There is no indication as to an accurate age for Matthew, although he was called by Christ, as a tax collector shortly after the beginning of His ministry in about 31 AD. His name was Levi, son of Alphaeus, according to Mark 2:14. This indicates that he was a mature man, having some time of establishment as "a receiver of custom (tax collector)." The theologian, Dr. W. A. Criswell, has said: "There is no reason to question the Matthean authorship of the first Gospel."
The Gospel of John was probably written about 80-90 AD, certainly before he wrote the book of Revelation, which he did in exile to the isle of Patmos, about 95 AD. as an aged man. Irenaeus, who was taught by Polycarp, a disciple of John, attested to these matters in the early church.
Chat with our AI personalities
The Gospels of Matthew and John were originally anonymous and were only attributed to the disciples whose names they now bear, later in the second century. We do not really know who wrote these gospels, but biblical scholars say that it is most unlikely that they were the disciples Matthew and John. It would indeed be strange if Matthew, as an eyewitness disciple, wrote the Gospel attributed to him, given that nearly all biblical scholars now accept that the author relied on Mark's Gospel for much of his information about Jesus. Why would an eyewitness copy so much material, often word for word in the original Greek, from another gospel that was not written by an eyewitness? A similar point can be made about the authorship of John's Gospel.
We can not say how old the actual authors were, and it is very likely that John was a committee effort.
Assuming that the Authors were contemporary of Jesus, then:1.There is little in the gospel (Matthew) itself to indicate with clarity the date of its composition. The majority of scholars date the gospel between the years 70 and 100.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_MatthewIf Matthew is the real author of the Gospel ascribed to him, then he must be 100-130 yrs old when he wrote the book.2.Since Mark may have been written around the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, around 70, Luke would not have been written before http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_lukeIf Luke is the real author of the Gospel ascribed to him, then he must be 100+ yrs old when he wrote the book.3."Most scholars agree on a range of c. 90-100 for when the gospel (John) was written, though dates as early as the 60s or as late as the 140s have been advanced by a small number of scholars. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_johnIf John is the real author of the Gospel ascribed to him, then he must be between 90-170 yrs old when he wrote the book.4. "There is wide scholarly agreement that Mark was written sometime between the late 60s or the early 70s.[13] There are vocal minority groups that argue for earlier or later dates. However, as most scholars believe that either Matthew or Luke was written around the year 80 and used Mark as a source, they find a date past 75 unlikely."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_markIf Mark is the real author of the Gospel ascribed to him, then he must be 105+ yrs old when he wrote the bookAnswerThe Gospels were written much earlier than previously thought for, among other things, the obvious problems with the ages of the authors, together with internal evidence. The fact that the Book of Matthew, like the other synoptics, together with Acts does not report the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem, but has it as still future can mean one of two things. Either they were written before or long after this significant event (when it was no longer relevant). If one takes the most simply logical view that they were written before, this makes most sense of this historical setting.Thus, all of the New Testament Gospel writers in order for them to be the authors, and some of them being actual direct eyewitnesses to the events they record, would have to be considerably younger than mentioned above, even if blessed with considerable longevity.
All four of the Gospels document it. Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23, and John 19. It's also referred to in the rest of the New Testament, and predicted in the Old Testament, but those four chapters contain the historical documentation of it.
Both Matthew and Luke are in the New Testament. It is about John the baptist and Jesus going to the wilderness.
The Old Testament does not have any Gospels (Good News) as there was not much in the way of good news such as in the New Testament and the Good News that the world now has a Savior, Jesus Christ.
This is a very difficult question to answer because it took place over several centuries, beginning with monks who started doing some texts.As early as the late 7th century, the complete Book of Psalms was translated by Aldhelm. In the 10th century the Lindisfarne Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John) were translated into English by Aldred. As the English language evolved, so the translations were updated. Around 990, the Wessex Gospels were completed. In the 11th century, man books from the Old Testament were translated into Old English. In the 12th century the Ormulum presented a Middle English version.Ultimately, in the 14th century, John Wycliffe released the Wycliffe Bible, a complete Bible which was a collaborative translation with other writers contributing to the translating.