Do any of the gospels predate the writings of Paul?

[DaphneBlack]

@Chronos

Q wasn’t a source for Mark; Q and Mark together were sources for the other two. Q is invoked to explain the various elements which show up in both Matthew and Luke but not in Mark.

Whoops! My apologies. That’s right, of course.

[Koxinga]

I thought it was only in Mark there was a bit about a kid at Gesthemane hanging around Jesus’ camp who ran away starkers when the soldiers grabbed hold of him by his robe; and further, that kid is speculated to have been Mark himself. Or am I misremembering?

[Sage_Rat]

There’s some reason to believe that there was an early set of Gospels that was targeted to the Jews, rather than the Gentiles. Most particularly, the Gospel of Matthew appears like it may depend on an early version that was written in Aramaic (called the Gospel of the Hebrews, or The Aramaic Gospels according to Matthew) and had such differences as including Mary as the Holy Spirit, holding that Jewish law needed to be followed to be a Christian, and emphasizing James as the leader of the church.

There were also the Gospel of the Ebionites, which did not include the virgin birth and nativity, and Gospel of the Nazoraeans, which might be another name for the Gospel of the Hebrews (and also didn’t include the virgin birth.)

Unfortunately, none of these survive and there’s little to no way to know for certain that they came previous to the still existing gospels. That they focus on James and Jews makes it seem certainly quite plausible that they are earlier seeing that the church did start among and for the Jews, all indications are that the church was split between James and the Jews and Paul and the Gentiles, and there was the Council of Jerusalem, where James was definitely the man and Paul was the guy who had to come asking favors.

[tomndebb]

@ITR_champion

(1st Corinthians is most commonly believed to be his earliest letter.)

1st Thessalonians.

[ftg]

@Aji_de_Gallina

There’s the (controversial) 7Q5 fragment. Papirologists tend to accept it more than bible scholars. If true that would put Mark before A.D. 50, maybe even to early-40’s.

Here’s the Wikipedia article on the fragment. There’s several layers of “supposing” going on to get to claiming that Mark was written by 68AD. One of the weakest links I think is that even if an early, tiny, fragment of any gospel was found, jumping to the conclusion that the whole gospel was written by that time is too much.

[Northern_Piper]

@tomndebb

1st Thessalonians.

that’s what I thought too, but didn’t have a cite for it. could you point me to something, tom? (NT 101 is a long way away…)

[Northern_Piper]

@sweetevil jesus

Do any of the gospels predate the writings of Paul?

You know, I would have thought that someone called sweeteviljesus might have personal knowledge on this point…

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Koxinga

I thought it was only in Mark there was a bit about a kid at Gesthemane hanging around Jesus’ camp who ran away starkers when the soldiers grabbed hold of him by his robe; and further, that kid is speculated to have been Mark himself. Or am I misremembering?

That is indeed the speculation, though speculation is all that it is.