Editing New Testament (section)

===Gospels===
{{Main|Synoptic Gospels}}
[[File:The Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel.jpg|thumb|''Evangelist Mathäus und der Engel'', by [[Rembrandt]], 1661]]
Authorship of the Gospels remains divided among both evangelical and critical scholars. The names of each Gospel stems from church tradition, and yet the authors of the Gospels do not identify themselves in their respective texts. All four gospels and the Acts of the Apostles are [[anonymous work]]s.{{sfn|Harris|1985|p=501}} The Gospel of John claims to be based on eyewitness testimony from the [[Disciple whom Jesus loved]], but never names this character. The author of [[Luke-Acts]] claimed to access an eyewitness to [[Paul the Apostle|Paul]]; this claim remains accepted by most scholars.<ref>"A glance at recent extended treatments of the "we" passages and commentaries demonstrates that, within biblical scholarship, solutions in the historical eyewitness traditions continue to be the most influential explanations for the first-person plural style in Acts. Of the two latest full-length studies on the "we" passages, for example, one argues that the first-person accounts came from Silas, a companion of Paul but not the author, and the other proposes that first-person narration was Luke's (Paul's companion and the author of Acts) method of communicating his participation in the events narrated.17

17. Jurgen Wehnert, Die Wir-Passegen der Apostelgeschitchte: Ein lukanisches Stilmittel aus judischer Tradition (GTA 40; Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989); Claus-Jurgen Thornton, Der Zeuge des Zeugen: Lukas als Historiker der Paulus reisen (WUNT 56; Tugingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991). See also, Barrett, Acts of the Apostles, and Fitzmyer, Acts of the Apostles.", Campbell, "The "we" passages in the Acts of the Apostles: the narrator as narrative", p. 8 (2007). Society of Biblical Literature.</ref> Objections to this viewpoint mainly take the form of the following two interpretations, but also include the claim that Luke-Acts contains differences in theology and historical narrative which are irreconcilable with the authentic letters of [[Paul the Apostle]].<ref>"The principle essay in this regard is P. Vielhauer, 'On the "Paulinism" of Acts', in L.E. Keck and J. L. Martyn (eds.), Studies in Luke-Acts (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 33-50, who suggests that Luke's presentation of Paul was, on several fronts, a contradiction of Paul's own letters (e.g. attitudes on natural theology, Jewish law, christology, eschatology). This has become the standard position in German scholarship, e.g., Conzelmann, Acts; J. Roloff, Die Apostelgeschichte (NTD; Berlin: Evangelische, 1981) 2-5; Schille, Apostelgeschichte des Lukas, 48-52. This position has been challenged most recently by Porter, "The Paul of Acts and the Paul of the Letters: Some Common Misconceptions', in his Paul of Acts, 187-206. See also I.H. Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Leister: InterVarsity Press, 1980) 42-44; E.E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 2nd edn, 1974) 45-47.", Pearson, "Corresponding sense: Paul, dialectic, and Gadamer", Biblical Interpretation Series, p. 101 (2001). Brill.</ref> According to [[Bart D. Ehrman]] of the [[University of North Carolina]], none of the authors of the Gospels were eyewitnesses or even explicitly claimed to be eyewitnesses of Jesus's life.{{sfn|Ehrman|2003|p=235|ps=: "The four Gospels that eventually made it into the New Testament, for example, are all anonymous, written in the third person ''about'' Jesus and his companions. None of them contains a first-person narrative ('One day, when Jesus and I went into Capernaum...'), or claims to be written by an eyewitness or companion of an eyewitness. ... Some scholars abandon these traditional identifications, and recognize that the books were written by otherwise unknown but relatively well-educated Greek-speaking (and writing) Christians during the second half of the first century."}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2004b|p=[https://archive.org/details/truthfictionin00ehrm/page/110 110]|ps=: "In fact, contrary to what you might think, these Gospels don't even claim to be written by eyewitnesses."}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2006|p=[https://archive.org/details/lostgospelofjuda00ehrm/page/143 143]|ps=: "The Gospels of the New Testament are therefore our earliest accounts. These do not claim to be written by eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus, and historians have long recognized that they were produced by second- or third-generation Christians living in different countries than Jesus (and Judas) did, speaking a different language (Greek instead of Aramaic), experiencing different situations, and addressing different audiences."}} Ehrman has argued for a scholarly consensus that many New Testament books were not written by the individuals whose names are attached to them.{{sfn|Ehrman|2006|p=143}}{{sfn|Ehrman|2009|pp=102–04}} Scholarly opinion is that names were fixed to the gospels by the mid second century AD.<ref name="Nickle2001">{{cite book|author=Nickle, Keith Fullerton |title=The Synoptic Gospels: An Introduction|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5SSytjasmAgC&pg=PA43|date=2001|publisher=Westminster John Knox Press|isbn=978-0-664-22349-6|page=43 }}</ref> Many scholars believe that none of the gospels were written in the region of [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]].<ref>Theissen, Gerd (2004). ''The Gospels in Context''. London, ENG: Bloomsbury-Continuum. p. 290.</ref>

[[Christian tradition]] identifies [[John the Apostle]] with [[John the Evangelist]], the supposed author of the [[Gospel of John]]. Traditionalists tend to support the idea that the writer of the Gospel of John himself claimed to be an eyewitness in their commentaries of [[John 21]]:24 and therefore the gospel was written by an eyewitness.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Barnes |first=Albert |title=Barnes' Notes on the New Testament |year=1962 |orig-year=1832 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qvXCoSQ1y0EC&pg=PA360 |publisher=Kregel Publications |page=360|isbn=978-0825493713 }}</ref><ref name="Henry">{{Cite book|last=Henry |first=Matthew |title=Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible |year=1706 |url=http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mhm/john-21.html |publisher=StudyLight.org}}</ref> This idea is rejected by the majority of modern scholars, with most viewing the passage as a later addition, though a growing minority view it as part of the earliest text.{{sfn | Brown | 1988 | p=9}}{{sfn | Schubert | 2016 | p=16}}<ref name=":2">{{Cite book |last=Keith |first=Chris |title=The Gospel as Manuscript: An Early History of the Jesus Tradition as Material Artifact |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2020 |isbn=978-0199384372 |pages=142-143}}</ref>

Most{{Citation needed|date=April 2020}} scholars hold to the [[two-source hypothesis]], which posits that the [[Marcan priority|Gospel of Mark was the first gospel to be written]]. On this view, the authors of the [[Gospel of Matthew]] and the [[Gospel of Luke]] used as sources the [[Gospel of Mark]] and a hypothetical [[Q document]] to write their individual gospel accounts.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark.html |title=Gospel of Mark |publisher=Early Christian Writings |access-date=15 January 2008 |last=Kirby |first=Peter}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Achtemeier |first=Paul J. |encyclopedia=The Anchor Bible Dictionary |title=The Gospel of Mark |year=1992 |publisher=Doubleday |volume=4 |location=New York |isbn=978-0-385-19362-7 |page=545}}</ref><ref>Easton, M. G. (1996) [ca. 1897] "Luke, Gospel According To". ''Easton's Bible Dictionary''. Oak Harbor, Washington: Logos Research.</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Meier |first=John P. |author-link= John P. Meier |title=A Marginal Jew |publisher=Doubleday |year=1991 |location=New York |volume=2 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/mentormessagemir00john/page/955 955–56] |isbn=978-0-385-46993-7 |url=https://archive.org/details/mentormessagemir00john |url-access=registration}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Helms |first=Randel |title=Who Wrote the Gospels? |publisher=Millennium Press |year=1997 |location=Altadena, California |page=[https://archive.org/details/whowrotegospels00helm/page/8 8] |isbn=978-0-9655047-2-0 |url=https://archive.org/details/whowrotegospels00helm |url-access=registration}}</ref> These three gospels are called the [[Synoptic Gospels]], because they include many of the same stories, often in the same sequence, and sometimes in exactly the same wording. Scholars agree that the Gospel of John was written last, by using a different tradition and body of testimony. In addition, most scholars agree that the author of Luke also wrote the [[Acts of the Apostles]]. Scholars hold that these books constituted two-halves of a single work, [[Luke–Acts]].{{Citation needed|reason=Scholars not named.|date=July 2019}}