Mid-63 -------------- 1 Peter Late 63 ------------- 2 Timothy Late 64 ------------- Jude Late 64 ------------- 2 Peter
19
Dating the Gospel of Matthew (AD 31-38) As Frank Luke notes, “Matthew seems to view the city [of Jerusalem] as still intact when he writes that: For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day (Matt 27:8).” Thus, a pre-70 date for Matthew seems easily vindicated. And there is more evidence, both inside and outside Matthew which easily pushes the date two or three decades earlier. For example, we could ask: Is there any evidence in Paul’s six earliest epistles (i.e., the ones written before AD 58) that he had read any of the four gospels? What about in his later epistles (after AD 58)? It would help us assign dates to the four gospels, especially in relation to Paul’s earlier writings, if we can find any definite quotes or allusions to the gospels in them. Here are some guidelines for our consideration: 1. There are no long quotes from any of the four gospels in Paul’s epistles. However there are some short phrases, several allusions, and one big parallel section, that appear to be pulled from some of the gospels. 2. The parallels between Matthew 24 and Paul’s two letters to the Thessalonians is a good place to start. When we have something as significant as this, we really do not need much else to prove that Paul was familiar with, and had access to the Gospel of Matthew before he wrote his two epistles to the Thessalonians. Even though that is not the only evidence, it is compelling enough to push way beyond probability to almost certainty. 3. One thing we need to establish right up front, is that Matthew appears to be the first gospel to be produced, followed by Mark, Luke, and John. We believe this because Luke quotes and alludes to both Matthew and Mark, showing that Matthew and Mark were already available; and Mark quotes from Matthew (and not from Luke), showing that Matthew was probably written before both Mark and Luke. Furthermore, John alludes to some unique material in Luke, implying that John was written after Luke, making it the last of the four gospels. So, that appears to be the sequence in which they were written (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), based on a comparison and analysis of their similarities and differences. 4. Now let’s look at some of the more significant connections between Paul’s epistles and the gospel of Matthew specifically.
Dating Matthew with Paul’s Use of it in his epistles to the Thessalonians: A. The Major Evidence First: 1 Thess. 4-5; 2 Thess. 2; and 1 Cor. 15:52 – many parallels with Matthew 24, and possibly with Mark 13 also (which would mean that both gospels were written before Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians). It is utterly astounding to see how few futurist commentaries are willing to explore the significance of this amazing connection. Don Preston and Mike Sullivan have both documented the linkage between Matthew 24 and 1 Thess. 4-5 (Preston: We Shall Meet Him in the Air, pp. 72-80, 171; Sullivan: House Divided, pp. 107-110). The similarities are so clear and strong, that it cannot be ignored or explained away. It certainly allows for the possibility that Paul had access to a copy of Matthew’s gospel while writing his two epistles to the Thessalonians and First Corinthians. Paul was obviously aware of everything Jesus had taught in the Olivet Discourse. The only question is whether he had a photographic memory from the oral teaching of the other apostles, or had direct revelation from Christ on this subject, or had access to a copy of Matthew’s gospel. And these three options are not mutually exclusive. It
