What is the date of the Gospels' writing? Definition and Purpose The four Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—are the historical, theological, and Christological accounts of the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Their purpose is to present the words and works of Christ so that readers “may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing [they] may have life in His name” (John 20:31). Determining their dates of writing provides context for both their historical reliability and their apostolic witness. Factors Influencing the Dating of the Gospels 1. Internal References • Each Gospel can contain internal clues such as references to historical events (e.g., the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in A.D. 70). • The authors’ mention or omission of major events often shapes scholarly estimates of when the texts were composed. 2. Early Church Fathers and Tradition • Early Christian figures such as Papias, Irenaeus, and Eusebius preserved the testimony of those directly discipled by the Apostles. • Their writings give indications about who wrote each Gospel and when these works were circulated among early Christian communities. 3. Manuscript Evidence • Papyrus fragments (e.g., Papyrus Rylands P52, often dated to the early second century for the Gospel of John) demonstrate that the texts were in circulation at an early date. • Some have argued that a fragment found at Qumran (7Q5) could be from Mark, suggesting even earlier circulation of that Gospel. 4. Historical Backdrop of First-Century Palestine • Archaeological findings in the Judean region confirm the existence of places named in the Gospels and reflect societal and cultural details consistent with a first-century setting. • The Gospels’ depiction of Jewish religious customs aligns with the era before and shortly after the Temple’s destruction in A.D. 70. Date of Matthew 1. Possible Early Composition (Mid-50s to Early 60s A.D.) • Many hold Matthew to be written before the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, noting Jesus’ prophecy of the Temple’s destruction (Matthew 24:2) appears given as a future event. • Church tradition suggests that Matthew wrote his account for a largely Jewish audience, fitting a timeframe when Jerusalem was still the central hub of Jewish life. 2. Evidence from Church Fathers • Irenaeus (second century) implied that Matthew wrote first among the Gospels. • Papias, quoted by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 3.39), spoke of Matthew compiling sayings of Jesus in the “Hebrew dialect.” This indicates a relatively early stage of Gospel composition when many Jewish Christians still read Hebrew or Aramaic. 3. Range of Scholarly Proposals • Conservative estimates place Matthew in the 50s or 60s A.D. • Others suggest later dates (70s or 80s), but the internal and external evidence from early church testimony typically supports the earlier window. Date of Mark 1. Association with the Apostle Peter • According to Papias, Mark served as Peter’s interpreter (Ecclesiastical History 3.39). This close connection implies Mark gleaned much of his material from Peter’s eyewitness preaching. • This relationship often suggests an earlier date, since Peter was martyred in Rome (traditionally mid- to late-60s A.D.). 2. Likely Mid-50s to Late-60s A.D. • Mark’s abrupt ending (Mark 16:8 in the earliest manuscripts) and style of writing suggest a text compiled quickly, possibly around the time of Peter’s final ministry. • Some date Mark in the mid-60s, especially if we hold that Peter’s preaching was a direct source quickly committed to writing. 3. Archaeological Note • Advocates of a very early Mark point to the potential identification of Mark fragments among the Dead Sea Scrolls (7Q5). Though not accepted by all scholars, the suggestion of a pre-A.D. 70 date remains noteworthy in some circles. Date of Luke 1. Connection to Acts • Luke and Acts form a two-volume work (Luke 1:1–4; Acts 1:1). Acts concludes with Paul under house arrest in Rome, with no mention of Paul’s execution or the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70). • This abrupt ending typically suggests Acts was finalized before those events took place—so many place Acts in the early 60s. 2. Implication for Luke’s Composition • If Acts was concluded by approximately A.D. 62, then Luke’s Gospel was likely completed slightly earlier, possibly in the early 60s. • Luke’s stated purpose was to provide an “orderly account” (Luke 1:3) of Jesus’ deeds based on eyewitnesses. The internal linguistic and historical details align with the first-century context. 3. Historical Verifications • Luke’s tendency to include specific names, dates, political titles, and geographic details is consistently supported by archaeological discoveries (e.g., references to the “politarchs” in Thessalonica, verified by first-century inscriptions). • These confirmed details bolster the reliability and early composition of Luke. Date of John 1. Later Composition Relative to the Synoptics • John’s Gospel differs in style and content, containing extended theological discourses and unique material not found in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke). • Early church tradition often suggests John wrote later, having had more time to reflect on the significance of Jesus’ life and teaching. 2. Possible Range (Mid-80s to Mid-90s A.D.) • Many date John between A.D. 80–95, aligning with the time after the destruction of the Temple. • External references from church tradition indicate John’s long life in Ephesus and the possibility that he penned his Gospel shortly before writing the Book of Revelation (ca. A.D. 95). 3. Manuscript Confirmation • The discovery of the John Rylands Papyrus (P52), dated to around A.D. 125, supports an earlier composition date (likely before A.D. 100) if it had already circulated widely enough to reach Egypt. • This evidence underscores that John’s Gospel could not have been written too late in the first century. Why the Dates Matter 1. Historical Reliability • If the Gospels were completed within a generation of the events described, eyewitnesses would still be alive to affirm or challenge their accuracy. • Paul attested that many who saw the resurrected Jesus were still living at his writing (1 Corinthians 15:6), giving further credibility to an early circulation of Christ’s story. 2. Prophecy of the Temple’s Destruction • References to Jesus’ prophecy concerning the Temple (Matthew 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6) carry added weight if written before A.D. 70. • This also reveals the cohesive nature of Scripture’s consistency in proclaiming fulfilled prophecy. 3. Apostolic Witness and Church Growth • The earliest possible dates place these Gospels in direct contact with the Apostles themselves—underscoring their authentic firsthand (or close secondhand) testimony. • The rapid global spread of these writings testifies to their significance and the early church’s commitment to preserve the eyewitness narrative of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Summary of Proposed Dates • Matthew: Commonly between A.D. 50–65. • Mark: Often placed in the 50s to 60s, possibly mid-60s. • Luke: Likely late-50s to early-60s. • John: Generally from the 80s to 90s. Many conservative scholars prefer a timeline placing Matthew, Mark, and Luke all prior to A.D. 70, with John somewhat later, yet still within the first century. These early dates align with the strong manuscript evidence, the accounts of church fathers, and the historical context of first-century Judea. Concluding Thoughts The dating of the Gospels, supported by internal textual evidence, external church tradition, manuscript discoveries, and archaeological data, points to their composition well within the lifetime of eyewitnesses. This proximate timeframe—from the mid-first century to the end of that century—reinforces their reliability and the direct involvement of those who knew Jesus. Such evidence aligns with the broader scriptural narrative that Jesus is the promised Messiah, foretold in prophecy, and risen from the dead, a proclamation that the early believers held with unwavering conviction. As the Berean Standard Bible confirms, “But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” (John 20:31), highlighting the life-giving message that spurred their authorship and swift circulation. |
    |