Dating the writing of the gospels
While the absence of any description of the temple’s destruction can reasonably be interpreted as a piece of circumstantial evidence supporting the early dating of the New Testament accounts, skeptics sometimes use this fact to make just the opposite case.Many have proposed that Jesus’s prediction related to the destruction was inserted to legitimize the text and make it appear that He had some prophetic power.Why then is John the Apostle's authorship almost universally rejected in modern critical scholarship?The answer involves several objections as to why the son of the fisherman Zebedee could have authored such a deeply theological text.Revelation is about "the last things" and the second coming of Jesus, so it makes sense that it comes at the end.Revelation and the Gospels function as bookends for the New Testament.The second was that of Mark, who composed it under Peter's guidance....The third, the Gospel which was praised by Paul, was that of Luke, written for gentile converts. circa 185AD) quoted by Eusebius, History of the Church, Bk. 25 The Gospel According to John, Apostle of Jesus Christ, Bishop of Ephesus, stands as a unique testimony among the other 3 Gospels and indeed unique among the other books of the New Testament.
It contains the same 27 documents, but sequences them in the chronological order in which they were written.Its order is based on contemporary mainstream biblical scholarship.Though there is uncertainty about dating some of the documents, there is a scholarly consensus about the basic framework.The naturalistic bias of these critics prevents them from accepting any dating that precedes the destruction of the temple in AD 70 and forces them to ignore all the circumstantial evidence that supports the early dating.When explaining why the destruction of the temple itself was not included in the gospel record, skeptics have argued that the gospel writers intentionally omitted the fulfillment to make the accounts look like they were written early.