Redating matthew mark and luke
The Gospel of Luke was written by the same author as the Acts of the Apostles, who refers to Luke as the 'former account' of 'all that Jesus began to do and teach' (Acts 1:1).
The destiny ('Theophilus'), style, and vocabulary of the two books betray a common author. The significance of Gallio's judgement in Acts -17 may be seen as setting precedent to legitimize Christian teaching under the umbrella of the tolerance extended to Judaism. The prominence and authority of the Sadducees in Acts reflects a pre-70 date, before the collapse of their political cooperation with Rome. The relatively sympathetic attitude in Acts to Pharisees (unlike that found even in Luke's Gospel) does not fit well with in the period of Pharisaic revival that led up to the council at Jamnia.
Negative critical scholars strengthen their own views as they separate the actual events from the writings by as much time as possible.
That said, beginning with Schleiermacher in the early 1800s, the idea that Mark was actually the first began to take hold.
Miracle Matthew Mark Luke John The nobleman's son at Capernaum healed -54 The demoniac in the synagogue healed -28 -37 Simon's wife's mother healed -17 -34 -41 Circuit round Galilee -25 -39 -44 Healing a leper 8:1-4 -45 -16 Christ stills the storm -27 -41 -25 Demoniacs in Gadarenes -34 5:1-20 -39 Jairus' daughter.
Woman healed -26 -43 -56 Blind men and demoniac -34 Healing the paralytic 9:1-8 2:1-12 -26 Matthew the publican 9:9-13 -17 -32 "Thy disciples fast not" -17 -22 -39 Because these three seem to have the 'same view' on a lot of matters, they have been called the "synoptic" Gospels, from the Greek syn (same) and optic (relating to sight or view).
Roman historian Colin Hemer has provided powerful evidence that Acts was written between AD 60 and 62. There is no mention in Acts of the crucial event of the fall of Jerusalem in 70. There is no hint of the outbreak of the Jewish War in 66 or of serious deterioration of relations between Romans and Jews before that time. There is no hint of the deterioration of Christian relations with Rome during the Neronian persecution of the late 60s. There is no hint of the death of James at the hands of the Sanhedrin in ca. At that time a new phase of conflict began with Christianity. Acts seems to antedate the arrival of Peter in Rome and implies that Peter and John were alive at the time of the writing. The prominence of 'God-fearers' in the synagogues may point to a pre-70 date, after which there were few Gentile inquiries and converts to Jerusalem. Luke gives insignificant details of the culture of an early, Julio-Claudian period. Areas of controversy described presume that the temple was still standing. Adolf Harnack contended that Paul's prophecy in Acts (cf. If so, the book must have appeared before those events. Christian terminology used in Acts reflects an earlier period.
Harnack points to use of always designates 'the Messiah', and is not a proper name for Jesus. The confident tone of Acts seems unlikely during the Neronian persecutions of Christians and the Jewish War with the Rome during the late 60s. The action ends very early in the 60s, yet the description in Acts 27 and 28 is written with a vivid immediacy.