SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Ask God

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: RMF who wrote (39335)6/1/2006 1:47:44 PM
From: Stan  Read Replies (1) of 39621
 
Well, RMF, there are varying opinions among the commentators I have.

For example, from Jamieson-Faussett-Brown, this appears in Matthew's introduction: "For the date of this Gospel we have only internal evidence, and that far from decisive. Accordingly, opinion is much divided. That it was the first issued of all the Gospels was universally believed. Hence, although in the order of the Gospels, those by the two apostles were placed first in the oldest manuscripts of the Old Latin version, while in all the Greek manuscripts, with scarcely an exception, the order is the same as in our Bibles, the Gospel according to Matthew is in every case placed first."

From Albert Barnes, this: "Epiphanius says that the Gospel by Matthew was written while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome. This was about a.d. 63, about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. It is now generally supposed that this Gospel was written about this time."

From Adam Clarke: "St. Matthew’s gospel is generally allowed to be the most ancient part of the writings of the New Covenant. Many modern critics contend that it was written about the year of our Lord 61, or between this and 65. Others, that it was written so early as 41, or about the eighth year after the ascension; and this is supported by the subscriptions at the end of this gospel in many MSS.; but it must be observed, that all these MSS. are posterior to the 10th century."

These last two commentators are from the 19th century, meaning they would not have access to more recent information.

Conservative estimates of John place his anywhere between 65 and 90 a.d. Given the outer band of the dates, it has always been placed last.

Mark is placed by them at between a.d. 57-63. So, it is possible that Mark is first. I always thought it was. I have a very old New Testament from 1898 that was from a yard sale, and it decided to place the 27 books chronologically. It put Mark first, then Matthew, Luke then John.

And, yes, I am referring to Matthew and John, disciples of Jesus who wrote the ones named after them.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext