The debate over the anonymity of the Gospels revolves around the proposition that the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) were initially penned without specific author names and only later attributed to the apostles and their associates Critics point out that the earliest Gospel manuscripts don't contain titles like "The Gospel According to Matthew/Mark/Luke/John," suggesting these were later additions. Furthermore, the Gospels are written in the third person, without any self-identification by the authors. The first clear mentions of the Gospels' authorship come from early church fathers in the late 1st and early 2nd centuries, leading skeptics to argue that this time gap indicates added names for authority's sake.
Prominent scholars like [[BDEhrman_undated-ez|Bart D. Ehrman], [[Conway2021-ld|Colleen M. Conway, David M. Carr]], [[Martin2012-tz|Dale B. Martin]] support the anonymity claim. Ehrman, for instance, contends that the Gospels were written by unknown individuals and later attributed to the apostles for added weight. He also suggests that the original apostles - if they were even literate - would have written in Aramaic, not Greek.
# Evidence Against The Anonymous Gospels
#### Early Church Tradition:
The early church consistently attributed the Gospels to their traditional authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John).
![[The Early Church On The Gospels]]
This attribution significantly weakens the claim that the Gospels were anonymous works. Some scholars argue for late dating of the Gospels, contending they were written after the apostles' lifetimes. However, others, like Craig Blomberg in "[[Blomberg2014-tq|The Historical Reliability of the Gospels]]" support an earlier dating. Also, there is evidence that the authorship claim goes all the way back to the original Apostles themselves.
![[The Gospels Trace Back To The Apostles Themselves]]
The consistent references and testimonies from early Christian writings and leaders underscore the Gospels' direct ties to their apostolic sources.
#### Authors did not often name themselves
The Gospels themselves may not name their authors, but many ancient literary works did not include the author's name within the text ([[Herkommer1968-vq]]), such as [[Caesar1983-jq|Julius Caesar's, The Conquest of Gaul]], Xenophon in [[Xenophon2022-vl|Anabasis]], Josephus in [[Josephus2018-gw|The Antiquities of the Jews]], the works of [[Polybius2010-fl|Polybius]], [[Siculus2017-zl|Diodorus]], or [[Mellor2010-ja|Tacitus]]. This lack of explicit authorship does not necessarily indicate anonymity. In fact, scholor [[Gathercole2018-xa|Simon Gathercole]] says that an author naming themselves in the work is completely irrelevant to the question of authorship.
Micheal Jones from [[InspiringPhilosophy2023-ew]] points out that there were several different ways for a author to name themselves such as in:
- Title or subscription above the main body
- Table of contents
- Running header
- End title
- Title page
- Signed on the back of the scroll
- Name tag attached to the scroll
For the New Testament to have been collected and copied in the early church as sacred texts, it would have been inconceivable that the authors would be unknown to them.
#### There is no competing traditions
When observing the sheer number of manuscripts that we have of the Gospels, this argument for anonymity starts to break apart.
[[The Variations Of The New Testament]]
In all of these early manuscripts for just the Gospels, not one title gives a different author, the uniform titles in early manuscripts suggest that the attribution to the traditional authors was early and consistent. Scholar [[Bauckham2017-ml|Richard Bauckham]] emphasizes that there is no evidence of competing authorship traditions, indicating that the titles likely reflect original attributions.
A contrasting example is the book of [[The Anonymous Book Of Hebrews|Hebrews]], for which there is no definitive authorial attribution. The case of the Gospels is different; there are no competing traditions or debates among the early church, and copies of the Gospels consistently attribute them to the traditional authors, as pointed out by [[Pitre2016-qa|Brant Pitre]]
#### The Disciples Were Not Illiterate:
![[Were The Disciples Illiterate]]
Even if one contends that the disciples were illiterate and couldn't have written the Gospels, oral tradition was a strong cultural practice at the time. Stories and teachings could be preserved with accuracy for generations. Moreover, it's possible that educated followers or scribes might have been the ones to physically write the accounts down. Paul, who was highly educated, often dictated his letters to a scribe.
#### Stylistic Differences and Theological Development:
Some argue that the differences in writing style, language, and theological emphasis across the Gospels are indicators of different authors. However, these variations can be understood in a different light. Michael J. Kruger's "[[Kruger2012-uz|Canon Revisited]]" explains that such differences can be attributed to different audiences and purposes for writing, rather than indicating different authors. For example, one Gospel might target Gentiles, while another focuses on a Jewish audience, leading to different styles and emphases. These variations do not necessarily negate traditional authorship claims and can be seen as adaptations by the authors to better reach their intended audiences.
#### Internal Evidence For Authorship Of The Gospels
The internal evidence for the Gospels that supports the traditional authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) refers to clues within the texts themselves that may align with the characteristics, backgrounds, or perspectives of these authors. Here's an overview of the evidence collected so far:
[[Internal Evidence For The Authorship Of The Gospels]]
#### Conclusion
The debate surrounding the anonymity of the Gospels highlight the absence of titles like "The Gospel According to Matthew/Mark/Luke/John" in early manuscripts, suggesting later additions, and the lack of self-identification by the authors within the texts. However, the evidence against anonymous authorship is substantial. Early church tradition consistently attributes the Gospels to their traditional authors, even though the Gospels themselves might not explicitly name the authors. The historical testimonies of figures like Tertullian, Origen, Papias, and Irenaeus provide valuable insights into the authorship, dating, and authenticity of the Gospels, emphasizing their ties to apostolic sources. Additionally, the absence of competing authorship traditions and the consistent attribution to traditional authors in copies of the Gospels further reinforce the case against anonymity. The internal evidence within the Gospels also aligns with the characteristics, backgrounds, and perspectives of their respective authors, strengthening the argument for their traditional authorship.