Companion Post to Bonus Show 25.

In the Road to BSC segment in the latest Bonus Show, I mentioned my old Marcionite Scriptures website and I also said that I would post the New Testament dating timeline from my Defender of Peace blog. 

The attached pics show the Marcionite Scriptures homepage. In the fourth pic, if you scroll down to the paragraph on the catechism, you can see the "in-universe" explanation for where these texts were coming from. I found these pics on the Wayback Machine after recording the show, and I had totally forgot the main angle of the site which was that these texts were not only newly discovered, but were being put online by a modern Marcionite "sect." Now I might look somewhat hypocritical for criticizing modern Marcionites as I did on the episode, but really the religious trappings of the website were all part of the gimmick.

I also attached a PDF of my post on the origins of Christianity from my Defender of Peace blog, with the dates at the end. (I had to attach it as a PDF because Patreon doesn't allow me to copy / paste into a text post; WTF). I changed nothing about this except that I updated the capitalization and punctuation to reflect the conventions that I now use.

The posted is dated 11/11/2014 and there are a lot of differences between my theory as it is now and as it was then. These are the main differences that stand out:

1. I would no longer say that the Savior was identified as the Logos in the original form of Christianity. I think I extrapolated that from the fact that the Philonic Logos predated Christianity.

2. The paragraph that follows, on the "left," "center," and "right" of Early Christianity, is all wrong. It sounds like it was written by someone who had skimmed one F.C. Baur book. Back at this time, I was still thinking about a single origin for Christianity, and not the concept of "Christianity arose separately in multiple centers among multiple sects" which is the current basis of my theory.

3. The paragraph that begins "In the spirit of the Mystery Religions" clearly shows that I had not read Bousset's "Kyrios Christos" yet.

4. In the paragraph about the earliest strata of Paul's Letters, you can see how close I am to lighting on the concept of Paulinism as a distinct religion from Catholicism.

5. The 100 - 130 AD paragraph: I said that "the only reason" for the Jesus as Earthly Man concept was so that one sect could trace a line of authority into the past. This seems like a ridiculous thing to say. I also had no inkling as yet of the Pre-Christian Joshua cult concept.

6. The 130's paragraph is surprisingly consistent with what I now believe except for a few details. I never got the chance to go into it on the show but my theory allows for Marcion to have redacted 1 Cor, 2 Cor, Rom, and possibly Gal.

7. The 160's paragraph is alarmingly incorrect in most respects. Most importantly, Justin in fact does *not* have a clear idea of what heresy entails, which is one of the strongest supports for my theory in its current form. I think I got that notion from believing at that time that Justin wrote the (lost) Syntagma. Either that, or back then I didn't care too much about looking things up in Greek, so I may have assumed that in the parts of the Dialogue that talk about the Basilideans, etc., Justin framed them up as heretics in the stereotypical way.

8. The 170's paragraph is mostly OK but you can see that I hadn't yet heard Martin make the comment to me about so much of Early Christianity happening in Asia Minor. I would now say that the institution of Bishop began not in the major Roman cities but in the small towns and villages of western Anatolia.

COMMENTS ON THE DATES

The main thing to remember is that at this time (2014), I hadn't yet done any serious independent research and most of my dates were essentially based on dead reckoning.

1. In the 90 - 100 block, I would move Phil and Philemon out of there and into the 105 - 115 period. Phil and Philemon (and Col) are part of a separate (and later) Pauline school.

2. The 120 block - back then I knew very little about the following letters: Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Jude, James, and 1 2 3 John. I would violently disagree with every single date that I have listed here. These days I would put Heb and 1 Pet 155 - 165, James and Jude 165 - 175, 1 2 3 John 170's.

3. 120 - 130 block - by "Acts of Pilate" I meant Justin Martyr's weird Crucifixion Source. I'm OK with leaving that date. 120s now seems brutally early for Didache; I think I was putting it so far back because it "seemed" ancient; I would now put it in the late 150s. Barnabas is OK if not a bit early; I think I said 120s here because I was taking "and now they will rebuild it" too literally.

4. 130 - 140 block. I put Mark here because back then I believed that the Little Apocalypse was post Bar-Kochba. Mark would now go around 120. Ur-Lukas (Proto-Luke) would now be 140s. I would put Thomas later than this now; I think I had assumed that the earliest layer of Thomas would have been contemporary with Q. The Shepherd of Hermas belongs nearly an entire generation after this; I put it here back then based not on what the Muratorian Canon says, but the fact that it doesn't cite any NT text.

5. ca. 140 block. The second redaction of Paul's Letters should go in the 120s. I had put it here because I was following the traditional date for Marcion. Laodiceans (Ephesians) should be pushed back to the 130s. I think the Catholic redaction of Revelation is OK here, but I don't think that's what I meant; I'm sure that back then I thought of Rev as a unitary Christian text.

6. 140 - 150 block. Matthew should be pushed back one decade or more. Colossians should be pushed back a generation (I must have read some wacky theory that had Laodiceans preceding both Col and Eph). Eph should be struck from here. I don't believe there was a Gospel of Marcion anymore. Gospel of John should be pushed forward 20 years. 1 2 3 John should be pushed forward 20 years although I will say additionally that 1 John postdates the Gospel, and 2 and 3 John postdate 1 John.

7. 150 block. 1 Clement is okay; should maybe be pushed forward a bit. I would push 2 Thes back more than a generation. I think I put it here based on the assumption that it's responding to the second redaction of 1 Thes. Titus and 2 Tim can be pushed into the 160s.

8. 150 - 160 block. 1 Timothy is okay. Polycarp should be pushed to like 175 at least.

9. 160 - 170 block. Everything in here seems OK. I will clarify, though, that my view of Paul's Letters is much different, and so here, what I called the "third" redaction would really be the Catholic redaction.

10. 200 block. I would be fine with putting 2 Peter even a little earlier than this.