Professor of Early Christianity - ask me (almost) anything!

[AlbMagno]

But if you are asking a question it’s because you want a truthful answer, and in science knowing the possible biases of the answers helps greatly in searching that truth, no matter if it is in a forum, a university or any other place.

As we are discussing sciences, it’s a matter of epistemology, not of how universities work.

 

[HarryStotle]

It seems to be pretty widely accepted by scholars that the direct personal and individual authorship of some NT books is unknown, but that is not the same thing as “anonymous”.
To say that John came out of the Johanine community without John wielding the pen is not the same thing as a completely unknown source or “anonymity”.
So I’m not exactly sure what is meant by “anonymous”. If he means we don’t know with certainty if The John wrote such and such specifically, he’s correct. There are those mysteries of attribution.

Full disclosure: I’m a layman who’s pastor is a scripture scholar and former seminary instructor.

I suppose the question then becomes whether we ought to trust modern scholars regarding “direct personal and individual authorship” or scholars from the second and third centuries who had some direct personal connections with the authors, regarding who it was who “wielded the pen” that wrote each Gospel.

So we have…

Papias of Hierapolis (writing ~120 to 130 AD) who lived in Asia Minor and personally was a disciple of John, the Apostle, and who wrote:

Matthew composed the sayings in the Hebrew dialect and each person interpreted them as best he could.

And the elder [John] used to say this: “Mark, having become Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately everything he remembered, though not in order, of the things either said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, followed Peter, who adapted his teachings as needed but had not intention of giving an ordered account of the Lord’s sayings. Consequently Mark did nothing wrong in writing down some things as he remembered them, for he made it his one concern not to omit anything that he heard or make any false statement in them.”

Justin Martyr (writing ~140-165 AD) who lived in Palestine and was an early pagan convert to Christianity, and who wrote:

For in the Memoirs of the apostles and their successors it is written…

We are told that he [Christ] changed the name of one of the apostles to Peter, and it is written in his memoirs that this took place…”

Irenaeus of Lyon (writing ~150 to 200) who lived in Lyon in Gaul, but was a disciple of Polycarp, a direct disciple of John.

Now Matthew published among the Hebrews a written gospel also in their own tongue while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and founding the church.

After their [Peter and Paul’s] departure, Mark also, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself handed down to us in writing the things which were preached by Peter…

Luke also, who was a follower of Paul, put down in a book the gospel which was preached by him.

Then [after the publication of Matthew, Mark, and Luke] John, the disciple of the Lord, who had even rested on his breast, himself also gave forth the Gospel, while he was living at Ephesus in Asia.

Continued…

 

[HarryStotle]

Clement of Alexandria (writing ~ 170-200) who lived in Egypt and personally knew elders who were direct disciples of the Apostles

Of all those who had been with the Lord only Matthew and John left us their recollections, and tradition says they took to writing perforce. Matthew had first preached to the Hebrews, and when he was on the point of going to others he transmitted in writing in his native language the Gospel according to himself, and thus supplied by writing the lack of his own presence to those from whom he was sent…”

But a great light of godliness shone upon the minds of Peter’s listeners that they were not satisfied with a single hearing or with the oral teaching of the divine proclamation. So, with all kinds of exhortations, they begged Mark (whose gospel is extant), since he was Peter’s follower, to leave behind a written record of the teaching given to them verbally, and did not quit until they had persuaded the man, and thus they became the immediate cause of the scripture called “The Gospel according to Mark.” And they say that the apostle, aware of what had occurred because the Spirit had revealed it to him, was pleased with their zeal and sanctioned the writing for study in the churches.

Of all those who had been with the Lord only Matthew and John left us their recollections (hypomnēmata), and tradition says that they took to writing perforce… John, it is said, used all the time a message which was not written down, and at last took to writing for the following cause. The three gospels which had been written down before were distributed to all including himself; it is said he welcomed them and testified to their truth but said that there was only lacking to the narrative the account of what was done by Christ at first and at the beginning of the preaching… They say accordingly that John was asked to relate in his own gospel the period passed over in silence by the former evangelists (tōn proterōn euangelistōn)…

 

[goout]

I trust living scripture scholars to have the best information.
They have the advantage of all that you just posted plus all the discoveries in centuries since.

You don’t need to prove this particular authorship issue to me. I don’t have a dog in the fight.
I was just trying to understand and maybe clarify the anonymity issue. I’m not debating with you specific cases.

 

[HarryStotle]

I trust living scripture scholars to have the best information.
They have the advantage of all that you just posted plus all the discoveries in centuries since.

You don’t need to prove this particular authorship issue to me. I don’t have a dog in the fight.
I was just trying to understand and maybe clarify the anonymity issue. I’m not debating with you specific cases.

Fair enough.

I was merely demonstrating that the case for the anonymity of the Gospel writers is very far from having been made, despite what modern scholars “widely accept.”

Unfortunately, what is often presented is not the actual case from both sides, but mere allusion to scholarly opinion as if that in itself is sufficient to make the case.

 

[annem]

I trust living scripture scholars to have the best information.
They have the advantage of all that you just posted plus all the discoveries in centuries sinc
*

*

That’s a point, but consider what knowledge the ancient authors had: vast libraries of early writings that have now vanished, and the sort of knowledge that only comes from living through the era, such as familiarity with slang or current arguments.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I did not insinuate the OP is a fraud. I am uneasy that
the OP is not comfortable sharing his religion.
Is he Jewish or Buddhist or Baptist or SDA or Jehovah’s Witness?

I am not questioning if the OP is really a professor of
early Christianity.

 

[TheWryWren]

Goodness, everything on this forum turns controversial so quickly!

If you are still answering questions @billsherman,

Are there any history books on Early Christianity that you consider to be, for the most part, reliable? History is a subject that has always interested me, but I never know which history books are considered to be quality.

Thanks for taking the time to answer!