Re: Gospels are not eye witness accounts

Bobby D. Bryant wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, "Iasion" <quentinj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 

Matt's dependence on Mark also puts its date somewhere around 80 CE
(if not later) which is pushing the envelope for the plausibility of
the author being a contemporary of Jesus. It's not impossible, of
course, but this is an era when people generally didn't live much
past forty or fifty years of age.

8< 

First of all there is the very late date (c. 100 CE if not later)
which puts it at the absolute edge of any plausible lifespan for a
contemporary of Jesus.


IMO these aren't good arguments; they're mere arguments from
incredulity, based on something that's not even particularly
incredible.


Nobody doubts that Sophocles lived to the age of 90, despite the low
life expectancy of the age.

Which is not surprising at all, simply rare. Life expectancy was and is statistical as in average as in including infant mortality. AVERAGE life expectancy was essentially constant until the industrial revolution. After that it increased. But there was always a share of long lived people all through history. All we have today is more of them as we have identified and can correct many causes of early death such as hypertension. People with untreated severe hypertension are usually dead by 50, moderate by 70 but cheap pills can keep people from ever dying of complications of that cause.

--
Out of touch, def: After support for the Iraq war falls below 50% declare
the "terrorists" will not break the will of the American people.
	-- The Iron Webmaster, 3517
 nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
 environmentalism http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml a9
.