The authors present a refreshing new take on the origins of the new testament and Christianity.
I am not yet sold on their every proposition. Example: they seem at least open to a dating Paul’s letters well in to the second century, whereas Richard Pervo (Dating Acts) said the church at Ephesus had the first known collection of Paul’s letters in 100 AD, with copies of the individual letters presumably circulating beforehand. There are other problems with this thesis, for example: if the gospels are based on the pauline letters, as I believe is firmly demonstrated, how could there be time for the letters to be written and perhaps copied many times before the gospels are written? Thus, I think the Paulines are definitely no later than late first century.
But I am still convinced that there is substantial feasibility in their views. There are important convergences with what M. David Litwa argues in his book “Late Revelations” (review) that the gospels are all second century and that Luke derives from Marcion’s gospel, which the stylometry tests of CBJ confirms. The reasons Pervo dated Acts to the second century was Josephan and Pauline dependance, but Mark also used these sources, as the authors point out.
It’s interesting that 1 Peter seems to be written by the same author(s) as Paul, and a real challenge for mainstream views. Many other assertions are made throughout the book, again, some of which I query but really the larger part of what they’re saying deserves a proper reading and answer from experts. They also provide very succinct but overwhelming refutations of the passages in Josephus, which of course are more and more being challenged in the scholarly literature.
Recommended: an important contribution to the study of Christian origins!
