Furthermore, those who were alive at the time of the events could have countered the gospel accounts; and since we have no contradictory writings to the gospels, their early authorship as well as apostolic authorship becomes even more critical. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down." (Luke 21:6, see also Matt. Such an obvious fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy most likely would have been recorded as such by the gospel writers who were fond of mentioning fulfillment of prophecy if they had been written after A. But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels (at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were written before A. Acts is a history of the Christian church right after Jesus' ascension. If Q actually existed, then that would push the first writings of Christ's words and deeds back even further lessening the available time for myth to creep in and adding to the validity and accuracy of the gospel accounts. Luke is simply recounting the events from the disciples.
None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in A. Acts also fails to mention the incredibly significant events of A. 70, which would have been extremely relevant and prophetically important and would require inclusion into Acts had it occurred before Acts was written. If what is said of Acts is true, this would mean that Luke was written at least before A. 63 and possibly before 55 - 59 since Acts is the second in the series of writings by Luke. Therefore, Matthew was in circulation well before Ignatius came on the scene. Since Luke agrees with Matthew, Mark, and John and since there is no contradictory information coming from any of the disciples stating that Luke was inaccurate and since Luke has proven to be a very accurate historian, we can conclude that Luke's account is very accurate.
Estimating an Earliest Likely Date Before trying to assign dates to particular Gospels, it can be helpful to try to identify a broader range of years in which they were composed.
Concerning the earliest the Gospels might have been written, Ehrman writes: To begin with, none of the Gospels appears to have been known to the apostle Paul, writing in the 50s. Many of Paul’s epistles were written in the 50s, and in those epistles, Paul does not quote from the Gospels.
“The Worker Is Worth His Wages” Third, 1 Timothy states: [T]he scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” The first quotation is found in Deuteronomy 25:4 and the second is found in Luke 10:7. This would suggest that the Gospel of Luke was in circulation in the A. 60s, but Ehrman’s point is still fair that Paul’s letters from the 50s don’t contain any clear references to the Gospels.This group of books, plus Deuteronomy, is called the "Deuteronomistic history" by scholars.The proposal that they made up a unified work was first advanced by Martin Noth in 1943, and has been widely accepted.This article is about books written about the life of Jesus.For the Good News of salvation through Jesus, The gospel.