For completeness, I thought it might be helpful for me Duality Review to write a second post on this subject since my earlier post focussed on the dating of St John's gospel only. The reason for that was that I wanted to present hard evidence in the form of scholarly dating of extant manuscripts and it just so happens that the fragment P52 of John's Gospel is the earliest of such.
Dating of the other canonical gospels is based on a different type of evidence; what is generally referred to as internal evidence considering factors like chronology, style and theology. Biblical scholars are agreed that the gospels of Matthew and Luke were produced later than the gospel of Mark. Textual analysis of both of these gospels reveals that parts of Mark were included in them so, logically, they must have been written later.
Since St Luke records the destruction of the temple by the Romans around 70 AD in some detail, most scholars conclude the text must have been written sometime after that event; and that's, largely, where the date of 80-90 AD comes from. Similarly, with Matthew's Gospel, the description of the destruction suggests a date of later than 70 AD.
Because Mark's gospel is generally believed to have been written earlier than both of these gospels, scholars are generally agreed on a dating of Mark as between 65 AD – 72 AD. Now the foregoing is all fact. It is simply a statement of what scholars believe based upon painstaking research of the texts themselves.
https://diettipstoday.com/controlling-the-events-in-our-life/
