ChatGPT said:
The four canonical Gospels of Christianity—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—were written between roughly 65 and 100 CE. Here is a general scholarly consensus on their dates:
- Mark – ca. 65–70 CE
Likely the earliest Gospel, written shortly after or during the Jewish-Roman War (66–73 CE), possibly in Rome or Syria. - Matthew – ca. 70–90 CE
Likely written after Mark, possibly in Antioch or another urban Jewish-Christian community. - Luke – ca. 80–95 CE
Written as part of a two-volume work (Luke–Acts), with a more Greco-Roman audience in mind. - John – ca. 90–100 CE
The most theologically developed, written last, possibly in Ephesus.
These dates reflect when the texts were likely composed, not when the events they describe occurred (which are typically dated to ca. 30–33 CE).
Would you like an explanation of how scholars estimate these dates?
You said:
yes
ChatGPT said:
Scholars estimate the dates of the four Gospels using a combination of historical, textual, and literary evidence. Here’s how they approach it:
1. Historical Clues
- Destruction of the Jerusalem Temple (70 CE):
This major event during the Jewish-Roman War is key. The Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke) either predict or reflect it (e.g., Mark 13). Since Mark seems to refer to it as a future or recent event, scholars often date Mark just before or around 70 CE. - Acts ends around 60–62 CE but doesn’t mention Paul’s death (~64 CE):
Since Luke wrote Acts as a sequel to his Gospel and doesn’t mention Paul’s martyrdom, some argue Luke was written before or around 90 CE, but this is debated.
2. Textual Relationships (Synoptic Problem)
- Markan Priority:
Most scholars believe Mark was written first, because about 90% of Mark is found in Matthew and/or Luke, often word-for-word. Matthew and Luke seem to build on Mark, elaborating and adding material. That puts Mark around 65–70 CE, and Matthew and Luke after that. - “Q Source” Hypothesis:
Matthew and Luke share material not in Mark, suggesting a second source (called “Q”) may have existed. If so, it implies a development and layering of traditions—supporting a chronological order: Mark → Matthew/Luke → John.
3. Theological and Literary Development
- John’s Gospel is very different—more theological and reflective, with a high Christology (e.g., “In the beginning was the Word…”). Its advanced theology suggests it came later, around 90–100 CE.
- Earlier Gospels focus more on Jesus as a teacher and healer, while later ones (especially John) present him more explicitly as divine. This theological evolution helps date them.
4. Church Fathers and External Sources
- Early Christian writers like Irenaeus (late 2nd century) quote or refer to the Gospels, showing they were in circulation by then. That sets a terminus ante quem (latest possible date).
Summary Table:
| Gospel | Estimated Date | Key Clues |
|---|---|---|
| Mark | 65–70 CE | Temple destruction, earliest form |
| Matthew | 70–90 CE | Builds on Mark, Jewish-Christian focus |
| Luke | 80–95 CE | Builds on Mark + Acts ending |
| John | 90–100 CE | Theological development, independence |