The chain of narration supporting the attribution of Gospel authorship to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John going back to the 1st century, is not as direct or well-documented as we might find in some other traditions, such as Islamic hadith literature, where chains of transmission (isnads) are meticulously documented.
MATTHEW
The Gospel according to Matthew is traditionally attributed to Matthew Levi, who is identified as one of the twelve apostles of Jesus. Matthew Levi is described in the New Testament as a tax collector who was called by Jesus to be a disciple. The attribution of this gospel to Matthew Levi is based on early 2nd Christian tradition and writings from the early church fathers.
Here are some reasons why the Gospel of Matthew is attributed to Matthew Levi:
Early Church Tradition: The earliest attributions of the Gospel to Matthew come from the second century. Church fathers such as Papias of Hierapolis, who wrote around 130–140 AD, attributed the gospel to Matthew. According to Papias, Matthew collected the sayings of Jesus in the Hebrew language (which could mean Hebrew or Aramaic) and then translated them into Greek, suggesting that Matthew had a direct role in recording Jesus' teachings.
Connection to a Jewish Audience: The Gospel of Matthew is known for its strong Jewish characteristics, such as frequent references to Hebrew Scriptures, emphasis on Jesus as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, and use of Jewish customs and terms. This is consistent with what one might expect from a Jewish author like Matthew Levi, who would have been familiar with Jewish traditions and scriptures.
Unique Content and Perspective: Some of the content in Matthew's Gospel appears to reflect the perspective of a tax collector or someone familiar with financial matters. For example, Matthew includes unique details about the payment of the Temple tax (Matthew 17:24-27) and the parable of the unforgiving servant, which involves financial transactions (Matthew 18:23-35). These details could reflect Matthew's background as a tax collector.
Early Manuscript Evidence: While the earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew do not explicitly name the author, the title "According to Matthew" is found in later manuscripts. This suggests that early Christian communities accepted the tradition that Matthew was the author of the gospel. While Papias’s attribution of the Gospel to Matthew dates to around 130–140 AD, the earliest physical manuscripts that specifically include the title "According to Matthew" come from the 4th century. However, the tradition of associating the gospel with Matthew likely predates these manuscripts, as evidenced by the writings of early church fathers and the consistent use of these titles in later manuscript traditions. The earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew that include the title "According to Matthew" (in Greek, "Κατὰ Μαθθαῖον" or "Κατὰ Ματθαῖον") date from the late 2nd century to the early 3rd century AD.
Canonical Acceptance: The Gospel of Matthew was widely accepted in the early church and was included in the New Testament canon. The early church's acceptance of the Gospel as authoritative likely reflects their belief in its apostolic authorship and credibility.
It's important to note that while these reasons provide a basis for the traditional attribution, modern scholars debate the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Some scholars suggest that the gospel may have been written by an anonymous Christian who used Matthew’s name to lend authority to the text. Despite this debate, the tradition of Matthew Levi as the author has remained significant in Christian history and thought.
MARK
The Gospel of Mark is traditionally attributed to John Mark, who is described in the New Testament as a companion of both the Apostle Paul and the Apostle Peter. The attribution to John Mark is based on early 2nd Christian tradition and the writings of early church fathers.
Here are some reasons why the Gospel of Mark is attributed to John Mark:
1. Testimony of Early Church Fathers
Early Christian writers provide significant evidence for the attribution of the Gospel of Mark to John Mark:
Papias of Hierapolis: Writing around 130–140 AD, Papias, as quoted by the church historian Eusebius, stated that Mark was Peter's interpreter and that he wrote down accurately all that Peter remembered of the sayings and deeds of Jesus. Papias mentioned that Mark's Gospel was not an ordered account but rather a collection of Peter’s teachings. According to Papias:
"Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him, but afterward, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings."
This statement by Papias provides a strong early link between John Mark and the Gospel of Mark.Irenaeus of Lyons: Around 180 AD, Irenaeus also confirmed that Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, handed down the preaching of Peter in written form. He states,
"Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter."
Clement of Alexandria and Origen: These early church fathers also echoed the tradition that Mark wrote his Gospel based on Peter's reminiscences.
2. Association with Peter
The New Testament itself associates John Mark with Peter, which supports the tradition that he could have written a gospel based on Peter’s teachings:
- 1 Peter 5:13: In this letter, Peter refers to Mark as "my son," a term that suggests a close relationship and possibly spiritual mentorship:
"She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark."
This connection implies that Mark had a close relationship with Peter, potentially allowing him to record Peter's memories and teachings about Jesus.
3. John Mark in the New Testament
John Mark is mentioned several times in the New Testament, primarily in connection with Paul and Barnabas:
Acts 12:12, 25; Acts 13:5, 13; Acts 15:36-39: John Mark first appears in Acts as the son of a woman named Mary, in whose house early Christians gathered. He then travels with Paul and Barnabas on their missionary journeys but eventually parts ways with them. However, he later reconciles with Paul and is considered "useful" for ministry (2 Timothy 4:11).
Colossians 4:10 and Philemon 24: These letters also mention Mark as a companion of Paul, further indicating his involvement in early Christian ministry.
These references suggest that Mark was an active figure in the early Christian community, making it plausible that he could have authored a gospel.
4. Internal Evidence and Style of the Gospel
While there is no explicit internal claim of authorship within the Gospel of Mark itself, some scholars point to the Gospel's vividness, attention to detail, and use of Aramaic terms as indicative of someone who had firsthand knowledge of Peter's accounts and the region of Palestine. The Gospel of Mark is also the shortest and often considered the most straightforward of the four gospels, which aligns with the idea of a concise recording of Peter’s preaching.
5. Canonical Acceptance
The Gospel of Mark was widely accepted by the early church and included in the New Testament canon. Its acceptance is often tied to its association with Peter, who was a prominent figure among the apostles. The church likely viewed the Gospel as having apostolic authority due to its connection to Peter through Mark.
Summary
The attribution of the Gospel of Mark to John Mark is based on early church tradition, particularly the testimony of early church fathers like Papias, Irenaeus, and others. The connection of John Mark with Peter, as well as his mentioned role in the New Testament, supports the tradition that he wrote the Gospel based on Peter’s teachings and memories. This attribution has been a key factor in the Gospel’s acceptance in the Christian canon and its enduring place in Christian history.
LUKE
The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts are traditionally attributed to Luke, a companion of the Apostle Paul and thought to be a Gentile physician. This attribution is based on several lines of evidence, including internal clues within the texts themselves, early Christian tradition, and writings by early church fathers.
1. Internal Evidence from the Texts
The internal evidence from both the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts strongly suggests that they were written by the same author, who was closely associated with the Apostle Paul and had a good understanding of the early Christian community. Here are some key points:
Common Authorship: The opening verses of both the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts indicate that they are two volumes of a single work written by the same author. Both books are addressed to a person named Theophilus, suggesting a continuity in purpose and audience:
- Luke 1:1-4: The author states that he has carefully investigated everything from the beginning and has decided to write an orderly account.
- Acts 1:1-2: The author refers back to his "former book" (the Gospel of Luke) and continues the narrative from where the Gospel left off.
Use of "We" Passages in Acts: In the Book of Acts, there are several passages where the author switches to the first-person plural "we" (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1-28:16). These "we" passages suggest that the author was a companion of Paul during those parts of his missionary journeys. This detail indicates that the author was not only well-informed about Paul's activities but also a participant in them.
Detailed Knowledge of Medical Terms and Gentile Perspective: The Gospel of Luke contains more detailed descriptions of illnesses and healing miracles compared to the other synoptic gospels, which has led some scholars to believe the author was a physician. For instance, Luke describes the condition of the woman with the issue of blood (Luke 8:43) with more detail than Mark or Matthew. Additionally, Luke shows a particular interest in Gentiles and emphasizes that Jesus' message is for all people, not just Jews. This focus aligns with what one might expect from a Gentile writer like Luke.
2. Early Christian Tradition
The attribution of Luke and Acts to Luke, the companion of Paul, is well-supported by early Christian tradition. Several early church fathers affirm this authorship:
Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD): In his work Against Heresies (c. 180 AD), Irenaeus explicitly states that Luke, the companion of Paul, wrote the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. Irenaeus is a significant source because he was a disciple of Polycarp, who was himself a disciple of the Apostle John, giving Irenaeus close proximity to the apostolic age.
Muratorian Fragment (c. 170-200 AD): This early list of New Testament books, believed to be compiled around the late 2nd century, also attributes the third Gospel to Luke, the physician and companion of Paul.
Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD): Tertullian, an early Christian author from Carthage, attributes the Gospel of Luke to Luke and associates him with Paul.
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260-340 AD): Eusebius, a 4th-century church historian, lists Luke as the author of the Gospel and Acts. He describes Luke as a physician and companion of Paul, echoing earlier traditions.
3. Luke’s Role as Paul’s Companion
The New Testament provides several references to Luke being a close companion of Paul, which supports his role as the author of these two books:
Colossians 4:14: Paul refers to Luke as "the beloved physician." This is one of the direct references to Luke in the New Testament and provides the basis for identifying him as a physician.
Philemon 24: Luke is mentioned among Paul’s fellow workers, highlighting his close association with Paul’s ministry.
2 Timothy 4:11: Paul writes that "only Luke is with me," suggesting that Luke was a faithful companion to Paul, even during difficult times.
These references establish Luke’s close relationship with Paul, supporting the tradition that Luke wrote both the Gospel and Acts as an account of what he learned from Paul and his own experiences.
4. Gentile Perspective and Mission Focus
The Gospel of Luke and Acts reflect a strong interest in Gentiles and the universal scope of Jesus' message, which fits the profile of a Gentile author like Luke:
Emphasis on Universal Salvation: Luke’s Gospel is unique in its emphasis on Jesus' concern for all people, including Gentiles, women, the poor, and marginalized groups. Luke includes parables and events that highlight God's love and salvation for Gentiles (e.g., the parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 and Jesus’ interaction with Zacchaeus, a tax collector, in Luke 19:1-10).
Acts as a History of the Early Church’s Expansion to Gentiles: The Book of Acts focuses on the spread of the Gospel from Jerusalem to the Gentile world, particularly through Paul’s missionary journeys. This aligns with Luke’s interest in the Gentile mission and suggests that the author was deeply invested in this aspect of early Christianity.
5. Absence of Apostolic Claim
Unlike some other New Testament writings, Luke and Acts do not claim apostolic authorship. The author’s humility in not naming himself, despite his evident role in the events he describes, aligns with what we know about Luke from other sources—a companion of apostles, but not an apostle himself. This fits the character of Luke as a secondary witness who carefully compiled his accounts based on the testimonies of those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning (Luke 1:2).
Summary
The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts are attributed to Luke, a Gentile companion of Paul, based on a combination of internal evidence from the texts, early Christian tradition, and historical writings by early church fathers. Luke’s close association with Paul, his emphasis on Gentile inclusion, and his detailed and orderly accounts are consistent with the profile of Luke as a physician and careful historian. These factors together provide strong support for the traditional attribution of these two New Testament books to Luke.
JOHN
The Gospel according to John is traditionally attributed to John, the son of Zebedee, one of the twelve disciples of Jesus. This attribution is based on several pieces of evidence, including internal clues within the text, early Christian tradition, and writings from early church fathers. Here’s an overview of why the Gospel of John is attributed to the disciple John:
1. Internal Evidence from the Gospel of John
The Gospel of John contains several internal clues that suggest it was written by someone with intimate knowledge of Jesus and his ministry, likely an eyewitness:
The "Beloved Disciple": Throughout the Gospel of John, there are references to a "disciple whom Jesus loved," commonly known as the "Beloved Disciple" (John 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, 21:20). This disciple is portrayed as having a close and unique relationship with Jesus, often being present at key moments (e.g., at the Last Supper, at the crucifixion, and the empty tomb).
Eyewitness Testimony: The author of the Gospel emphasizes eyewitness testimony, which indicates that he was a firsthand witness to the events he describes:
- John 1:14: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
- John 19:35: After describing the crucifixion, the author writes, "He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he is telling the truth—that you also may believe."
- John 21:24: The author explicitly claims that the "Beloved Disciple" is the source of the testimony and writing: "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true."
Knowledge of Jewish Customs and Palestinian Geography: The Gospel of John demonstrates a detailed knowledge of Jewish customs, festivals, and geographical locations in Palestine. This suggests that the author was a Jew familiar with the culture and landscape of the region, which would fit John the son of Zebedee, a Galilean fisherman.
2. Early Christian Tradition and Church Fathers
Early Christian tradition and writings from church fathers strongly support the attribution of the Gospel to John, the disciple of Jesus:
Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD): Irenaeus, an early church father, is one of the earliest sources to explicitly attribute the Gospel to John. In his work Against Heresies, written around 180 AD, Irenaeus states that John, the disciple of the Lord, wrote the Gospel while he was living in Ephesus, Asia Minor. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, who himself was a disciple of John, providing a close link to the apostolic age. Irenaeus's testimony is considered particularly credible because of this direct line of teaching from John to Polycarp to Irenaeus.
The Muratorian Fragment (c. 170-200 AD): This early list of New Testament books, dating to the late 2nd century, attributes the fourth Gospel to John, one of the disciples. The fragment mentions that John wrote his Gospel after being encouraged by his fellow disciples and bishops, indicating an early consensus on the authorship.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD): According to Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria wrote that John, aware of the other three Gospels, composed a "spiritual Gospel" to provide a deeper theological understanding of Jesus’ life and ministry. Clement’s writings further affirm that John was the author of the Gospel.
Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD): Tertullian, an early Christian apologist, also supports the tradition that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel of John.
Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260-340 AD): Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, refers to the writings of earlier church fathers who consistently attribute the Gospel to John the Apostle. He also cites Irenaeus and others as confirming this tradition.
3. Association with Ephesus and the Johannine Community
John is traditionally associated with the Christian community in Ephesus, where he is believed to have lived and taught until his death. This connection provides further support for his authorship:
John’s Influence in Ephesus: Early Christian sources, including Irenaeus and the tradition preserved by Eusebius, suggest that John spent his later years in Ephesus. The community there is thought to have been the center of Johannine Christianity, influencing not only the Gospel of John but also the Johannine Epistles (1, 2, and 3 John) and possibly the Book of Revelation.
Theological Depth and Differences from Synoptic Gospels: The Gospel of John differs significantly in style, content, and theology from the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Its emphasis on the divinity of Jesus, the focus on longer discourses, and its unique narrative elements suggest that it was written by someone with a distinct perspective and theological insight, consistent with what early church fathers believed to be John’s purpose in writing a “spiritual Gospel.”
4. Absence of John’s Name in the Gospel
Interestingly, the Gospel of John never explicitly names its author, and the Apostle John is never mentioned by name. Instead, the Gospel frequently refers to "the disciple whom Jesus loved." This could suggest that the author, out of humility or a desire to focus on Jesus rather than himself, chose not to directly name himself, which some early church fathers took as a sign of John’s authorship.
Summary
The attribution of the Gospel of John to John, the son of Zebedee and disciple of Jesus, is supported by internal evidence from the Gospel itself, the consistent testimony of early church tradition, and the writings of early church fathers such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. The Gospel’s emphasis on eyewitness testimony, its unique theological perspective, and its deep understanding of Jewish customs and geography further support the idea that it was written by someone with firsthand knowledge of Jesus' life and ministry, aligning with the traditional view that John the Apostle is its author.
Comments
Post a Comment