or worse). In other words, the "we" refers not a group of apostles, nor the Twelve, ...
4
Since he is using the 'I' without further reference, he is the author. (No one else is being named explicitly who could be co-author.)
The 'we' in the beginning therefore can only be understood as standing for the group of witnessing disciples (apostles).
Regarding witness the commonness (plural) of the experience is important (as not being just an ...
4
Several years ago, I was reading through the Fourth Gospel about every week. During this time, one of the things I noticed was the way in which the author refers to Peter. Matthew, Mark and Luke almost almost refer to him simply as "Peter", the major exception being in the retelling of accounts prior to Peter's meeting with Jesus. On the other hand, the ...
4
Apparently the Theory is not from Analysis of Pre-Extant Texts
If C. Marvin Pate is correct in his Romans commentary statements (no page numbers shown in that Google Book link, but it is under the section where he discusses those verses in the commentary), then the two main reasons this becomes a question at all for this passage has nothing to do with any ...
4
The question: What does the inclusion of τῆς μιᾶς σαββάτων in the LXX of Psa. 24:1 demonstrate about the religious identity of the translator(s) of Psa. 24:1 into the LXX?
Forgive me if I'm oversimplifying, but doesn't the inclusion (or addition) of a phrase from the Hebrew Talmud logically suggest a Jewish religious identity? I don't see how it could ...
4
Psalm 90 is unique in that it is the only psalm that has a superscription that identifies it as having been written by Moses.
Mark S. Smith says in 'Taking Inspiration', published in Psalms and Practice (edited by Stephen Breck Reid), page 245, that the scholarly consensus is that the superscriptions we see on many of the psalms are prose additions to the ...
4
In short, No, there is no “significant scholarly view (independent of arguments from the NT) that the book was written by a single individual.”
My source for such an assertive reply is Dr. Benjamin D. Sommer, Jewish Theological Seminary, New York (Ph.D. Religion/Biblical Studies, University of Chicago, 1994). The following notes are selected from his ...
4
While Is.24-27 is still often called the ‘Isaiah apocalypse’ because of its several eschatological motifs, Joseph Blenkinsopp states plainly that much of these chapters has little in common with the apocalyptic genre. Instead he describes them as composed of "a number of loosely connected passages of uneven length, the sequence of which manifests no ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
