What proof can you offer that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the gospels?

Question

Most scholars today, including many christian scholars know that these works were pseudonomous. What proof can you offer me to state otherwise?

Yes, thats right Homer did not write the Illiad, assuming a Homer ever existed.

Sweet p I usually enjoy your arguments, they are normally above Pascals Wager though. Do a little research, maybe I wasn't specific enough I should have clarified bible scholars. If you think the majority do not hold the view that they are pseudonomous you arent being truthful with yourself.

Answer 1

I think that those dudes delivered their messages orally.

Since it is reasonable that literacy was uncommon, the masses required for the momentum of this new faith could not have sat around reading a mass produced single scripture one from each apostle. It is unreasonable to assume that actual documents written by Apostle were somehow gathered together in a bible project some 300 years later. By that time, of course when imperial necessity and the Roman sense for civil order prevailed .. it legislated Christianity like any other civil law of the time... and administered the Christian law to the masses through its network of scholars.

Of course.. pure speculation on my part.. but hey... I can do no worse.

Answer 2

First the first century Church acknowleded each of the authors by name, do you think yesterday someone pulled lots to name the books LOL
2nd each has their own individuality, Matthew writes to the Jewish people with geneology-very important to them, and Messianic prophecies and fulfillment from both testaments
mark writes as a soldier
luke as a doctor
John as Jesus from the God side

Dah are your for real??? most scholare today including many Christian scholars---

first scholarship is based in an area-a scholar in Chinese language is not a English scholarship

to be a scholar on the bible, means you study it --how many people that are against the bible study the bible scholastically?? and how can you be a Christian lol and believe the bible isnt the Word of God, without a basis-that is like saying I believe in the universe, but i dont believe it exists.


Josh Mcdowel came as an athiest to disprove the bible, today because of that he writes how he came to know Jesus through trying to disprove the bible. "Evidence demands a verdict-" by Josh Mc Dowell -if your half way honest about your questions--get the book it covers basically all your questions abouit the writing of the bible and the different parts of it too

if your right about your preconcieved ideas against Jesus and the bible-one day you will rot in the grave=the end, after a life of antagonizing against Jesus and the bible.

If you just lived your life it would be easier and better not bitter

yet if your wrong, and Jesus isnt lying, then you will be in hell weeping forever, and maybe from time to time yelling out Matthew Mark Luke and John didnt each write a gospel, your wrong Jesus, oweee weep weep, but after a million year or two you will probably be says I was wrong but its too late now.

who wrote the gospels-Matthew, Mark Luke and John


a church carried it on and 1947 the dead sea scrolls from the first century were found and colaborated =perfectly put them as the authors, those that made the claim, also that there were 3 Isaiahs or 2 that wrote that book-were all proven wrong Isaiah was all intact too.

peace up and one day you may ask a question that you really would like an answer and didnt try to answer yourself against the bible and Jesus.

Answer 3

Agreed, but you may be oversimplifying...

I'm not sure about them being pseudonymous, not in the sense that, say 2 Peter is pseudonymous. The attribution of the name "Mark" to that gospel is found among the earliest of Christian writings (Papias in the early 2nd century). But it's certain that the Mark of the gospel is not the Mark found in Acts. It is very likely that Mark the evangelist was a disciple of Peter or Petrine Christianity at least. But the gospel of Mark in its earliest form was slightly different from it's current form. A variety of "happy endings" are found appended in different manuscripts. The original ending is well attested as being at 16:8 - "they said nothing to anyone, for they were very afraid".

Luke is genuinely believed to be the Luke writing first hand in Acts as an associate of Paul, although his gospel was, again, likely edited from its original form. But Luke is not - other than the missionary journeys laid out in Acts - a first hand source, by his own admission. He "looked into all these things thoroughly", obviously borrowing from the other sources (oral and written) he had available to him, to compose his works.

Matthew is probably the one gospel which is pseudonymous in a sense closest to what you mean. The attribution of the work to the disciple Matthew is not credible. (It may even be a linguistic fluke, as Matthew means "gift of God" and is similar to the greek word for "disciple" or "learn" [mathetes] ). But the attribution of authorship was (and is not) made in any manuscript. It is an anonymous work which was by tradition associated with Matthew, a tradition now largely irrelevant as the work stands on its own merits within the canon.

As for John, the best scholarship I've seen associates this gospel with a clear tradition of Johannine Christianity - it was edited together by disciples of John intent on preserving his teachings. (The John of the Apocalypse or Revelation, though, is widely held to be a different John - not the disciple, probably not even of the Johannine school of Christianity). John's gospel seems to be quite reliable in that sense, preserving the disciple's vision of Jesus' message and life, which is actually a quite beautiful vision. It was the Johannines after all, who most clearly preserved for us the message that "God is Love."

Peace to you.

Answer 4

There is no proof, and even the oldest of the "gospels", Mathew, wasn't written until approximately 70 CE. Not to mention that most of the apostles were fishermen, in a day when the average fisherman was totally illiterate.

Answer 5

You are correct,a majority of biblical scholars almost unanimously agree that these 4 gospels were not written by these men.

Answer 6

I have no proof other than the Gospels themselves. I really don't care what "christian scholars" believe. I have found a number of religious scholars that, in my opinion, are atheists... don't believe the Bible at all. So who cares what people like that say about Bible text? There opinion would be no better than, say, Adolf Hitler's opinion of the Bible.

Answer 7

Mark only:

14:51 And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him:
14:52 And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.

The wording suggests personal involvement by the author.

Answer 8

about as much proof as they were written by GOD. or that christianity is right.

none.

Will D, i guess anyone who doesnt conform to the christian dogma must be an atheist huh. dont be so closed minded.

Answer 9

Many say that either Francis Bacon or Christopher Marlowe wrote Shakespeare's plays: so what ?

Answer 10

The proof that they these books speak the truth come from the fact that they hold the truth. If you have read them and do not believe, what more can be offered? You reject them or accept them. Choose wisely.