etc.) which may suggest a later date could be used.In this case, we can have early Pauline letters and a late Luke-Acts.Paul conducted no less than five evangelistic journeys.He was the first person recorded in the Bible, in 50 A. He also wrote fourteen epistles or letters that became part of the inspired word of God, almost THREE TIMES more than the next two biggest contributors to holy writ (Moses and the apostle John each wrote five books).
Although maybe it should be obvious, could you make explicit what you see as the potential conflict to be reconciled?But there are other reasons for the differences in the text of the extant manuscripts. The text has been revised over the centuries to meet the needs of the people who actually used the books. Bilingual editions were produced for Latin-speaking students who were learning Greek; these provided the Latin translation between the lines or on the page facing the Greek text, paragraph by paragraph.Lectionaries were produced to be read aloud by the priest during worship services.I think you're assuming that the same people believe in authentic early letters of Paul and authentic late Luke, which would be an odd position to hold.Unless you can provide a reference to someone who thinks this way it's really rather hypothetical, which is a poor fit for this site.