While no arrangement of these books can be made with absolute confidence, the following dates are sufficiently reliable to serve the purpose of the Bible student....These.
James - 50 A.D.
First Thessalonians - 52-53.
Second Thessalonians - 52-53.
Galatians - 55.
First Corinthians - 57.
Second Corinthians - 57.
Romans - 57-58.
Philippians - 62-63.
Colossians - 62-63.
Philemon - 62-63.
Ephesians - 62-63.
Luke - 63.
Acts - 64.
First Timothy - 65.
Titus - 65.
Second Timothy - 66.
Mark - 66.
Matthew - 67.
Hebrews - 67.
First Peter - 67-68.
Second Peter - 68.
Jude - 68.
Apocalypse - 68.
John - c. 85.
Epistles of John - 90-95.
Thanks for attending to my ongoing education!
I wouldn’t disagree with most of those dates except for Revelation which the current consensus puts at about 95 AD, as stated by Irenaeus in the second century and affirmed by Eusebius in the 4th century. Granted there is a considerable minority view among Preterists, best argued by Gentry, that Revelation was written before the fall of Rome. But you asked what specific word was used in the original manuscript and to the best of my knowledge there is no record of anyone seeing an “original” manuscript of any NT books in at least 1800 years. There are literally thousands of manuscript copies, the earliest going back to the early second century. (P52) Those who favor the majority text argue that the earliest copies are not the most accurate. Those who favor the critical text (NA27) argue for the earlier copies. Thus my question as to just what you were referring to as the “original manuscript” I’m supposed to comment on - which of these thousands of copies are you equating with the “original manuscript”?