Robinson redating the new testament
He believed that AD70 was a pivotal year for the early church with the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem and found it quite staggering that that event would have gone unmentioned in those books which had been believed to have been written very late, such as the epistles of John and the Book of Revelation. Robinson definitely came from the more liberal tradition of Anglicanism, and wrote many things which many of us would not support, however, his redating of the New Testament was, in the opinion of many of us, long overdue and it solved many former problems and questions. For example, Galatians was often thought to have been a very early book yet it contains the mature Paul of Romans, so - even many years ago - I believed that Galatians was not a very early epistle at all and must have been written around the same time as the theologically-mature Epistle to the Romans.
This has got to be the most fastidious, lucid and un-tendentious book I’ve read.On the basis that the fall of Jerusalem is never mentioned in the New Testament writings as a past fact, Dr.Robinson defends that the books of the New Testament were written before A. 70....contradicting, of course, the consensus of generations of Bible scholars.His main and final conclusion thus is “There is, first of all, the observation that all the various types of the early church’s literature (including the Didache, a version of its ‘manual of discipline’) were coming into being more or less concurrently in the period between 40 and 70.”This book will definitely effect you if not completely change your mind on the assumed dates that you have been taught without any internal exegetical or external historical evidence. At some point he asked himself "why any of the books of the New Testament needed to be put after the fall of Jerusalem in 70." He notes that none of the books make any reference (actual or metaphorical) to the destruction of Jerusalem as a past event. Robinson (1919-1983) was a thoroughgoing theological modernist.This is the complete dating of the New Testament to which Robinson arrives after detailed and scrupulous research. He contrasts this with the apocryphal books, with their use of the Bishop Dr. He began writing this book as a theological exercise, as "little more than a theological joke".
He has difficulty accepting the authors of scripture as people who cooperated in the proclamation and promulgation of the Gospel.