Writing of the Gospels

Wikipedia Notice

The Material on this Page is taken from articles published by Wikipedia.  Citations to the original sources are given.  According to Wikipedia standards, the notice printed below must be included when copying Wikipedia material:

"This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License, which means that you can copy and modify it as long as the entire work (including additions) remains under this license", and provide a link to http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html.

Mark

Mark the Evangelist (מרקוס, Greek: Μάρκος) (1st century) is traditionally believed to be the author of the Gospel of Mark and a companion of Peter. He also accompanied Paul and Barnabas in Paul's first journey. After a sharp dispute, Barnabas separated from Paul, taking Mark to Cyprus (Acts 15:36-40). Later Paul calls upon the services of Mark, the kinsman of Barnabas, and Mark is named as Paul's fellow worker. He is also believed to be the first patriarch of Alexandria by both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Coptic Orthodox Church, and thus the founder of Christianity in Africa. His evangelistic symbol is the lion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_the_Evangelist)

Matthew

The Gospel of Matthew (literally, "according to Matthew"; Greek, Κατά Μαθθαίον or Κατά Ματθαίον, Kata Maththaion or Kata Matthaion) is a synoptic gospel in the New Testament, one of four canonical gospels. It narrates an account of the life and ministry of Jesus. It describes his genealogy, his miraculous birth and childhood, his baptism and temptation, his ministry of healing and preaching, and finally his crucifixion and resurrection. The resurrected Jesus commissions his Apostles to "go and make disciples of all nations."

The Christian community traditionally ascribes authorship to Matthew the Evangelist, one of Jesus' twelve disciples. Augustine of Hippo considered it to be the first gospel written (see synoptic problem), and it appears as the first gospel in most Bibles. Secular scholarship generally agrees it was written by an anonymous non-eyewitness to Jesus' ministry. The author apparently used the Gospel of Mark as one source and the hypothetical Q document as another, possibly writing in Antioch, c 80-85.^[1]

Of the four canonical gospels, Matthew is most closely aligned with the Jewish tradition, and the author was apparently Jewish. Most scholars consider the gospel, like every other book in the New Testament, to have been written in Koine Greek, though some experts maintain the traditional view that it was originally composed in Aramaic. The gospel is associated with noncanonical gospels written for Jewish Christians, such as the Gospel of the Hebrews. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew)

Luke/Acts

The Gospel of Luke (literally, according to Luke; Greek, Κατά Λουκαν, Kata Loukan) is a synoptic Gospel, and the third and longest of the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament. The text narrates the life of Jesus, with particular interest concerning his birth, ministry, death, and resurrection; and it ends with an account of the ascension.

The author is characteristically concerned with social ethics, the poor, women, and other oppressed groups.^[1] Certain well-loved stories on these themes, such as the prodigal son and the good Samaritan, are found only in this gospel. The Gospel also has a special emphasis on prayer, the activity of the Holy Spirit, and joyfulness.^[2] D. Guthrie stated, “it is full of superb stories and leaves the reader with a deep impression of the personality and teachings of Jesus. It is perhaps for this reason that for many it is their favourite gospel.^[3]

The introductory dedication to Theophilus, 1:1-4 states that "many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word", and that the author, "after investigating everything carefully from the very first" has decided likewise to compose an orderly account for Theophilus.^[4] Luke intended to write a historical account,^[5] bringing out the theological significance of the history.^[6] The author's purpose was to portray Christianity as divine, respectable, law-abiding, and international.^[1]

Scholarship today is in wide agreement that both the Gospel and Acts have the same author.^[7] Likewise, the traditional view of Lukan authorship is “widely held as the view which most satisfactorily explains all the data.”^[8] However, there is scholarly division concerning the traditional attribution that the text was written by Luke the companion of Paul (named in Colossians 4:14), division which R. E. Brown characterized as "evenly divided".^[9] Scholars are also in disagreement concerning the date of the Gospel, arguing either for a pre- or post-70 date, though most all would agree that the text is a first century work.

Composition

Contemporary scholars generally conclude that the author, probably a Gentile Christian, wrote the gospel about 85-90. As sources, he used the Gospel of Mark (written 65-70), the hypothetical Q document, and unique sources (designated L). Like the rest of the New Testament, the gospel was written in Greek. Like Mark but unlike Matthew, the intended audience is Gentile, and it assures readers that Christianity is an international religion, not a Jewish sect. Scholars are divided on whether the author is indeed Paul's physician companion, Luke. Several cities have been proposed as it place of origin with no consensus. .^[1]

Alternatively, some scholars hold to the traditional view that Luke is based on Matthew (which was the first-written gospel), and that it was written before the fall of the Second Temple (70).

Author

Early tradition, witnessed by the Muratorian Canon, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origin, and Tertullian, held that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were both written by Luke, a companion of Paul.^[12] The oldest manuscript with the start of the gospel (ca. 200) carries the title “the Gospel according to Luke”.^[13] This tradition, which no ancient source questioned, has been described as one which “could hardly be stronger”.^[14]

The claim that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were written by the same author is considered by contemporary scholarship to be “almost certain”,^[15] a rare example of consensus amongst biblical scholars. The most direct evidence comes from the prefaces of each book. Both prefaces are addressed to Theophilus, the author's patron, and the preface of Acts explicitly references "my former book" about the life of Jesus. Furthermore, there are linguistic and theological similarities between the two works, suggesting that they have a common author.^[16] Both books also contain common interests.^[17] With the agreement of nearly all scholars, Udo Schnelle writes, "The extensive linguistic and theological agreements and cross-references between the Gospel of Luke and the Acts indicate that both works derive from the same author".^[18] Those biblical scholars who consider the two books a single, two-volume work often refer to both together as Luke-Acts.^[19]

Given this, the internal evidence of the Acts of the Apostles concerning its author pertains to the authorship of the Gospel. This evidence, especially passages in the narrative where the first person plural is used, points to the author being a companion of Paul.^[20] As D. Guthrie put it, of the known companions of Paul, Luke is “as good as any… [and] since this is the traditional ascription there seems no reason to conjecture any other.”^[21] There is further evidence from the Pauline Epistles.^[22] Paul described Luke as “the beloved physical”, and scholars have long found evidence of technical medical terminology used in both the Gospel and Acts,^[23] though this argument has been challenged and it without universal acceptance.

The traditional view of Lukan authorship is “widely held as the view which most satisfactorily explains all the data.”^[24] The list of scholars maintaining authorship by Luke the physician is lengthy, and represents scholars from a wide range of theological opinion.^[25] But there is no consensus, and the current opinion concerning Lukan authorship has been described as ‘about evenly divided’.^[26] on who the author was.

Date

The Gospel was likely widely known before the end of the first century, and was certainly fully recognized by the early part of the second.^[27] The work is reflected in the Didache, the (Gnostic) writings of Basilides and Velentinius, the apologetics of the Church Father Justin Martyr, and was used by Marcion.^[28] Scholars are divided as to whether the text was written before or after the pivotal year of 70.

Before 70

Arguments for a pre-70 date are largely bound up with the complicated arguments concerning the date of the book of Acts, with most proponents arguing for a date around 60-61 for the Gospel.^[29] This incorporates the conjecture that Luke collected much of his unique material during the imprisonment of Paul in Caesarea, when Luke attended to him.^[30] Acts does not mention Paul’s martyrdom, which occurred some time in the 60s, nor does the fulfilment of Jesus’ prophecies concerning the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, which occurred in 70.

After 70

In contrast to the traditional view, many contemporary scholars regard Mark as a source text used by the author(s) of Luke, following from the theory of Markan Priority. Since Mark may have been written around the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, around 70, Luke probably would not have been written before 70. These scholars have suggested dates for Luke from 75 to as late as 100, and Acts shortly thereafter, between 80 and 100. Support for a later date comes from a number of reasons. The universalization of the message of Luke is believed to reflect a theology that took time to develop. Furthermore, Acts is believed to present a significantly different picture of Paul than that which is seen in the undisputed Pauline Epistles. Differences of chronology, "style", and theology suggest that the author of Luke-Acts was not familiar with Paul's distinctive theology but instead was writing a decade or more after his death, by which point significant harmonization between different traditions within early Christianity had occurred. However, Luke makes use of many words and phrases that are used by Paul (see Relationship with other gospels below), suggesting Luke may have been familiar with Paul's theology and/or letters.

Debate continues among non-traditionalists about whether Luke was written before or after the end of the 1st century. Those who would date it later argue that it was written in response to heterodoxical movements of the early 2nd century, for example see Gospel of Marcion. Those who would date it earlier point out both that Luke lacks knowledge of the episcopal system, which had been developed in the 2nd century, and that an earlier date preserves the traditional connection of the gospel with the Luke who was a follower of Paul.

Audience

The consensus is that Luke was written by a Greek or Syrian for gentile/ non-Jewish Christians. The Gospel is addressed to the author's patron, Theophilus, which in Greek simply means Friend of God, and may not be a name but a generic term for a Christian. The Gospel is clearly directed at Christians, or at those who already knew about Christianity, rather than a general audience, since the ascription goes on to state that the Gospel was written "so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught" (Luke 1:3–4).

Manuscripts

    See also: Acts of the Apostles#Manuscripts

The earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke are four papyrus fragments dating from the first half of the 3rd century [1], one containing portions of all four gospels (P⁴⁵) and three others preserving only brief passages (P⁴, P⁶⁹, P⁷⁵). These early copies, as well as the earliest copies of Acts, date after the Gospel was separated from Acts.

Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus are 4th-century codices of the Greek bible that are the oldest manuscripts that contain Luke. Codex Bezae is a 5th- or 6th-century Western text-type manuscript that contains Luke in Greek and Latin versions on facing pages. This text-type appears to have descended from an offshoot of the main manuscript tradition, departing from more familiar readings at many points. Verses 22:19–20 are omitted only in Codex Bezae and a handful of Old Latin manuscripts. Nearly all other manuscripts including Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus and Church Fathers contain the "longer" reading of Luke 22:19 and 20. Verse 22:20, which is very similar to 1 Cor 11:25, provides the only gospel support for the doctrine of the New Covenant. Verses 22:43–44 are found in Western text-type. But they are omitted by a diverse number of anctient witnesses and are generally marked as such in modern translations. See Bruce M. Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament for details.

Relationship with other gospels

According to Farrar, "Out of a total of 1151 verses, Luke has 389 in common with Matthew and Mark, 176 in common with Matthew alone, 41 in common with Mark alone, leaving 544 peculiar to himself. In many instances all three use identical language." Mark is widely considered a principal direct source, and Martin Hengel has made the more controversial argument that Luke also made use of Matthew.^[31]

There are 17 parables peculiar to this Gospel. Luke also attributes to Jesus seven miracles which are not present in Matthew or Mark. The synoptic Gospels are related to each other after the following scheme. If the contents of each Gospel are numbered at 100, then when compared this result is obtained: Mark has 7 peculiarities, 93 coincidences. Matthew 42 peculiarities, 58 coincidences. Luke 59 peculiarities, 41 coincidences. That is, thirteen-fourteenths of Mark, four-sevenths of Matthew, and two-fifths of Luke describe the same events in similar language. Luke's style is more polished than that of Matthew and Mark with fewer Hebrew idioms. He uses a few Latin words (Luke 7:41; 8:30; 11:33; 12:6; and 19:20), but no Syriac or Hebrew words except sikera, an exciting drink of the nature of wine but not made of grapes (from Heb. shakar, "he is intoxicated"; Lev 10:9), perhaps palm wine. According to Walter Bauer's Greek English Lexicon of the NT, in Aramaic (שכרא) it means barley beer, from the Akkadian shikaru. This Gospel contains 28 distinct references to the Old Testament. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke)

John

The Gospel of John, (literally, According to John; Greek, Κατά Ιωαννην, Kata Iōannēn) is the fourth gospel in the canon of the New Testament, traditionally ascribed to John the Evangelist. Like the three synoptic gospels, it contains an account of some of the actions and sayings of Jesus, but differs from them in ethos and theological emphases. The purpose is expressed in the conclusion, 20:30-31: "...these [Miracles of Jesus] are written that you may (come to) believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through this belief you may have life in his name.^[1]

Of the four gospels, John presents the highest christology, describing him as the Logos (Word) who existed from the beginning, teaching at length about his identity as the only savior, and (according to the trinitarian tradition) declaring him to be God.^[2]

Compared to the synoptics, John focuses on Jesus' cosmic mission to redeem humanity. Only in John does Jesus talk at length about himself, and John includes a substantial amount of material that Jesus shared with the disciples only. Certain elements of the synoptics (such as parables, exorcisms, and the Second Coming) are not found in John.

Since the "higher criticism" of the 19th century, historians have largely rejected the gospel of John as a reliable source of information about the historical Jesus.^[3][4] "[M]ost commentators regard the work as anonymous."^[5]   (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John