Then why would they be in Greek?
I don't see how it could be true that the Church in Israel was finished
The first Bishop and Patriarch of Jerusalem, +James the Just, was beheaded in 62 AD and the Church in Jerusalem was shut down by Romans in 69 AD. The Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed a year later, and Jews started leaving Palestine. Before that, the Christians were thrown out of the synagogues by the Jews, and hunted down by zealots like Saul.
+Paul, addressing the Jews says "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles" [Act 13:46]
In the broad sense, all of the Gospels were written to all believers
Then, I believe they would have followed the steps in which +Paul does "first the Jew then the Gentile" and naturally would have written the Gospels in Hebrew, and would have used Hebrew canon rather than the Septuagint.
I just don't think [the "Apocrypha"/OT Deuterocanonical books] were inspired as individual work
I have no issues with that, since you clearly state that this is you opinion.
I don't claim to know for sure when they were written, or why it would be terribly important. One line of reasoning I found in the notes was that Acts had to be written in the early 60's because monumental events (e.g. burning of Rome, destruction of the Temple, etc.) are not mentioned at all. Then, add in that Luke was the first volume before Acts. Finally, Luke had the Gospel of Mark when he wrote his Gospel, so Mark must have been from the 50's or very early 60's but not as late as 70. But again, I'm not declaring anything as fact.
The Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed a year later, and Jews started leaving Palestine. Before that, the Christians were thrown out of the synagogues by the Jews, and hunted down by zealots like Saul.
OK, I may have misunderstood. They had to move, yes, but I didn't think they folded in on themselves in terms of just quitting or something. I always thought a fair amount of the early laity in general was Jewish.
FK: "In the broad sense, all of the Gospels were written to all believers."
Then, I believe they would have followed the steps in which +Paul does "first the Jew then the Gentile" and naturally would have written the Gospels in Hebrew, and would have used Hebrew canon rather than the Septuagint.
They did follow those steps. Weren't the mission journeys in both Luke 9 and 10 only to the Jews? Matthew was probably written in Hebrew, and as you like to note, there were plenty of Jews who could understand Greek. If we believe that the Bible is truly a timeless work, then we have to say that it was written generally to all believers. I would agree that in cases it appears that some audiences are more targeted than others, but I still think all applies to us generally.