Thanks for the sacrifice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospels ;http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/14452.htm;
http://www.carm.org/questions/gospels_written.htm; http://www.geocities.com/metacrock2000/Bible/Gospel_behind.html

 

Would it make any difference if I did?! I'm sure you wouldn't be interested in reading it!

You believe what you want and I'll believe what I want.

 

what chhhhhhhristianity is ? tis a Quest ...a light above and some comforting .

 

In an earlier post, I provided this from Bart Ehrman, Professor and Chair of the Deparatment of Religious Studies, University of North Carolins,Lost Christianities, p. 19: "Most scholars think that Mark is our earliest surviving account of Jesus' life, written somewhere around 65 or 70 c.e.; that Matthew and Luke were produced ten or fifteen years later, possibly 80-85 c.e.; and that John was the last of the canonical accounts, written near the end of the first century, around 90 or 95 c.e." Not only are his academic credentials impeccable, but he might have credibility to Fedup because he is a former evangelical Christian turned nonbeliever. His dates are later than Moonbeam's but earlier than Fedups--and they aren't just his dates, but reflect the views of "most scholars". In another post, which I should have said more about, I gave links, some of which support Moonbeam's earlier dates and discuss the basis for their conclusions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospels ;http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/14452.htm;
http://www.carm.org/questions/gospels_written.htm; http://www.geocities.com/metacrock2000/Bible/Gospel_behind.html

This is another one of those issues that it will probably be impossible to resolve without conjecture or "faith". The earlier dates come mainly from conservative Christian apologists and the later ones from liberal Christian or secular humanist revisionists. They all have good reasons based on the available evidence, but they all have biases, as well. I don't think there are any truly "objective" sources on the subject. An important marker for both sides is the destruction of the temple, which we know happened in 70 A.D. Since none of the gospels mention the event, conservative Christians conclude that it hadn't happened yet when the gospels were written, especially since the event was predicted in Mark 13:2 and its occurence would be touted by the gospel writers as confirming the prophecy. Liberal/secular scholars, who are skeptical about prophecy, see this as an indication they were all written after 70 A.D., since Mark, which they take to be the earliest, includes the prophecy, which they assume is after the fact.