Program / Course 16: Historical Defense / Lesson 3.2
What you will learn
- Explain in what sense the four Gospels are anonymous.
- Summarize the earliest church traditions about who wrote each Gospel.
- State the main arguments for and against the traditional attributions.
- Explain how the question of authorship bears on reliability without settling it.
The big idea
None of the four Gospels names its author in its text. The names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John appear in titles that were added when the Gospels were collected, and church writers of the second century said who they thought the authors were. Many scholars regard these traditions as partly sound, for instance about Mark and Luke, and doubt others, especially about Matthew and John. Authorship matters because an author’s access to eyewitnesses affects the weight of the account. The question is open, and honest scholars give different answers.
Key terms
- Anonymous
- Without a named author in the text itself. The Gospels are anonymous in this sense, unlike the letters of Paul.
- Superscription (title)
- A heading such as According to Mark, added to a manuscript to identify the work. These are not part of the original text in the view of most scholars.
- External evidence
- Testimony from outside the text, such as statements by early church writers, about its origin.
- Internal evidence
- Clues within the text itself, such as language, style and knowledge of places and customs.
- Pseudonymity
- Writing under the name of a famous person. It was practiced in the ancient world, and scholars debate how far it applies to New Testament books.
- Beloved disciple
- The unnamed follower described in the Gospel of John as loved by Jesus, and in John 21:24 as the one whose testimony underlies the Gospel.
Background
Unlike the letters of Paul, which begin with his name, the Gospels do not say who wrote them. The first line of Luke is addressed to Theophilus and speaks of the author’s research (Luke 1:1-4), and the Gospel of John says that its testimony comes from a disciple (John 21:24), but neither gives a name. The attributions come from the second century, in the writings of men like Papias, Irenaeus and others who passed on what they had learned.
This section sets out the traditions and the arguments about them. As with dating, a student should hold the conclusions loosely. The traditions are early and widely shared, which counts for something. But their accuracy cannot be checked directly, and scholars weigh the evidence in different ways.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: What the traditions say
Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in the early second century, is quoted by the fourth century historian Eusebius. According to Papias, Mark, who had been Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately but not in order what Peter taught, and Matthew compiled the sayings of the Lord in the Hebrew language. Irenaeus, about AD 180, names all four Gospels and their authors: Matthew among the Hebrews, Mark as Peter’s follower, Luke as the companion of Paul, and John the disciple of the Lord who lived in Ephesus.
By the end of the second century the attributions were generally accepted. Because the names are not obvious choices, since Mark and Luke were not apostles, some scholars argue that they are unlikely to be invented. If the church had wished to claim authority, it might have named apostles for all four.
Step 2: The case for the traditions
Defenders note that the titles were attached early and with no known rival attribution. There is no manuscript with a different author’s name. They add that Luke’s we-passages in Acts (for example Acts 16:10) fit a companion of Paul, and that Mark’s contents fit a Roman setting and include details that a close follower of Peter might know. John’s Gospel shows detailed knowledge of Jerusalem and Judea.
Richard Bauckham argues that the Gospels were written close to named eyewitnesses and that the pattern of names in the Gospels points to them, though he thinks the John of the fourth Gospel may be John the Elder, a different person from the apostle.
Step 3: The case against or for caution
Skeptics point out that the Gospels are anonymous and that second century attributions could be guesses or efforts to give the books authority. They argue that Matthew’s Greek, and its heavy reliance on Mark, are hard to square with an eyewitness apostle who would not need to copy a non-eyewitness. They add that the Gospel of John, with its different style and a theology that scholars see as developed, may have been written by a school of disciples.
Conservative scholars reply that ancient authors often borrowed from earlier works, that Matthew could have used Mark as the church later said Mark rested on Peter, and that the differences in John can be explained by the author’s own recollection and the passage of time. These arguments are not settled.
Step 4: The question of Luke and of John
Luke is the best supported attribution, though scholars differ on whether the we-passages come from a real companion of Paul or are a literary device. The author says he drew on those who were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word (Luke 1:2) and does not claim to be one.
John is the most disputed. The Gospel speaks of the beloved disciple and states that this disciple wrote these things (John 21:24). The tradition identifies him with John the son of Zebedee. Some scholars accept that. Others think a disciple of an apostle, or John the Elder mentioned by Papias, was the source. The Gospel itself does not settle this.
Step 5: Why authorship matters and why it does not decide
An eyewitness, or a writer with access to eyewitnesses, is in a better position than someone at a distance. For this reason defenders and skeptics both care about authorship. But authorship alone does not determine reliability. Eyewitnesses can be mistaken or biased, and unknown authors can record good tradition. The Gospels must be tested by content, by internal consistency, and by comparison with other evidence.
Church teaching adds another layer. Catholic and Orthodox Christians receive the Gospels as part of the church’s tradition, and their authority in the church does not depend on proving which man held the pen. Many Protestants hold that the Gospels are inspired whatever their human authors were called.
- What do the earliest witnesses say, and how close were they to the author?
- Is the attribution one that the church would have invented for authority?
- What does the text itself claim about its sources?
- Which clues in the language or content support or weaken the tradition?
- How would the reliability of the Gospel change if the author were someone else?
- Does my view of inspiration depend on the answer?
Examples
Papias on Mark
Papias reports from an earlier teacher that Mark wrote down what Peter said, accurately but not in order. If true, Mark is closely tied to eyewitness memory. A skeptic replies that Papias wrote decades later, and may have been defending the Gospel’s authority. A defender replies that the claim is modest and was kept despite its mention of disorder.
The we passages
In parts of Acts the narrator uses we, as in Acts 16:10, as if present with Paul. Some scholars take this as the author’s own participation. Others regard it as a literary convention or the use of a travel diary. The question is still debated.
John 21:24
The last chapter states that this is the disciple who testifies of these things, and that his testimony is true. The word we in the verse suggests a group of people vouching for him. Scholars disagree about whether the statement means that he wrote the Gospel or that it was composed from his teaching by others.
Different perspectives
Catholic
The Catholic Church teaches that the four Gospels are of apostolic origin and that they faithfully hand on what Jesus did and taught. The Second Vatican Council allows for the work of editors and writers in shaping the traditions, and Catholic scholars hold a variety of views on the exact authorship.
Orthodox
Orthodox Christians hold the traditional attributions and honor Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as evangelists. The authority of the Gospels rests on their reception by the church, and Orthodox scholars generally accept the tradition, though some engage the critical questions.
Evangelical and conservative Protestant scholars
Many defend the traditional authors as the best explanation of the early evidence, and argue that the burden of proof lies on those who reject a tradition that is early and unanimous. Others in these traditions accept that the details are uncertain without giving up the Gospels’ authority.
Mainline and critical scholars
Many accept that Mark and Luke were probably the traditional authors or close to them, but hold that Matthew and John were not written by the apostles. They see the Gospels as the product of communities and editors as well as individuals.
Skeptical scholars
Some argue that the attributions were assigned in the second century to give authority to anonymous works, and that the actual authors are unknown. They emphasize that anonymity weakens the claim to eyewitness origin.
Why it matters
Whether the Gospels come from eyewitnesses or from distant writers is one of the most common points in arguments about Christianity. A student who knows the actual evidence, its strengths and its limits, can judge such claims. It also shows that the Christian faith does not rest only on a chain of names but on the reception of the Gospels by the church.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: The Gospels name their authors in the text.
Correction: They do not. The names appear in titles added later. The traditions behind them are early but come from outside the text.
Misunderstanding: The traditional authors were certainly invented in the second century.
Correction: That is possible but not proven. The attributions are early, unanimous and not obvious inventions, particularly for Mark and Luke.
Misunderstanding: If an apostle did not write a Gospel, it has no authority.
Correction: Christian traditions differ here. Many hold that apostolic origin means apostolic teaching handed on, not necessarily the apostle’s own hand.
Misunderstanding: Scholars all agree on the authors.
Correction: They agree that the Gospels are anonymous in the text. On who wrote them, views range from the traditional attributions to unknown authors.
Knowledge check
In what sense are the Gospels anonymous?
None of them names its author within the text. The names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John come from titles attached to the manuscripts and from the testimony of second century church writers. Luke addresses Theophilus and describes his research, and John refers to the disciple whose testimony it records, but no author is named.
What did Papias say about Mark and Matthew?
As quoted by Eusebius, Papias said that Mark, Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately but not in order what Peter taught, and that Matthew compiled the sayings of the Lord in the Hebrew language. Scholars debate what these statements mean and whether they describe the Gospels as they survive.
Give one argument for and one against the traditional authorship of Matthew.
For: the attribution is early and unanimous, and an apostle was an obvious choice. Against: Matthew relies heavily on Mark, which is hard to explain if the author was an eyewitness, and Papias’s Hebrew sayings may not be the Greek Gospel. Defenders reply that ancient authors borrowed freely.
Why does authorship not decide the question of reliability?
Eyewitnesses may still be wrong or biased, and an unknown author may preserve reliable tradition. Authorship affects how likely access to firsthand information was, but the Gospels must be tested by their content, internal coherence and fit with other evidence.
Think it through
- What difference would it make to you if the Gospels came from unknown authors who used reliable sources?
- Why might a church have preferred Mark and Luke as authors over apostles if it were inventing?
- How would you weigh a tradition recorded in the second century about events from the first?
- Does your view of the Gospels’ authority depend on knowing who wrote them?
Independent assignment
The authorship file
In your own notebook, write a one-page file for each Gospel, with the traditional author, the earliest witness, the main argument for the tradition and the main argument against. Then write 150 words on which Gospel you think is best supported and why. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses Read the chapters on Papias and the Gospel of John.
- Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies Read Book 3, chapter 1, on the four Gospels.
- Bruce M. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament Read for the early evidence on the Gospels and their titles.
- F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? Read the defense of the traditional authors.
- Luke 1:3 Luke describes his careful research.
- John 21:24 The disciple who testifies of these things.