Replies

I thought I had previously discussed the bible elsewhere in this thread, or at least recently.

Which leaves us with Mark, written after the principles were safely dead, about the time of the fall of Jerusalem, as an attempt to separate Christianity from the Jews who were, you may recall, on the outs for rebellion. The Jews were forced to evacuate Jerusalem.

Writing it at that time makes its prophecy of things which take place before its writing a low risk effort.

OT prophecies I find unconvincing as people would go through the list of prophecies and then tailor their story (even if not modeling the actual events) to fulfill the putative prophecy.

Matthew and Luke seem to be unreliable (ie pious frauds) as they needed to use Mark as a reference, and then added stuff to it. John is a theological document, offering attestation to things to which the author had no chance to witness. I find the apostles letters interesting as a record of contemporary teaching, but not so much as a record of Jesus.
Which leaves us with Mark, written after the principles were safely dead, about the time of the fall of Jerusalem, as an attempt to separate Christianity from the Jews who were, you may recall, on the outs for rebellion. The Jews were forced to evacuate Jerusalem.

Seventy-one N.T. scholars date Mark as having been written between 59 and 64.3.

They place Matthew between 62.1 and 69.

Luke was penned between 64.1 and 68.4.

John;s Gospel is dated between 83.5 and 89.4.

http://www.errantskeptics.org/DatingNT-ChronologicalOrder.htm