How late might the gospels be?
Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:33 pm
Longstanding consensus among NT scholars has it that Mark was written circa 70. Maybe 65-80 if you ask around. But although the Jewish-Roman war provides a clear basement for dating Mark, I have never understood what specific evidence or criteria historians have used to establish a ceiling: how late could it be?
There seems to be recent acknowledgment that Luke-Acts, and particularly Acts, reflect a reaction against Marcion, and therefore probably stem from the mid-2nd century. Why not the same for Matthew and John? Is it conceivable that Mark too was written in the 2nd century?
Obviously, the bulk of scholars in the 19th and 20th centuries had theological reasons for dating the gospels as early as possible. That's less the case today (and not historical anyhow). And with the decline of form criticism, and the increased recognition of Mark's literary inventiveness over the whole structure of his narrative, there seems to be less reason to date him early.
There seems to be recent acknowledgment that Luke-Acts, and particularly Acts, reflect a reaction against Marcion, and therefore probably stem from the mid-2nd century. Why not the same for Matthew and John? Is it conceivable that Mark too was written in the 2nd century?
Obviously, the bulk of scholars in the 19th and 20th centuries had theological reasons for dating the gospels as early as possible. That's less the case today (and not historical anyhow). And with the decline of form criticism, and the increased recognition of Mark's literary inventiveness over the whole structure of his narrative, there seems to be less reason to date him early.