Are there many people that still believe that the 4 evangelists have been among the 12 disciples of Jesus?

Question

Despite the affirmation of the author of the Gospel according Luke regarding the fact that he hasn’t been witness to the events and therefore not even disciple, many people believe nowadays that the four evangelists: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John correspond to the four disciples of Jesus. So, do you believe the same thing, that is, the fact that the four evangelists have been among the twelve disciples of Jesus? Here I am quoting the passage in which Luke, the evangelist, affirms not to have been witness to the facts:
Luke 1:1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. - English Standard Version

Luke 1:1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed. - New King James Version
Luke 1:1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. - New International Version

For the ones who believe that the Book of Revelation and the Gospel according John are by the same author, how do you explain the evident difference of style that the two books present?

Answer 1

First of all, let's clairify the correct terminology: all 12 apostles were ALSO disciples; Jesus had hundreds of disciples, consisting of both men and women. There are many more than 12 apostles, however. The Greek word "apostolo" means "one who is sent." So each apostle is a person who was picked by God and sent out into the world by Him directly. Galatians 1:19 tells us of one such apostle, who was not one of the original 12.

You are correct that Luke and Mark (also referred to as John Mark) were disciples. Both men met and followed after Jesus Christ. The Book of Acts records that John Mark was a companion to Peter (Cephas) after Jesus' death. Luke was a frequent companion of Paul. This is why both have a "perfect understanding" of the gospel.

Regarding your follow up question, I do believe that the apostle John is the one who recorded the Revelation of Jesus Christ. In fact, John 21:22-23 tells us John remained until Jesus returned to give His revelation to all future believers. As far as differences in writing style, I see very few. However, you must also understand that there are quite a number of years between John's Gospel and Revelation. Another factor to consider is although the Gospel was divinely inspired and guided, John was describing events he witnessed as a human being; the Revelation, on the other hand, was a vision given to him by Jesus and was divinely dictated. We read time and time again that John was commanded to write the things which were shown to him. You simply cannot compare the writing style of someone who records such a powerful vision, with many symbols and fantastic images, with a narrative of earthly events.

I hope this helps. Peace.

Answer 2

What difference does it make? Lots of people believe things that were made up by men instead of scripture. How else would we have any catholics?

Your last question (concerning the authorship of the fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse) demonstrates a marked lack of understanding of Koine Greek and the way most authors during the period wrote.

everydaycatholic grossly misstates estimates of the composition of Mark. Scholarship is divided. Some place it in the 45-50 range and others in the last half of the 60's. Mark is difficult to date for a variety of reasons.
1. The original ending is likely missing, if it ever existed. (The author may have never finished the work.) There are marked stylistic differences and a complete lack of early textual evidence for anything after 16:8a. The origin of that material is unknown.
2. The late 60's assumption is based on the lack of mention of the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. It is possible that it was written later and that mention DID EXIST in the original.
3. The 45-50 assumption makes this the first of the synoptics and claims that it formed a basis for the others. While Luke was probably the last, we have no way at this time to know which was first.

Suzanne: You said, "The Greek word "apostolo" means "one who is sent."" That should read "apostoloS." Greek words don't end with -o (omicron) and -o (omega) is a VERB ENDING.

"Apostello: to send, send out, send away (especially used of the official sending out of the disciples)" resembles what you wrote, but is obviously a verb rather than a noun. It is the verb form of the same root, used in Matt 10:5, & 16 with reference to the apostles.

Several people besides the 14 "designated" apostles are called that.
Ac 14:14 But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting:
Ro 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.
... along with others. But Galatians 1:19 is not calling James an apostle, here is a better translation: "I didn’t see any of the other apostles. I only saw James, the Lord’s brother."

Answer 3

>For the ones who believe that the Book of Revelation and the Gospel according John are by the same author, how do you explain the evident difference of style that the two books present?


John's intentional difference of styles ... the first to record facts of Christ and His mission on Earth; the second, to present the apocalyptic view of the future. Also, some people have a change in writing styles as they age, etc. A change in style does not necessarily change the facts being written.

Answer 4

In addition, many letters were not written by people they were attributed to. In the first centuries, it was very common for followers of certain Apostles to write down what the person said or preached and then affix the Apostle's name to the letter. This is probably true with the letters of Peter and some letters of Paul.

It is as if you were to preach about the life of Jesus and I was one of your followers. i would write down what you taught and I would call it , the Gospel of ThomasGospel.

Most scholars state that the Gospel of Mark was written in the year 65 AD, Matthew and Luke was written about the year 70 AD and the Gospel of John about 90 AD

In no way does this make the letters or Gospels uninspired or false.

Answer 5

Acts 2:42 And they devoted themselves to the Apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. One of the earliest titles given to the Eucharistic banquet is "the breaking of bread." It is such an unobtrusive title that many non-eucharistic Christians never notice it when they read Acts 2. "The breaking of bread and the prayers" refers not to little informal holy potlucks but to the liturgy of the Eucharist. It met in informal surroundings like the houses of believers since there were no church buildings back then but it was always liturgical. Makes sense really, since liturgy was the only form of communal prayer known to the Jews of antiquity. And liturgy is not a thing imposed on freedom-loving "simple Christians" by hierarchs, bureaucrats and priestcraft. It is a thing that springs up naturally and supernaturally from the Jewish soil of the Church, since Judaism is itself a rich liturgical tradition. That is why the word "liturgy" means "the work of the people." Worship is the work of the people.

Answer 6

Even if they knew Jesus, what they wrote was written decades after his death and including other writings by people of the day. It was written with a purpose, too. They were trying to write the story to conform to the old prophecies that people believed in then.

Answer 7

You just finding this out? Of course all of them were not among the original 12.