Claim: The New Testament was written down 70 or more years after Jesus' death and resurrection
There is a lot of evidence that all four gospels were written before 70AD.
There is a lot of evidence that all four gospels were written before 70AD, and that they were written by those who witnessed the resurrection of Jesus, or by people who knew the eyewitnesses personally (by eyewitnesses I mean Jesus’ disciples, who were also his friends).
I have written about what is known about the historical background of the New Testament, i.e contemporary historians and archaeology, all of which supports the historical accuracy of the gospels, here.
The reason why it is important that the gospels were written relatively early is because Jesus probably died and was resurrected around 33AD, and that if they were written too much later, it casts into doubt their value as eyewitness testimonies.
The epistles of Paul, are well attested historically speaking, and very few scholars indeed would argue for late dates for these; also there are very good arguments regarding dating the other epistles before 70AD.
Revelation is the one book that appears as though it might have been written later than 70AD; 95-96 AD perhaps.
The Four Gospels: Matthew Mark Luke and John.
I will first deal with the dating of the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which are the biographies of Jesus in the New Testament. It is interesting to note that none of these gospels contain the name of the author explicitly stated in the text. I believe this is modesty, really, because none of these authors wished for recognition or glory, but only wanted Jesus to be acknowledged and glorified. Nonetheless, there are many clues as to who these authors were.
Matthew, Mark and Luke.
The three ‘synoptic’ gospels Matthew Mark and Luke are different in style and format from John’s gospel, which is entirely unique, both as one gospel among four, and as first century Jewish literature in the wider context1.
Note also that Luke is probably the author of Acts as well; I will expand on this thought below.
Matthew the tax collector and Mark, who was the interpreter of Peter.
The early church father Eusebius, writing in the early fourth century, quotes the writings of Papias, a church elder who had heard John the apostle and who questioned those who had known the apostles:
But now we must add to the words of his (Papias) which we have already quoted the tradition which he gives in regard to Mark, the author of the Gospel.
“This also the elder (Papias) said: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he (Peter) remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he (Papias) neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord’s discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.” These things are related by Papias concerning Mark.
But concerning Matthew he writes as follows: “So then Matthew wrote the oracles (logion =sayings) in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able.” And the same writer uses testimonies from the first Epistle of John and from that of Peter likewise. And he relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. These things we have thought it necessary to observe in addition to what has been already stated.
Matthew: An eyewitness?
Eusebius, therefore, speaks of Matthew as having been the author of Matthew’s gospel.
Before becoming a disciple of Jesus, Matthew was a tax collector by profession: he was required to keep accurate records; making a mistake could cause him a lot of trouble, particularly with his bosses, the Romans.
In addition, as a tax collector, Matthew had to be fluent in Hebrew, Latin and Greek.
Now, Jesus himself says that when the gospel would be preached in future, at least one episode in His life would be told, and I think this sits quite comfortably with the idea that someone was recording the events as they happened:
While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of Simon the Leper, a woman came to Him with an alabaster jar of expensive perfume, which she poured on His head as He reclined at the table.
When the disciples saw this, they were indignant and asked, “Why this waste? This perfume could have been sold at a high price, and the money given to the poor.”
Aware of this, Jesus asked, “Why are you bothering this woman? She has done a beautiful deed to Me. The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have Me. By pouring this perfume on Me, she has prepared My body for burial. Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached in all the world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her.” Matthew 26:6-13
…and there was shorthand.
And it is to be noted that shorthand existed in the ancient world: the earliest example of Greek shorthand is the Acropolis stone, found in the Acropolis of Athens, and is dated to 350BC.
The Latin version of shorthand became popular very quickly and was used for many centuries, well into the middle ages. Latin shorthand was invented by Cicero’s slave (later freedman) in the century before the New Testament was written, Tiro (103BC-4BC), hence the name of this shorthand, ‘Tironian notes’2.
For Hebrew, for which there is no record of any shorthand, it is no great stretch to think that Matthew might well have developed his own method of writing notes quickly.
Also, being one of the twelve, Matthew was with Jesus twenty four hours a day, seven days a week (except when Jesus went off to pray in the hills, etc); Matthew would have had many opportunities to check his work and ask Jesus to clarify, etc.
And Matthew was certainly an eyewitness to the events, if (as seems likely) he truly was the author of Matthew’s gospel.
Oh, and then there is the matter of the fascination with numbers.
In all, then, there were fourteen generations from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ. Matthew 1:17
Mark - an interpreter of Peter.
Mark is traditionally the young man who ran away and left behind his clothes when Jesus was arrested (Mark 14:51).
Then everyone deserted Him and fled. One young man who had been following Jesus was wearing a linen cloth around his body. They caught hold of him, but he pulled free of the linen cloth and ran away naked. Mark 14:51-53
Whether or not Mark is this young man, Mark’s gospel, according to the earliest church fathers, recounts the eyewitness testimony of Peter. I tend to think that the earliest view, the one closest to the actual time, might well be the truth, when we are dealing with history.
Luke’s prologue. He interviewed the eyewitnesses.
Many have undertaken to compose an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were passed on to us by the initial eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. Luke 1:1-3
Now Luke does not say he himself is an eyewitness. But he had investigated everything from the beginning.
Acts of the Apostles and Luke
And as I said before, Acts of the Apostles and Luke need to be considered together, because Acts is the sequel to Luke, written also by Luke.
This is the beginning of Acts of the Apostles; this book is clearly a continuation of Luke:
In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen. After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. Acts 1:1-3
In the book of Acts, the writer employs the pronoun "we" when talking about Paul’s travels. Acts 16:10-18, Acts 20:4-21:19, and Acts 27:1-28:30.
So whoever wrote Acts was a companion of Paul, someone Paul might well have talked about in his letters. Four of Paul’s travelling companions referenced in the epistles, Aristarchus, Tychicus, Timothy, and Mark, are also mentioned in Acts in the third person. Hence none of these are the author.
Luke is the only other travelling companion mentioned in the epistles, and so he must have been the author. The style of Greek between Acts and Luke is very similar also.
The gospel of John - another eyewitness
John is one of those who has seen Jesus’ glory:
The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Beloved Disciple - details only an eyewitness would know
Whenever the beloved disciple (probably John) comes into the story, there are extra details added that only an eyewitness would know:
John 1:39 - the tenth hour (Note two of his disciples - Andrew is mentioned - who is the other?)
The next day John (the baptist) was there again with two of his disciples. When he saw Jesus walking by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” And when the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus.
Jesus turned and saw them following. “What do you want?” He asked.
They said to Him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are You staying?”
“Come and see,” He replied. So they went and saw where He was staying, and spent that day with Him. It was about the tenth hour. John 1:35-39
John 13:26 - dipping the bread and giving it to Judas - a detail no one else knew about
Then the disciple whom Jesus loved leaned back against Jesus’ chest and asked him, “Lord, who is it?” Jesus replied, “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread after I have dipped it in the dish.” Then he dipped the piece of bread in the dish and gave it to Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son. John 13:26
John 19:33-35 - an eyewitness testimony of Jesus’ side pierced with the spear
But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and blood and water flowed out immediately. And the person who saw it has testified (and his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth), so that you also may believe.
John 20:6-7, an eyewitness testimony of the strips of linen
So she went running to Simon Peter and the other disciple whom Jesus loved and told them, “They have taken the Lord from the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!” Then Peter and the other disciple set out to go to the tomb. The two were running together, but the other disciple ran faster than Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent down and saw the strips of linen cloth lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter, who had been following him, arrived and went right into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen cloth lying there, and the face cloth,which had been around Jesus’ head, not lying with the strips of linen cloth but rolled up in a place by itself.
John 21:11, the exact number of fish
Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” So Simon Peter, when he heard that it was the Lord, tucked in his outer garment (for he had nothing on underneath it), and plunged into the sea. Meanwhile the other disciples came with the boat, dragging the net full of fish, for they were not far from land, only about a hundred yards. When they got out on the beach, they saw a charcoal fire ready with a fish placed on it, and bread. Jesus said,“Bring some of the fish you have just now caught.” So Simon Peter went aboard and pulled the net to shore. It was full of large fish, one hundred fifty-three, but although there were so many, the net was not torn. John 21:7-11
And at the end of the gospel:
This is the disciple who testifies about these things and has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. John 21:24
The dating of John’s gospel
As to the dating of John’s gospel; it includes a reference to the pool of Bethesda:
Now there is in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades. John 5:2
The pool of Bethesda would not have escaped the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.
If John had written his gospel after 70AD he would not have said the pool is in Jerusalem, he would have said, was.
An unfulfilled prophecy
The three synoptic gospels all speak of the destruction of temple and the siege of Jerusalem in 70AD as a prophesy of Jesus yet to be fulfilled, rather than as a prophecy that had been fulfilled. This dates the synoptic gospels to before 70AD.
By contrast Luke writing in Acts about Agabus’ prophecy of a famine mentions the fulfilment of the prophecy under Emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28). The argument seems valid, that had the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem been fulfilled, Luke would have mentioned it.
In Luke’s gospel Jesus also speaks of the future after the destruction of Jerusalem in very brief terms.
“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” Luke 21:20-24
Additionally there are the prophecies of the destruction of the temple (Matthew 24:2, Mark 13:2, Luke 21:6) and the destruction of Jerusalem, when Jesus wept as he was approaching the city: Luke 19:41-42.
The Sadducees who say there is no resurrection.
Furthermore the synoptic gospels and Acts of the Apostles mention the Jewish sect, the Sadducees, as those who do not believe in the resurrection of the dead. After the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70AD, the Sadducees no longer existed. The Sadducees’ rationale was that since there was no resurrection from the dead, that therefore the best tactic for Jewish survival was collaboration; in the context of Roman rule the Sadducees were the ruling class. Once the temple was destroyed, their reasoning no longer rang true, and the Pharisees became the entirety of Judaism.
In Matthew Mark and Acts (written by Luke, remember) the Sadducees are mentioned in the present active tense as those who say there is no resurrection, not those who said there is no resurrection.
Matt. 22:23 The same day Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to him and asked him…
Mark 12:18 Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) also came to him and asked him..
Acts 23:8 (For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.)
Paul’s letters and the rest of the New Testament.
The historicity and chronology of Paul’s letters is extremely well established, and historians agree about when Paul lived and when he wrote.
Indeed, one of the most convincing synchronicities in the New Testament as a whole is the agreement between Paul’s letters, Acts of the Apostles, contemporary historians such as Josephus, archaeological evidence, and even the pattern of winds and seasons in the Mediterranean, which agrees with Paul’s epistles as well.
John’s epistles are interesting because they are written in the same style as John’s gospel, however John’s authorship is specifically stated.
James’ epistle resembles the Mary’s hymn of praise in Luke in its subject matter and the language of James the brother of Jesus as recounted in Acts of the apostles; James the brother of Jesus is probably the author (a good article here). James was martyred in the late 60s AD.
The chronology of Jude (probably written by the brother of Jesus), Peter’s epistles (probably written by the apostle Peter; 2 Peter is a little more problematic), and Hebrews (probably written by Apollos; it is mentioned by the early church father Clement in his epistle 1 Clement, written 95AD so was definitely written before 95AD ) are not essential to my argument, however it is worth reading the bible.org articles which give many excellent reasons for considering these also as having been written before 70AD.
Revelation? In some ways, the dating is irrelevant for this apocalypse - however I tend to think the author was the apostle John. The Bible.org article below gives good reasons for dating Revelation to 95-96AD, during the reign of Domitian.
https://bible.org/seriespage/11-eyewitness-testimony-johns-gospel
https://bible.org/seriespage/12-jesus-heals-man-pool-bethesda-john-51-18
https://bible.org/seriespage/4-pauline-epistles
https://bible.org/seriespage/26-jude-introduction-argument-and-outline
https://bible.org/article/introduction-book-1-peter
https://bible.org/article/2-peter-peter’s
https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/WherePaulsLettersWereWritten.html
https://bible.org/seriespage/20-james-introduction-outline-and-argument
https://bible.org/article/argument-hebrews
https://bible.org/seriespage/27-revelation-introduction-argument-and-outline
CHANGE LOG - I did quite a bit of tidying up between 1am and 4am, ensuring I had mentioned every book in the New Testament, and just generally tidying it up...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you are interested in this post, you might be interested in reading my posts on the Resurrection and the contemporary evidence that Jesus existed:
John’s gospel is unique: in the attention of the author to eyewitness details as well as its philosophical depth and spirituality, and also in its intellectual union of Greek and Jewish thought regarding the logos, the Word of God.
Plutarch describes the invention of Latin shorthand thus:
This is the only speech of Cato which has been preserved, we are told, and its preservation was due to Cicero the consul, who had previously given to those clerks who excelled in rapid writing instruction in the use of signs, which, in small and short figures, comprised the force of many letters; these clerks he had then distributed in various parts of the senate-house. For up to that time the Romans did not employ or even possess what are called shorthand writers, but then for the first time, we are told, the first steps toward the practice were taken. Be that as it may, Cato carried the day and changed the opinions of the senators, so that they condemned the men to death. Plutarch Cato the Younger chapter. 23:3
Thank you. How beautiful. How absolutely beautiful.