Dating the new testament gospels
By these dates they argue that the New Testament documents, especially the Gospels, contain mythology.
The writers created the events contained, rather than reported them.
Using the accepted methods of papyrology and palaeography, O'Callahan compared sequences of letters with existing documents and eventually identified nine fragments as belonging to one gospel, Acts, and few epistles.
Some of these were dated slightly later than 50, but still extremely early: Both friends and critics acknowledge that, if valid, O'Callahan's conclusions will revolutionise New Testament theories.
Internal evidence is strong for this early date: 1. All three reveal a historical interest in the events of Jesus' life and give facts that agree with the Gospels.
For this reason radical scholars argue for late first century, and if possible second century, dates for the autographs [original manuscripts].Assuming the basic integrity and reasonable accuracy of the writers, this would place the reliability of the New Testaments beyond reasonable doubt. Since the book was composed in Asia Minor and this fragment was found in Egypt, some circulation time is demanded, surely placing composition of John within the first century.Of the four Gospels alone there are 19,368 citations by the church fathers from the late first century on. Whole books (Bodmer Papyri) are available from 200.It is also an odd place to end the book if years have passed since the pre-62 events transpired.
If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus.
If even some of these fragments are from the New Testament, the implications for Christian apologetics are enormous.