I admit that this conflicts with what I have posted on previous threads. I am now having to rethink some of that.
The earliest datable fragment is 12 verses in Mark (without which Mark would have 666 verses) that were written by Philo of Alexandria in 41 AD when Herod Agrippa ("King of the Jews") visited Alexandria. Because 666 is the number of "Caesar Nero" (Emperor from 54 to 68 AD) in Jewish numerology, I propose that this fragment about Jesus' hazing and the purple robe, is an add-on, discovered by some writer at a later date and added to the gospel. This could have happened no earlier than 54 AD. The victim's name in the hazing incident is Carabbas. The name is gibberish, but change one letter... And Philo was a Jew and would have known that.
The fall of the Temple is clearly mentioned in the gospels, placing them after 70AD. Paul's first letter (1st Corinthians) is mentioned in 1st Clement, placing it before 96 AD.
Matthew and Mark describe an "abomination in a high place" where it "had not ought to be." That high place being Temple Mount and the abomination being the Temple to Zeus built by the Roman Tenth Legion in 131 AD. The Legion placed a statue of their mascot - a boar's head - in front of the temple, probably to antagonize the Jews and remind them that they were a conquered people. In the Bible Jesus solved the problem by ordering a bunch of demons (named "Legion") into 2000 pigs (the number of men in a Roman legion). The story effectively dates to the Bar Kochba Rebellion of 132-135 AD. The Apocalypses of Matthew and Mark suggest that the hammer-blow from Rome has not yet fallen, but is imminently expected.
I used to think that this story dated Matthew and Mark to the Bar Kochba Rebeliion, but then I realized that writings of that time contain no apocryphal references. Those started being added about the time of Eusebius, so now I am thinking that a writer in the fourth century took the second-century version of the gospels and added some embellishments and that is what we now have.
Also, I used to think that Justin the Martyr quoted heavily from our modern gospels. Then I realized that the stories he was telling were fundamentally different and contained details unknown in our current gospels - like Jesus being enveloped in fire when he emerged from being baptized in the Jordan. So, our current gospels are not the same as those known to Justin.
While the four modern gospels date from much later, there remain non-canonical gospels from far earlier. If there is any historical truth to the story of Jesus, it will be found there. But finding it is not going to be easy.
Maybe from a psychic but could be some what true. John Mark Jesus`s consin wrote the frist letter of Jesus`s life, he was the beloved at the cross. He was seventeen at the time of the crucifiction. He was the compiler of a letter that later became the gospel of Mark, He wrote the letter at the age of fifty nine, 42AD. Paul and Barmbas did not ever meet or know Jesus only what known from John Mark.