Please help with Bible history?

Here is a complete list of biblical authors and the estimated year that they wrote their works.

The destruction of the second temple is not mentioned in the N.T....................

Biblical Writers

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy = Moses - 1400 B.C.

Joshua = Joshua - 1350 B.C.

Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel = Samuel / Nathan / Gad - 1000 - 900 B.C.

1 Kings, 2 Kings = Jeremiah - 600 B.C.

1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah = Ezra - 450 B.C.

Esther = Mordecai - 400 B.C.

Job = Moses - 1400 B.C.

Psalms = several different authors, mostly David - 1000 - 400 B.C.

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon = Solomon - 900 B.C.

Isaiah = Isaiah - 700 B.C.

Jeremiah, Lamentations = Jeremiah - 600 B.C.

Ezekiel = Ezekiel - 550 B.C.

Daniel = Daniel - 550 B.C.

Hosea = Hosea - 750 B.C.

Joel = Joel - 850 B.C.

Amos = Amos - 750 B.C.

Obadiah = Obadiah - 600 B.C.

Jonah = Jonah - 700 B.C.

Micah = Micah - 700 B.C.

Nahum = Nahum - 650 B.C.

Habakkuk = Habakkuk - 600 B.C.

Zephaniah = Zephaniah - 650 B.C.

Haggai = Haggai - 520 B.C.

Zechariah = Zechariah - 500 B.C.

Malachi = Malachi - 430 B.C.

Matthew = Matthew - A.D. 55

Mark = John Mark - A.D. 50

Luke = Luke - A.D. 60

John = John - A.D. 90

Acts = Luke - A.D. 65

Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon = Paul - A.D. 50-70

Hebrews = unknown, best guesses are Paul, Luke, Barnabas, or Apollos - 65 A.D.

James = James - A.D. 45

1 Peter, 2 Peter = Peter - A.D. 60

1 John, 2 John, 3 John = John - A.D. 90

Jude = Jude - A.D. 60

Revelation = John - A.D. 90

None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. 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 21:5)

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 70 A.D. Also, if the gospels were fabrications of mythical events then anything to bolster the Messianic claims -- such as the destruction of the temple as Jesus said -- would surely have been included. But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels (at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were written before 70 A.D.

I hope this helps with your questions.

When the original texts were written we don't know. But the translations we have now were written long after them.

Luke did write Acts.

Probably.

The original texts were written before the destruction of the Temple.

They do mention the destruction of the Temple but only as prophetic statements, not after the fact statements.

The Gospels covered a time previous to the temple destruction. The translated texts the Catholic church found and accepted as gospel were formed long after this period.

The 'Gospels' pretty uniformly end chronologically speaking about the time that YAHOSHUA ascended to Heaven, just before Pentecost. It is normally accepted that the Gospel of John was written last, even after John wrote Rev.(About 90 A.D.) The beginnings of the gospels were notes written on the margins of scrolls, and some of those notes were written while Messiah was still alive. There are books on this subject, and people have spent years studying it to come up with a probable time line. To my mind, it is much more important to know that the Spirit of YHVH was the prompting power, and to follow where 'He' leads.

There are a number of study bibles that preface every book of the Bible with the information you ask for. Nelson is good. My favorite is the Spirit Filled New King James Version - excellent commentaries, historical background, and basic information like when, where, who was involved, and the occasion of the writing itself.

You can probably also find this out at www.crosswalk.com, or www.biblegateway.org.

(And a quick response to one aspect of your question - yes, Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem, and this was recorded in at least one gospel.)

LATER:

It sounds like you've reeled in way more than you asked for. I understand the intent behind the cynical "study to be a marine" analogy - but WHEW. The difference between the marine's manual and the Word of God is the first prepares you to work towards becoming a marine....while the Word of God has the life and power in it to do the work in you. Don't let anyone discourage you from studying the Word of God. God Himself said to put that word before your eyes and in your ears and get it into your heart and GUARD it there. Meditate on it and let that Word transform you.

"The first four books, called Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, do not

give a history of the life of Jesus Christ, but only detached

anecdotes of him.

"The four books already mentioned, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John,

are altogether anecdotal. They relate events after they had taken

place. They tell what Jesus Christ did and said, and what others did

and said to him; and in several instances they relate the same event

differently. Revelation is necessarily out of the question with

respect to those books; not only because of the disagreement of the

writers, but because revelation cannot be applied to the relating of

facts by the person who saw them done, nor to the relating or

recording of any discourse or conversation by those who beard it.

The book called the Acts of the Apostles (an anonymous work) belongs

also to the anecdotal part.

"All the other parts of the New Testament, except the book of

enigmas called the Revelations, are a collection of letters under

the name of epistles; and the forgery of letters has been such a

common practice in the world, that the probability is at least

equal, whether they are genuine or forged. One thing, however, is much less equivocal, which is, that out of the matters contained in those books, together with the assistance of some old stories, the Church has set up a system of religion very contradictory to the character of the person whose name it bears. It has set up a religion of pomp and revenue, in pretended imitation of a person whose life was humility and poverty.

"Here, then, is the whole story, foolish as it is, of this child

and this virgin; and it is upon the barefaced perversion of this

story, that the book of Matthew, and the impudence and sordid

interests of priests in later times, have founded a theory which

they call the Gospel; and have applied this story to signify the

person they call Jesus Christ, begotten, they say, by a ghost, whom

they call holy, on the body of a woman, engaged in marriage, and

afterward married, whom they call a virgin, 700 years after this

foolish story was told; a theory which, speaking for myself, I

hesitate not to disbelieve, and to say, is as fabulous and as false as

God is true.*

"*In the 14th verse of the 7th chapter, it is said that the child

should be called Immanuel; but this name was not given to either of

the children otherwise than as a character which the word signifies.

That of the prophetess was called Maher-shalal-hash-baz, and that of

Mary was called Jesus."

Thomas Paine

"The Age of Reason"

Because of the increasing diffusion of Christian communities throughout the extensive Roman Empire, it was natural that the Christian mind began to raise questions of religious/moral and practical nature. Unable to attend to these queries personally, at the point of their origin, the Apostles responded to them through letters-epistles. Consequently, while the Gospel embodies the very fundamentals of the Christian faith, the Apostles' Epistles unveil the different aspects of Christ's Teachings in finer detail and indicate its practical application. Because of the Apostles' Epistles, we have a living witness of their Teachings and how the first Christians developed and lived within their communities. The Church always considered the Apostles' Epistles as the word of the Holy Spirit and as the pure source of the Truth (Luke. 12:12, John. 16:13, 17:17-19). Albeit living conditions change continuously and each year presents new problems, essentially these are the same problems that existed in apostolic times and throughout the ages of mankind's existence. That is why in these Apostolic Teachings, one can find correct guidance toward resolving personal problems as well as discovering the ageless treasures of Christian teachings on faith and life.

http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/bi...

It is important to understand that the dating of the Gospels and other New Testament books is at best an educated guess and at worst foolish speculation. For example, suggested dates for the writing of the Gospel of Matthew range from as early as A.D. 40 to as late as A.D. 140. This wide range of dates from scholars indicates the subjective nature of the dating process. Generally, one will find that the presuppositions of the scholars greatly influence their dating of the Gospels.

For example, in the past many liberal theologians have argued for a later dating of many of the New Testament books than is probably warranted or valid, in an attempt to discredit or cast doubts upon the content and authenticity of the Gospel accounts. On the other hand, there are many scholars who look to a much earlier dating of the New Testament books. There are some that believe there is good evidence to support the view that the whole New Testament, including Revelation, was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. It is our contention that the evidence supports the earlier dating more than it does the later dating.

There are scholars who believe the Gospel of Matthew was written as early as ten to twelve years after the death of Christ. Those who hold to this earlier dating of Matthew believe he first wrote his Gospel in Aramaic, and then it was later translated into Greek. One of the evidences of this earlier dating of Matthew’s Gospel is that early church leaders such as Irenaeus, Origen, and Eusebius recorded that Matthew first wrote his gospel for Jewish believers while he was still in Palestine. In fact Eusebius, (a bishop of Caesarea and known as the father of church history), reported that Matthew wrote his Gospel before he left Palestine to preach in other lands, which Eusebius says happened about 12 years after the death of Christ. Some scholars believe that this would place the writing of Matthew as early as A.D. 40-45 and as late as A.D. 55.

Even if the Gospels were not written until 30 years after Christ’s death, that would still place the writing of them prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This presents no major problem with their authority or accuracy. Passing on oral traditions and teachings was commonplace in the Jewish culture of that day, and memorization was highly cultivated and practiced. Also, the fact that even at that time there would have been a considerable number of eyewitnesses around to dispute and discredit any false claims, and the fact that none of the “hard sayings” of Jesus were taken from the Gospel accounts, further supports their accuracy. Had the Gospels been edited before being written down, as some liberal scholars contend, then it was a very poor job. The writers left far too many “hard sayings,” and culturally unacceptable and politically incorrect accounts that would need explaining. An example of this is that the first witnesses of the resurrection were women, who were not considered reliable witnesses in the culture of that day.

The bottom line for Christians is this—whether the Gospels were written soon after the death of Christ, or not until 30 years after his death, does not really matter, because their accuracy and authority does not rest on when they were written but on what they are: the divinely inspired Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16). We should also remember that one of the promises Jesus gave His disciples was that He would send them “another helper,” the Holy Spirit, who would teach them all things and ‘bring to your remembrance all that I said to you” (John 14:26). So, whether it was few years or many after Jesus' death that the Gospels were written, we can have total confidence and faith in their completeness and accuracy, knowing that they were written by “men moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21), who accurately recorded the very words of God.

It is believed Luke wrote the book of Acts they both were addressed to Theophilus.

Hope this helps some you can e-mail if you need anymore help I will try and find other stuff for you God Bless

The Bible is stimulated by using God. (2 Timothy 3:sixteen) it fairly is his word. besides the certainty that adult males wrote the Bible, God controlled what replaced into to be written. sure, the previous testomony does incorporate historic previous of Israel etc, even even though it additionally has prophecy that prophets and Jesus stated. (Matthew 24). So, the Bible isn't in user-friendly terms yet another e book using fact books come and bypass. The Bible has stood the thest of time. it fairly is sacred. it fairly is God's word. ISAIAH 8:20-"To the regulation and to the testimony! in the event that they do no longer talk in accordance to this word, it fairly is using fact there isn't any easy in them."

Keep in mind that many scholars argue that the bible borrows heavily from various preceding religions, substituting its own cast of characters. Also, that it was assembled from the writings of hundreds of authors over centuries, at least some of whom had ulterior motives guiding their translation/transliteration, and some political or religious leaders or even kings deciding which parts to include or drop completely.