Dating and authorship of the gospels
The same point is made by Ehrman 1997:"For a long time, scholars were convinced that corroborating evidence could be found in the vocabulary used throughout Luke-Acts. When scholars actually went to the trouble of comparing the medical terminology with that found in works by other Greek authors of the period, they discovered that "Luke" uses such terms no more frequently than other educated writers of his day." (p.
130).(On Luke) "It too is anonymous and appears to have been written by a Greek-speaking Christian somewhere outside of Palestine.
98)Ehrman 1997 also spends further time discussing some of the other aspects of Lukan authorship (whether he was a companion of Paul's and the "we" passages).
And he also has some things to say towards the end of Ch. Like that the Evangelists are all fluent Greek speakers, but the disciples were probably native Aramaic speakers and Greek for them would probably have been a 2nd or 3rd language.
The later dates are based also on this timeframe, but the difference is that they account for the mention of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, which occurred in 70 .
According to this scholarship, the gospels must have been written after the devastation because they refer to it.
However, conservative believers maintain the early dates and assert that the destruction of the temple and Judea mentioned in the gospels constitutes "prophecy," demonstrating Jesus's divine powers.
The substantiation for this early, first-century range of dates, both conservative and liberal, is internal only, as there is no external evidence, whether historical or archaeological, for the existence of any gospels at that time.
Although it would be logical for all those directly involved with Jesus to have recorded their own memoirs, is it not odd that there are so many bogus manuscripts? If Peter didn't write the Gospel of Peter, then who did? Is not the practice of pseudepigraphy—the false attribution of a work by one author to another—an admission that there were many people within Christianity engaging in forgery?
If these apostles themselves had gospels forged in their names, how can we be certain that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not likewise have gospels falsified in their names?