|
Who Wrote
the Gospels?
by
John A. Tvedtnes
The term “gospel”
means “good news” and has specific reference to the
news of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The word came to
be applied to histories of the life of Christ because Mark began
his account with the words, “the beginning of the gospel of
Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).
A large number
of gospels were circulating in the early centuries of Christianity,
as Luke 1:1 attests. Some of them have been rediscovered only in
the last century. Not all of them deal with the mortal life of Jesus;
some describe his post-resurrection visits to the apostles and what
he taught them. Of the many “gospels,” only four were
accepted as part of the New Testament, those of Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John. To Latter-day Saints, there is another canonized gospel,
the book of 3 Nephi in the Book of Mormon.
Three of the
New Testament gospels are termed “synoptics” (from the
Greek word meaning “seeing together”) because they cover
basically the same story. These are Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Of
the gospel writers, only twoBthe apostles Matthew and John had known
Jesus (Matthew 4:21; 9:9).
The apostle
John was the last to write an account of Jesus’ life. He included
stories not found in the synoptics and deliberately avoided repeating
most of the stories found in all three synoptics. John's approach
is essentially his testimony of the divinity and power of the Savior.
Thus, he begins with the premortal Christ (John 1:1).
One of the
synoptic gospels was also written by a man named John, whose Latin
name was Marcus, generally known as Mark. He is said to have been
the nephew of Mary, the sister of Barnabas (Acts 12:12; Colossians
4:10), which would explain why he accompanied Barnabas and his friend
Paul on missionary journeys (Acts 12:25; 15:36-40; 2 Timothy 4:11).
He later traveled with the apostle Peter, who called the young man
“my son” (1 Peter 5:13). In fact, several early Christian
writers indicated that Mark’s gospel comprised a collection
of stories about Jesus that he heard from Peter. Barnabas, a native
of Cyprus, was an early convert to the church (Acts 4:36), but there
is no indication that either he or his nephew Mark had known Jesus.
(Despite the popular attempt to identify Mark with the “young
man” of Mark 14:51-52, there is no evidence for this assertion.)
Luke or Lucas,
a physician by trade, was one of Paul's later missionary companions
(Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11; Philemon 1:24). He is the author
of both the gospel that bears his name and the Acts of the Apostles
(compare Luke 1:1-4 with Acts 1:1 and note the use of Awe in Acts
16:10-13, 16; 20:6, 13-15; 21:1-8, 10, 12, 14-17; 27:1-5, 7, 15-16,
18-20, 26-27, 29, 37; 28:10-14, 16). Luke was at least a second-generation
Christian and had not known Christ. His is the only account of the
calling of the Seventy (Luke 10), which may reflect his concern
for missionary work. Quite likely the only gospel writer who was
not Jewish, Luke is our only source for information on the good
Samaritan, the Samaritan leper cured by Jesus, and the conversion
of the first Samaritans (Luke 10:30-36; 17:16; Acts 8:25). Matthew,
on the other hand, has Jesus telling his disciples not to preach
to the Samaritans (Matthew 10:5-6; compare Matthew 15:24).
Scholars disagree
about which of the gospels was written first, but many accept that
Mark was the first, followed by Matthew and Luke. This is suggested
by the fact that both Matthew and Luke include in their accounts
most of the stories told by Mark. They differ in their treatment,
however. Luke typically accepts Mark's version, while Matthew, who
was an eyewitness to Jesus’ ministry, often corrects Mark’s
record. This accounts for some of the variants in the stories.
Matthew and
Luke share some information, such as the sermon on the mount (or,
according to Luke 6:17, “in the plain”). Some scholars
believe that the material common to these two gospels but missing
in Mark came from a now-lost collection of sayings of Jesus that
they call Q, from the German word for “source,” Quelle.
The fact that Matthew places many of Jesus’ teachings in a
totally different context than Luke again suggests that he may have
been correcting an earlier account.
Matthew and
Luke must have had other sources as well, for each included some
stories that are unique to his gospel. Thus, only Matthew wrote
of the visit of the wise men, while only Luke tells of the shepherds
finding the infant Jesus in the manger. Indeed, the nature of some
of Luke’s account suggests to me that he may have interviewed
members of Jesus’ family, for he seems privy to some rather
intimate family stories. He alone wrote of the angelic appearances
that announced the forthcoming birth of John the Baptist and Jesus
Christ and that the mothers of these two men were cousins (Luke
1-2). Only Luke recounted Jesus’ visit to the temple at the
age of twelve (Luke 2:41-51) and the attempt to kill him in Nazareth,
where he had been raised (Luke 4:16-30). Another reason to believe
that Luke may have interviewed members of Jesus’ family is
that he was privy to Mary’s thoughts (Luke 2:19, 51).
As one reads
the various gospel accounts, one is struck by the fact that, even
when telling the same stories, they do not always agree on the facts.
While nonbelievers might see this as a strike against these New
Testament accounts, I consider them to be evidence of the sincerity
of the writers. Had they been trying to perpetrate a fraud, it seems
likely that they would have agreed with each other on all points.
The diversity among the gospels reflects the different perspectives
of the early witnesses of Christ and the emphasis each of the writers
placed on various aspects of his mission.
Click
here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.
© 2007 Meridian
Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
|
