Their testimony is not infallible (especially when, as in the case of the tradition about Mark, the tradition is recorded over a century after the Gospel was written), but it serves as a valuable starting point when we are looking for information about the Gospels’ authors and dates, and shouldn’t be dismissed lightly.
There are also clues hidden in the text itself that can be used to date it.
A well-known and leading Critical Scholar in New Testament Origins Professor of New Testament at Princeton University, Chair of the Editorial Board for the UBS and Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament.
It's funny becuase the mythers have reached back into the nineteenth century while the new trend even among liberals is toward earlier dates not latter ones.
Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts -31). Since we know that the gospel of Luke was written before the Book of Acts, we can then date the Gospel of Luke sometime around A. Paul wrote of a brother who was well-known among the churches for the gospel.
The inference is that Acts was written while Paul was still alive, seeing his death is not recorded. There is ancient testimony that this refers to Luke and his written gospel.
If we begin from a position of philosophical naturalism (the presumption that nothing supernatural is possible), we have no choice but to describe the supernatural elements we find in the Gospels as lies.
From a naturalistic perspective, prophetic claims are impossible.