When were the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) actually written?

Question

Does the timing of the writing call anything into question for you? Why or why not?

Answer 1

Matthew about 50 a.d. Mark 65-70 a.d. Luke 60-70 a.d.and John 90-95.

Answer 2

Most Biblical scholars agree that the original four Gospel manuscripts were penned in the later part of the first century. Mark's is generally thought to be the earliest gospel (between 55 and 75 AD), John's the latest (80 to 90 AD).

The timing? No biggie. Much of what the Gospel writers put down were oral accounts from people who were contemporaries of Jesus (the apostles, other followers who knew him before the crucifixion). A pretty common practice in a day when there was no quick travel, no long distance communication and very little literacy.

Answer 3

Even the most liberal scholars now say it's impossible for ANY of the books of the New Testament to have been written any later than 100 A.D.

Matthew is said to have been written sometime between 50 and 65 A.D.
Mark was written by John Mark, Peter's secretary, and would have been written before around 62 A.D.
Luke was written by Luke, Paul's physician. Because of where Acts ends (with Paul in prison, awaiting trial), it is said to have been written before 68 A.D., which is when Paul was killed.
John is the latest of the Gospels, and is said to have been written around 90-100 A.D., during his exile to the island of Patmos.

Why would that call anything into question? That is a relatively short amount of time, considering when it was written. At that time, most histories were not written for up to five hundred years after they happened. Because these were accounts written by eyewitnesses, or people who LEARNED under eyewitnesses, there is very little time for anything mythical to be added in.

Historians, regarding ANY ancient manuscript, always do an internal test of the manuscript. And every single test has pointed to the scriptures being written in the first century, because of the localized knowledge. Luke, especially, has been called a top-notch historian by most scholars. The words he uses to describe various officials and their positions is what they were called at the time. Archaeology has confirmed this.

Answer 4

Mark's was most likely first in around AD 65. Mark was NOT an apostle but he was the cousin of Barnabus (COL 4:10)....presumably he was Peter's interpreter when he preached -- which is how he got his info for his Gospel.

Matthew wrote next....he WAS an apostle.

Luke wrote yet another version of the Gospel....after doing tons of research and interviewing....."I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning" (LK 1:3). Luke was not an apostle either.....he was a travel companion to Paul. Notice that Luke was aware that "many" had undertaken to write down what had been witnessed; however, only Mark & Matthew had written their version of the gospel. This means that by Tradition, others (unnamed or unknown) had also written stuff down.

John wrote his gospel last -- in around the year 100...give or take.

So.....Jesus died, rose and ascended in approx. AD 33. The 4 gospels were written between AD 65-100....roughly.

Soooooooooo....the preaching done between 33 and until there were several copies of bibles (not for hundreds of years), the Word of God was spead strictly by Oral Tradition.....not by email attachment, pulpit, iPod broadcast or even Pony Express.

Because Mark & Luke were NOT apostles, what they knew was from Oral Tradition. Matthew, Mark & Luke did not sign their gospels....so we have it only by Tradition that they were written by whom they are credited to.

Now do you see the importance of Oral Tradition in the Catholic Church? "Jesus did MANY other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are NOT RECORDED in this book" (JN 20:30).

Answer 5

I am not going to repeat numbers on here, because after a while the numbers won't mean anything to you, and most likely whatever is more to your taste will be what you choose. Of course truth has nothing to do with taste. However, I would be much more on the conservative side of things, placing most of the Bible before A.D. 70. One of the answers already previewed one reason. The destruction of Jerusalem was a huge event. Around a million Jews were killed and the rest dispersed around the world. Jesus's brother James was the head of the church in Jerusalem and absolutely nothing was mentioned about an event that was one of the most devastating events to the Jews in their entire history. Also many of the disciples were killed in the A.D. 70-90 period and this would have been a tremendous rallying cry for Christianity but again nothing was mentioned about any of this. Third reason, Christians themselves were being persecuted and killed (secular history verifies this) in that same period and nothing is mentioned of the fact that they were being killed. (A good number of christians would have been killed in the sacking of Jerusalem since it was kind of a central location for Christianity where the brother of Jesus was kind of a head of the church. This period of time between the death of Jesus and the written accounts for this period of History is bar none. The written accounts we have of alexander the great are 400 years after his death. Compare the gospel writtings with anything fromt that time period and nothing compares-literally anything from that time or antiquity and there is nothing that even comes close to the dating of the N.T. Even take the liberal datings that some on here put on the gospels and again those dates will be better than most of anything we find in our text books. Not to mention that there are 10 secular accounts of Jesus in relatively early history.

Answer 6

There is quite a bit on nonsense in some of these answers. While some of the dates are probably right (probably before 100 AD), the attributions, except the one about Luke being part of Paul's entourage, are pure speculation. For example, we have no clue who "John of Patmos" was and we have even less of a clue as to who wrote the others that bear the names of Matthew, Mark of John - again, the exception is probably Luke.)

Answer 7

Nothing in the New Testament indicates the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, so experts, real experts that is, believe that is proof it was all written prior to that.

The only exception to that is the Revelation to John, written about 90 or so AD.

Copies have Matthew's gospel have been found dated to within 5 years of when Jesus died.

Those who wish to discredit the gospels do so by estimating the date of their writing hundreds of years into the future and that's just not being honest.

Pastor Art

Answer 8

When Matthew, Mark, Luke & John were alive. They were alive after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Do a study on the authors.

Matthew Is one of Jesus disciples (of the 12).
Mark wrote this book sometime during the mid-50s-60s AD.
Luke in the 60s AD.
John is the disciple Jesus loved and is one of the 12 also. Though Jesus loves all His disciples. But this writer just felt special because that is how Jesus makes us feel. Historians believe John wrote this in his older years. John also wrote 1-3Jn and Revelation.

Answer 9

Matthew: approx. between 60-70A.D.
Mark: approximately between 55-65 A.D.
Luke: approximately 60 A.D.
John: about 85-90 A.D.

no. books were usually written like chronicles, jotting down a bit when time was made, and notes were added. considering most Jewish history was spoken, general knowledge, not written, I imagine reciting the story many times would keep a memory fresh

Answer 10

I believe Mark was written first about 60 years after Christ died, then came Matthew 80 years after Christ died, and Luke was written about 90 years,the author or Luke is the same as Acts. Both Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source.
John was written about 90-100 years after Christs death.

I know before the decision to canonize the bible for both Jews & Christian, that there were many different biblical stories that were circulating after Christ died. A lot of them you can find in the Qu'ran, about the mother Mary and Jesus.
Any sort of biblical story before the cannozation was accepted by just about anyone. When they cannonzied the bilbe they picked the most popular stories. You can also find a lot of Gnostic biblical stories, those were popular in the time of Jesus, before and after until they cannonized the bible.
I hope this answered your question.