How do we know the authors of the Gospels were the real authors?

[theCardinalbird]

How do we know the authors of the Gospels were the real authors?

 

[straykat]

Tradition, later church fathers attesting what was handed down to them.

John is a bit more self-evident though. He writes in the first person in places. Whoever it was, was a witness. Tradition ascribes his letters and the Gospel to John. Not to mention that his language isn’t native Greek. It’s simplistic and full of Hebraisms. So that’s another mark for a Judean follower.

 

[Le_Cracquere]

Other than tradition, I’m not sure we DO know that. However, I’d say the burden of proof lies with someone who wants to argue the contrary. Absent a smoking gun that makes the Gospels’ alleged authorship impossible, I see no reason not to go along provisionally with tradition.

 

[straykat]

Another witness that doesn’t get mentioned enough is the Didache. This is first century, and it’s already sharing sayings with, for example, Matthew’s gospel. Either Matthew’s sayings were already floating around very early, or Matthew predated the Didache and the texts were lifted from that. Things like the Lord’s Prayer, some sayings from the Sermon on the Mount, etc…

Not to mention that this was also likely written by a Jew of Judea… but not as simplistic in language as John. More directed towards Jewish believers too, with all of it’s references to the Torah and how Jesus completes it. And odd little Hebraisms here and there, that aren’t easy to understand outside the idioms of the time. Like when Jesus says “If your eyes are good, then your whole body will be full of light” means something very down to earth. To have a “good eye” means to be generous. A bad one is stingy. I bet a Greek or some Gnostic would have interpreted this in Platonic terms and ascribed more mystical meaning to it than necessary.

edit:

Actually, this comes from the Hebrew in the OT. “He who is generous (Hebrew tov ayin, good eye) will be blessed, for he gives some of his food to the poor” (Proverbs 22:9)

 

[KJW5551]

Because there is no manuscript evidence of anyone else writing them nor evidence that they were written anonymously. Plus as already mentioned, the church fathers are absolutely unanimous in their attestation of the gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Did Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John Really Write the Gospels? | Catholic Answers Magazine

 

[straykat]

At the very least, I think the most ridiculous theory (pushed by Joseph Atwill) was that Jesus was invented by the Romans. lol. Just with the little I said, it’s obvious it has Jewish roots and peculiarities. Why in the world would Romans do this? And why would Jews help them! Jews ended up revolting in a gruesome act of mass suicide that destroyed Jerusalem by AD 70. It’s horrors were legendary and only are matched by the holocaust. That would be a whole other miracle in itself that Romans managed to get some pretty knowledgeable (and profound) religious Jewish writers to concoct a story for them… to what end… I can not say.

 

[BartholomewB]

How do we know the authors of the Gospels were the real authors?

It depends what you mean by “know”. Certain knowledge is one thing, the balance of probabilities is another thing.

 

[Thom18]

Firstly, the surviving manuscripts (at least, the earliest ones) are named after their authors. Second, the early Church sifted through all the books being considered for canonization, accepting or rejecting them based on what was known about them. The gospels we have were accepted, and others (such as the gospel of Thomas or Mary) rejected based on (among other things) the fact that their authorship couldn’t be confirmed.

 

[goout]

Joe1:

How do we know the authors of the Gospels were the real authors?

It depends what you mean by “know”. Certain knowledge is one thing, the balance of probabilities is another thing.

Also depends what you mean by “real” and “authors”

 

[Eric_Hyom]

How do we know the authors of the Gospels were the real authors?

I just believe that the Bible I read today, is the Bible that God intends me to read. If God can create the universe and life, he has the power to edit the Bible in the way that he wants.

Even if a corrupt Roman emperor wanted to distort the Bible, he would have to fight against God, so no contest.

 

[straykat]

Firstly, the surviving manuscripts (at least, the earliest ones) are named after their authors. Second, the early Church sifted through all the books being considered for canonization, accepting or rejecting them based on what was known about them. The gospels we have were accepted, and others (such as the gospel of Thomas or Mary) rejected based on (among other things) the fact that their authorship couldn’t be confirmed.

Thomas is also overtly Gnostic. It’s not even transparent where it can be slightly construed to be Judean in origin. It’s got late development written all over it and just reflects the views of one fringe movement.

People just like holding it up these days, out of some misplaced sense of rebellion… But it’s funny that they gravitate towards Gnosticism. When Gnosticism is all about elitism and “secret knowledge” that separated the haves and have-nots (based in Pythagoreanism and his secret cults). People aren’t actually being rebels in choosing it, but ironically choosing an explicit slave-master.

 

[1ke]

How do we know the authors of the Gospels were the real authors?

In some cases, we don’t. We don’t know who wrote Hebrews, but suspect it was Paul.

Paul’s letters are pretty certain. The other books may or may not have been written by those whose names they bear. It isn’t actually important.