0
Another answer from our community:
The traditional authors assigned to the four gospels are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, as suggested by the names of these books. Mathew and John were two of the disciples of Jesus the Apostles. Mark is said to be the translator for Peter, so Mark's Gospel derives it's apostolic authority from Peter. Luke is the "beloved physician" mentioned by Paul, and so Luke's Gospel gets its authority from the Apostle Paul.
The traditional view is disputed scholars, of course. Those who disagree with the traditional view do not assign known authors to the Gospels, except perhaps for Luke.
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Devin
Jordan
ReneOf course, knowing which gospel was the earliest of the New Testament gospels does not tell us who actually wrote it. All the New Testament gospels were originally anonymous and only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear, later in the second century. Biblical scholars say there is no good reason to accept those attributions, so we do not know who actually wrote Mark's Gospel.
- Probably Matthew.
- It is not known for certain who wrote the book of Matthew, traditionally it was believed that it was written by St. Matthew the Evangelist (the tax collector who was a disciple of Jesus) ; however many scholars believe that it was written some time after St. Matthew's death by an unknown person
- The Gospel known to us as the Gospel According to St Matthew does not identify its author. For many decades after it was written, probably in the 80s CE, it was not attributed to any specific author. In the middle of the second century, it was felt that the author must have been one of the disciples, because of his apparently intimate knowledge of the life of Jesus. The disciple called Matthew was decided on as the most likely author because, as a tax collector, he would have been well educated.
However, some believe the author of this Gospel copied most of his information about the life of Jesus from Mark's Gospel. The author did not have any first hand knowledge of the life of Jesus and therefore the author could not have been the disciple called Matthew. We are back in the position where we do not know the name of the author.
What we can say is that the author of Matthew's Gospel was a Jew, literate in the Greek language and very familiar with the (Septuagint) Greek version of the Hebrew Bible.
- The Gospel of Matthew was attributed to Matthew because the internal evidence, time frame, style and focus all point to the eyewitness account of the tax collector Matthew. Thus, one need search no further for the author.
- The disciple Matthew was the author of the Gospel that bears his name. The early church, who were in a better position to know, uniformly attributed it to him.
- The Good News According to Matthew, known as the Book of Matthew, was written by the Apostle Matthew. His full name was Mattithiah and was also a tax collector before becoming an Apostle to Jesus.
Writer of MatthewExternal evidence to the effect that Matthew originally wrote this Gospel in Hebrew reaches as far back as Papias of Hierapolis, of the second century C.E. Eusebius quoted Papias as stating: "Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language." (TheEcclesiastical History, III, XXXIX, 16) Early in the third century, Origen made reference to Matthew's account and, in discussing the four Gospels, is quoted by Eusebius as saying that the "first was written . . . according to Matthew, who was once a tax-collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, . . . in the Hebrew language." (The EcclesiasticalHistory, VI, XXV, 3-6) The scholar Jerome (of the fourth and fifth centuries C.E.) wrote in his work De virisinlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men), chapter III, that Matthew "composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed. . . . Moreover, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected."-Translation from the Latin text edited by E. C. Richardson and published in the series "Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur," Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14, pp. 8, 9. Wikipedia; Gospel of Matthew"The Christian community traditionally ascribes authorship to Matthew the Evangelist, one of Jesus's twelve disciples, while secular scholarship generally agrees it was written by an anonymous non-eyewitness to Jesus's ministry AnonymousPapias, another noted Father, was a contemporary of Justin. He refers to writings of Matthew and Mark, but his allusions to them clearly indicate that they were not the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Dr. Davidson, the highest English authority on the canon, says: "He [Papias] neither felt the want nor knew the existence of inspired Gospels" (Canon of the Bible, p. 123).
These books are anonymous. They do not purport to have been written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Their titles do not affirm it. They simply imply that they are "according" to the supposed teachings of these Evangelists. As Renan says, "They merely signify that these were the traditions proceeding from each of these Apostles, and claiming their authority." Concerning their authorship the Rev. Dr. Hooykaas says: "They appeared anonymously. The titles placed above them in our Bibles owe their origin to a later ecclesiastical tradition which deserves no confidence whatever" (Bible for Learners, Vol. III, p. 24).
It is claimed that the Gospel of Matthew originally appeared in Hebrew. Our version is a translation of a Greek work. Regarding this St. Jerome says: "Who afterwards translated it into Greek is not sufficiently certain." The consequences of this admission are thus expressed by Michaelis: "If the original text of Matthew is lost, and we have nothing but a Greek translation then, frankly, we cannot ascribe any divine inspiration to the words."
The contents of these books refute the claim that they were written by the Evangelists named. They narrate events and contain doctrinal teachings which belong to a later age. Matthew ascribes to Christ the following language: "Thou art Peter, and Upon this rock I will build my Church" (xvi, 18). This Gospel is a Roman Catholic Gospel, and was written after the beginning of the establishment of this hierarchy to uphold THC supremacy of the Petrine Church of Rome. Of this Gospel Dr. Davidson says : "The author, indeed, must ever remain unknown'. (Introduction to New Testament, p. 72).
The disciple MatthewMatthew the disciple of Jesus Christ and former tax collector. Although not accepted by some, Matthew's authorship is most likely given the fact that authorship identity was important for the early church in terms of the credibility it attached to the document. This is also why, if Matthew was not the author, there would then be multiple alternative suggested authors. In fact, if the identity of the author was uncertain in any way, as it apparently was with several other books, there would have been difficulty with its being included in the canon of scripture. The fact is, the early witness is unanimously to Matthew. No-one else is claimed or can be demonstrated to have been the author.Matthew himself, having held the hated position of tax collector on behalf of the Roman rulers, obviously had the ability. Some consider Matthew, originally believed to have been written in Aramaic and obviously addressed to a Jewish audience, given its Jewish flavor, to have been the first written in that language. The later version in Greek which is what we base our current textual knowledge, was obviously a slightly later version, but obviously within the time-frame prior to 70AD.
Biblical scholars say that there is no good reason to accept these attributions. They also say that none of the gospels could have been written by eyewitness to the events portrayed, which certainly eliminates Matthew and John as possible authors. Luke's Gospel was written around the end of the century, far too late to have been written by Luke, the physician and companion of Paul. Also, the author of Luke relied on Mark's Gospel foreverything he knew about the life and mission of Jesus, whereas Paul's companion Luke could be expected to have learnt something about Jesus from Paul himself. There are other reasons for excluding Mark as a gospel author.
The Church Fathers did not really know who wrote the gospels, and neither do we.
The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) were written anonymously, as was the Gospel of John. It was only later in the second century that the New Testament gospels were attributed to the disciples whose names they now bear. However, there is no good reason to believe that these disciples were the real authors. Analysis of the gospels show that they could not have been written by eyewitnesses to the events they protray, nor by acquaintances of any eyewitnesses. This evidence rules out the apostles Matthew, Mark and Luke, or any other New Testament disciple.
We do not know who wrote the synoptic gospels, but we do know that they were written between 70 CE and the end of the century.
Scholars do say that the four gospels were not assigned to any authors until well into the second century. Even as late as the 140s, Marcion simply referred to Luke's Gospel as "the Gospel", indicating that he was not aware of it having been attributed to any author.
Eventually, the Church Fathers tried to establish who, in their view, would most likely have been the authors.
- Matthew and Mark were named after the disciples seen as most likely to have written in that style.
- John was so named because the apostle John was never mentioned, but there were references to an "apostle whom Jesus loved" and it was assumed that this must be John. On the assumption that the author was being modest, this meant that the author was John.
- Since the author of Luke's Gospel also wrote Acts of the Apostles, it was assumed that the author must have known Paul, as well as being familiar with the life of Jesus. As the physician Luke was a gentile, and Luke's Gospel and Acts seem to emphasise a gentile perspective, he was regarded as the most likely candidate.
Scholars have concluded that Matthew and Luke were originally written in Greek and used Mark as their main sources for information about the life of Jesus, with the 'Q' document as an important secondary source. Similarly, Johnappears to have used Luke and, to a lesser extent, Mark for information about the life of Jesus. So, certainly the evangelists Matthew, Luke and John were not eyewitnesses to Jesus and did not receive their information from eyewitnesses. Internal evidence suggests that the author of Mark was someone unfamiliar with Palestine. We do not know who the real authors of the gospels were.
John Carroll (The Existential Jesus) says that the author of Matthew copied something like 80% of Markvirtually word for word. His reliance on Mark for the story of Jesus shows that he was not the disciple Matthew, as once supposed. John Shelby Spong (Born of a Woman: A bishop rethinks the birth of Jesus) says that the author of Matthew, writing between 80 and early 90s CE, was a Jew familiar with midrash storytelling, but his primary language must have been Greek. There are few other clues as to the possible identity of the author of Matthew's Gospel.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
