[bunkerhill7]

30-60 Passion Narrative
40-80 Lost Sayings Gospel Q
50-60 1 Thessalonians
50-60 Philippians
50-60 Galatians
50-60 1 Corinthians
50-60 2 Corinthians
50-60 Romans
50-60 Philemon
50-80 Colossians
50-90 Signs Gospel
50-95 Book of Hebrews
50-120 Didache
50-140 Gospel of Thomas
50-140 Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel
50-200 Sophia of Jesus Christ
65-80 Gospel of Mark
70-100 Epistle of James
70-120 Egerton Gospel
70-160 Gospel of Peter
70-160 Secret Mark
70-200 Fayyum Fragment
70-200 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
73-200 Mara Bar Serapion
80-100 2 Thessalonians
80-100 Ephesians
80-100 Gospel of Matthew
80-110 1 Peter
80-120 Epistle of Barnabas
80-130 Gospel of Luke
80-130 Acts of the Apostles
80-140 1 Clement
80-150 Gospel of the Egyptians
80-150 Gospel of the Hebrews
80-250 Christian Sibyllines
90-95 Apocalypse of John
90-120 Gospel of John
90-120 1 John
90-120 2 John
90-120 3 John
90-120 Epistle of Jude
93 Flavius Josephus
100-150 1 Timothy
100-150 2 Timothy
100-150 Titus
100-150 Apocalypse of Peter
100-150 Secret Book of James
100-150 Preaching of Peter
100-160 Gospel of the Ebionites
100-160 Gospel of the Nazoreans
100-160 Shepherd of Hermas
100-160 2 Peter

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

33 King James hands out the red-letter edition.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Where did you copy and paste that? The “lost sayings Gospel Q” doesn’t exist. It’s a hypothetical document by liberals who imagine that the Gospels we have are rip offs of a original, which also gave rise to the ‘Gospel of Thomas’ and other poorly written Gnostic works. They’re full of it, since any reading of the “Gospel of Thomas” would so that it’s heavily based off the Gospel of Matthew. Your list also dates it ranging from 50AD, but there is no evidence that it had such an early existence. The only evidence of its existence is in the second century, as it is attributed to heretics then living as a recent work. It just pulls Matthew out of context into something stupid. Same thing for the “Signs Gospel.” Another hypothetical document with no evidence that it ever existed. So why bother dating it?

Stick with conservative scholars who actually believe in Christianity, not these sophists and liars.

[TBP]

These dates are all but certainly way too early.

[Biggirl]

Is not the letters of Paul are the oldest books of the NT?