Internal Evidence of Early Authorship
All of the New Testament was written in the first century. Some scholars date them toward the middle and others toward the end. Usually, the late dating of the gospels is based on knowledge and predictions around the destruction of the temple. That is since some do not believe in the message of the New Testament––they do not believe Jesus could predict future events––and so the gospels must have been written after AD 70 if they predict these events. This is unfortunate and ignores much of the evidence to the contrary. There are internal reasons to date the book of Acts to AD 64 simply because of where it leaves off. If it was prepared as a legal defense of Paul and brought us to the point of his execution …show more content…
He exhorts the church to follow the ‘decrees’ of the apostles implying that his audience had access to the decrees themselves. Irenaeus (AD 130–200) declared that “It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are… it is fitting that she should have four pillars…” (Against Heresies, XI, 8).
Justin Martyr (AD 100-165) refers to the gospels as the ‘memoirs’ of the apostles and quotes the gospels when he quotes the memoirs.
they spake in mockery the words which are recorded in the memoirs of His apostles: ‘He said he was the Son of God: let him come down; let God save him.’ (dialogue with Trypho, Chapter CI quoting Matt 27:42)
He even knows that some of them are not written by the apostles, and quotes Luke when referencing the memoirs in this way.
in the memoirs which I say were drawn up by His apostles and those who followed them, [it is recorded] that His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying, and saying, ‘If it be possible, let this cup pass: (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter CIII quoting Luke …show more content…
It is important because it shows a dependency on the book of John––as well as all 3 synoptic gospels. When it recalls one single incident, it shows evidence of drawing on all 3 of the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Not only does it draw on all 3, but it exclusively draws on only those 3. Joachim Jeremias states, “There are contacts with all four Gospels. The juxtaposition of Johannine . . . and Synoptic material . . . and the fact that the Johannine material is shot through with Synoptic phrases and the Synoptic with Johannine usage, permits the conjecture that the author knew all and every one of the canonical Gospels.”
In the same way, the gospel of Judas (often dated very early by critical scholars) shows familiarity with a whopping 15 of the 27 books of the NT––including the gospel of John. It not only provides support for the transmission of the canonical NT books, it also removes itself as a candidate for the early date that some would attempt to assign
All of the New Testament was written in the first century. Some scholars date them toward the middle and others toward the end. Usually, the late dating of the gospels is based on knowledge and predictions around the destruction of the temple. That is since some do not believe in the message of the New Testament––they do not believe Jesus could predict future events––and so the gospels must have been written after AD 70 if they predict these events. This is unfortunate and ignores much of the evidence to the contrary. There are internal reasons to date the book of Acts to AD 64 simply because of where it leaves off. If it was prepared as a legal defense of Paul and brought us to the point of his execution …show more content…
He exhorts the church to follow the ‘decrees’ of the apostles implying that his audience had access to the decrees themselves. Irenaeus (AD 130–200) declared that “It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are… it is fitting that she should have four pillars…” (Against Heresies, XI, 8).
Justin Martyr (AD 100-165) refers to the gospels as the ‘memoirs’ of the apostles and quotes the gospels when he quotes the memoirs.
they spake in mockery the words which are recorded in the memoirs of His apostles: ‘He said he was the Son of God: let him come down; let God save him.’ (dialogue with Trypho, Chapter CI quoting Matt 27:42)
He even knows that some of them are not written by the apostles, and quotes Luke when referencing the memoirs in this way.
in the memoirs which I say were drawn up by His apostles and those who followed them, [it is recorded] that His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying, and saying, ‘If it be possible, let this cup pass: (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter CIII quoting Luke …show more content…
It is important because it shows a dependency on the book of John––as well as all 3 synoptic gospels. When it recalls one single incident, it shows evidence of drawing on all 3 of the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Not only does it draw on all 3, but it exclusively draws on only those 3. Joachim Jeremias states, “There are contacts with all four Gospels. The juxtaposition of Johannine . . . and Synoptic material . . . and the fact that the Johannine material is shot through with Synoptic phrases and the Synoptic with Johannine usage, permits the conjecture that the author knew all and every one of the canonical Gospels.”
In the same way, the gospel of Judas (often dated very early by critical scholars) shows familiarity with a whopping 15 of the 27 books of the NT––including the gospel of John. It not only provides support for the transmission of the canonical NT books, it also removes itself as a candidate for the early date that some would attempt to assign