No, the early church fathers are not reliable. They were grinding axes to lop off the heads of rival sects. If you had the slightest idea of the subject you would know that both Irenaeus and Tertullian were writing against the popularity of Marcion who had written his own gospel. They had to find some convincing authorship for their arbitrary choice of texts to undermine the canon that Marcion had devised. As promised a Taster of Marcion
And modern scholarship has completely debunked this ancient wishful thinking. We know that the text now titled “Mark” was written first, probably based on the maunderings of “Paul”. “Matthew” followed containing roughly 60% of Mark word for word, expanding some stories, correcting the egregious errors of jewish law and lore in the greek “Mark”. The birth narrative was probably added later as we know that the Ebionites were using a version of Matthew that did not contain the “virgin” nonsense.
Luke is another Greek copy of Mark with some stories expanded and new ones added. The errors in Jewish Law remain. None of these anonymous texts were written before 70CE, and most are dated to 80 CE and later.
John is the exception and the fragment P52 is dated at the earliest to 125CE and might be as late as 250CE. John contains many of the stories in Luke and Mark, but expands them and adds detail, like any fan fiction writer does today. It, again, is not an eye witness account by a 1st century Aramaic speaking Jew.
Conclusion: None of the gospels are contemporary to events described. None of the Synoptic texts are attributed until the late 3rd Century. 2 of the three gospels are copies of another and the last text is written even later and in a style common at the end of the 1st century.
One cannot base these texts as historical accounts for the reasons above, never mind the claims for supernatural events that underpin a very unremarkable life. Dead itinerant preachers were a very common occurrence in the 1st century CE. There are 13 such “messiahs” with better provenance that your messiah of choice.
Hardly a convincing entry. Pure hearsay. Try again.
There were many texts and cults bearing a similarity to the jewish messanaic cults that spread with the Roman Empire. Each church had a text, that it claimed was the one truth, Marcionites, and the Keralian Church founded (in legend) by Thomas (the twin) are examples, Some places (mostly hellenistic) used Luke only, Some used a gnostic text. The Coptic texts differ markedly as did the composite Syriac text. The texts were systematically edited and anything deviating was destroyed in the pogroms following the establishment of the Roman Church.
There was no orthodox Canon until the mid 4th century.
Only now are some ancient texts coming to light or being reconstructed like, Marcions Gospel, the Keralian founding texts, etc etc. The cleansing of the texts and the pogroms of the 4th to 10th centuries were notable for their thoroughness, that is the tradition you inherit. There is not an unbroken line of texts that spread back to the 1st 1/3 of the 1st century CE. Divest yourself of that cute notion.
Now we are getting perilously close to ridicule! The earliest fragment of any gospel is that P52 fragment of “john”. It does not evidence the veracity of any other text in the Canon.
It is widely accepted even by established churches that most of 1 Peter, all of 2 Peter, 2 Timothy and Titus are out and out forgeries, that all but 6 the remaining Pauline letters are composites rewritten years later. We know that Mark ended abruptly before the current version.
You are quoting people with a vested interest in the mythology of their beliefs
well how did you find those dates? His birth date is unrecorded and his death could be anywhere according to scholars, between 108 and 140 CE. In the days of average male lifespan being in the low 40’s and his alleged martyrdom would have been for a middle aged/younger man. You can see why I approach such claims with a sprinkling of healthy scepticism.
Only a much later tradition has him as a companion of “John”.
Please desist from presenting your youtube gathered wishful thinking as fact.