Unfortunately the etimology of the text also contains heavy influence and colloquialisms from language attributed to 200AD. This would place it's inception as much older
Unfortunately the etimology of the text also contains heavy influence and colloquialisms from language attributed to 200AD. This would place it's inception as much older
Nope. As the sources site if Christ's death falls in 30-37AD John's death is sometime after 65 AD so in 30 years from the time he left the Earth we found a copy of his writings. 30 year is not enough time for a fallacy to be created and accepted as truth. There is still people from that generation living. However 130 years is 3 generations removed and allows for the elements of Gnosticism that appear in Thomas to be an indicator of its validity as a Christian scripture.
Nope. As the sources site if Christ's death falls in 30-37AD John's death is sometime after 65 AD so in 30 years from the time he left the Earth we found a copy of his writings. 30 year is not enough time for a fallacy to be created and accepted as truth. There is still people from that generation living. However 130 years is 3 generations removed and allows for the elements of Gnosticism that appear in Thomas to be an indicator of its validity as a Christian scripture.
Why do scholars often place John about 60 years after Jesus, and claim it isn't synoptic? Please don't tell me you actually maintain the gospels are eyewitness accounts