There is great evidence for who wrote Mark. Don't allow skeptics to tell you differently

[@ronaldmorgan7632]

Don't we already know that Mark got most of his data from Peter?

[@chipmitchell23]

Yes

[@brunods4560]

Actually, he was first and foremost a student of paul.

[@ronaldmorgan7632]

@@brunods4560 I think I heard that they had some kind of falling out.

[@sp1ke0kill3r]

No actually we don't know this. It's possible he did, but if that's the case Mark's hostility to Peter would mean they had a falling out. Maurice Casey thinks Mark may well have heard Peter teach, but argues that Papias drastically overplayed his hand in using that connection to establish the accuracy of the whole Gospel Two important details emerge in chapter 4 with the parable of the sower 1.) Jesus teaches in parables so only the disciples understand, but they don't (4:10-20) and 2.) Peter's conduct throughout the gospel ( particularly after Jesus arrest) is presaged in the seeds that fall on rocky ground Simon is named Cephas or Peter, the rock: and what happens to the seeds sown on rocky ground? when they hear the word, [they]immediately receive it with joy. And they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while; then, when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately they fall away. Is it accidental that Mark's Jesus says that "Satan immediately comes and takes away the word that is sown in them" and calls Peter Satan later on? It's noteworthy that right after this Mark's Jesus tells the crowd "If any wish to come after me, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it." Can you think of any one following Jesus in Mark that saved their life to avoid taking up their cross? Does this sound like something Peter went around telling everyone? Further, doesn't Papias say that Peter's information was a series of anecdotes that he regularly changed to suit his audience which Mark pulled from memory? Doesn't he suggest that Mark was criticized (by the apostles?) for omissions and errors? Even more problematic for this view is that the Anti-Marcionite Prologues place both Papias and his professed source, John in the mid second century as contemporaries of Marcion. How then could John have had the quality of information suggested?

[@chipmitchell23]

@sp1ke0kill3r Your reasoning is a progressive Theology. Where you draw conclusions based on judgements of individuals motives. The text do not support ur conclusions

[@sp1ke0kill3r]

Unfortunately, no evidence points to John Mark apart from his having the name Mark. There's no indication that John Mark was or would be writing a gospel or even that he was literate. But let's grant that Papias is referring to John Mark. According to Papias own account. Mark is writing from memory. That is, he wasn't "carefully writing things down" as the narrator suggests:, Mark "wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered.... Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. " Sounds a bit like Papias or his source were responding to complaints about Mark's accuracy. If Papias is right about the relationship with Peter, he is drawing on anecddotes which Peter frequently changed to suit his audience. It's true that the other evangelists share Mark's view of Peter, but this can not be confirmation of what Mark says since it is clear and demonstratable that Matthew and Luke copy Mark. IF Mark was Peter's interpreter, they must have had a falling out given Mark's hostility to Peter: He is not just called Satan, but excoriated (8:34-36) and while the angels instruction to the women at the tomb includes Peter, it is nevertheless striking that he does not get the message. If eyewitness testimony was a crucial as the narrator intimates,why then doesn't the author make his connection known?

[@chipmitchell23]

@@sp1ke0kill3r Early Church Fathers, such as Papias, Irenaeus, and Eusebius, affirm that the Gospels were authored by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John: Papias on Mark: According to Papias (early 2nd century), Mark wrote his Gospel based on Peter’s preaching. Matthew's Hebrew Logia: Papias claims that Matthew compiled sayings of Jesus in Hebrew or Aramaic, which may have been a source for the Greek Gospel of Matthew. Irenaeus on Four Gospels: Irenaeus (late 2nd century) defends the authorship of the four Gospels and their apostolic origins.

[@chipmitchell23]

@@sp1ke0kill3r You make many assumptions in my opinion

[@chipmitchell23]

@sp1ke0kill3r The traditional attribution of the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John has been affirmed by numerous scholars over time. Below is a list of 50 scholars, both Christian and non-Christian, who support this view: 1. F. F. Bruce - Renowned biblical scholar known for his work on the New Testament. 2. Craig Blomberg - Professor of New Testament at Denver Seminary. 3. Richard Bauckham - Professor emeritus at the University of St Andrews. 4. D. A. Carson - Research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. 5. N. T. Wright - Former Bishop of Durham and New Testament scholar. 6. Martin Hengel - German historian of religion and New Testament scholar. 7. I. Howard Marshall - Professor emeritus of New Testament exegesis at the University of Aberdeen. 8. Leon Morris - Australian New Testament scholar and theologian. 9. Raymond E. Brown - American Catholic priest and biblical scholar. 10. Bruce Metzger - Professor at Princeton Theological Seminary and textual critic. 11. William Lane Craig - Philosopher and theologian specializing in the philosophy of religion. 12. Ben Witherington III - Professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary. 13. Craig S. Keener - Professor of biblical studies at Asbury Theological Seminary. 14. John Wenham - British Anglican Bible scholar. 15. Donald Guthrie - British New Testament scholar and lecturer. 16. R. T. France - British New Testament scholar and Anglican cleric. 17. J. B. Lightfoot - Bishop of Durham and biblical scholar. 18. A. T. Robertson - American Southern Baptist preacher and biblical scholar. 19. Henry Alford - English churchman and theologian. 20. J. P. Moreland - Philosopher, theologian, and apologist. 21. Norman Geisler - Christian systematic theologian and philosopher. 22. John A. T. Robinson - British New Testament scholar and author. 23. Michael J. Kruger - President and professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary. 24. Andreas J. Köstenberger - Professor of New Testament and biblical theology. 25. Darrell L. Bock - Senior research professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. 26. Daniel B. Wallace - Professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. 27. David Alan Black - Professor of New Testament and Greek. 28. Grant R. Osborne - Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. 29. Robert H. Gundry - Scholar of New Testament studies and Koine Greek. 30. Simon J. Kistemaker - Professor emeritus of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary. 31. William F. Albright - American archaeologist and biblical scholar. 32. John Nolland - Professor of New Testament studies. 33. David E. Garland - Professor of Christian Scriptures at George W. Truett Theological Seminary. 34. Robert L. Thomas - Professor of New Testament at The Master's Seminary. 35. Stanley E. Porter - President and professor of New Testament at McMaster Divinity College. 36. Craig A. Evans - Biblical scholar and author. 37. Scot McKnight - Professor of New Testament at Northern Seminary. 38. Douglas J. Moo - Professor of New Testament at Wheaton College. 39. Graham Stanton - British New Testament scholar. 40. C. H. Dodd - British New Testament scholar. 41. F. W. Beare - Canadian New Testament scholar. 42. C. F. D. Moule - British theologian and Anglican priest. 43. John Stott - English Anglican cleric and theologian. 44. J. I. Packer - British-born Canadian Christian theologian. 45. Alister E. McGrath - Theologian, priest, and professor. 46. Nicolas Perrin - Professor of biblical studies. 47. Richard A. Burridge - Dean of King's College London and biblical scholar. 48. David A. deSilva - Professor of New Testament and Greek. 49. John Piper - Theologian and pastor. 50. Timothy Keller - Theologian and pastor. These scholars, through their academic work and publications, have supported the traditional authorship of the Gospels, attributing them to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.​​

[@chipmitchell23]

@sp1ke0kill3r The early Church Fathers' connection with the disciples of Jesus is based on historical and textual evidence that many of them were either direct disciples of the apostles or closely associated with those who had firsthand knowledge of Jesus. This connection provided a strong foundation for preserving and transmitting the teachings of Jesus and the early Church. 1. Direct Discipleship Some Church Fathers were direct disciples of the apostles or their immediate successors: Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 69-155 CE): Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John, as recorded by Irenaeus. He served as a bishop and is known to have preserved and taught the teachings of John and other apostles. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35-108 CE): Ignatius, an early Church bishop, is believed to have been taught by the apostles Peter and John. His letters reflect a strong understanding of apostolic teachings. Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60-130 CE): Papias claimed to have received oral traditions from those who knew the apostles. He directly referenced hearing the teachings of those who had been with Jesus. --- 2. Transmission of Apostolic Teachings The early Church Fathers saw themselves as the custodians of apostolic tradition: The apostles passed on their teachings to disciples, who then entrusted them to faithful leaders in the early Church. This chain of transmission ensured continuity of doctrine. For example, Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, was a disciple of Polycarp and thus indirectly connected to the Apostle John. Irenaeus emphasized the importance of the apostolic tradition in combating heresies. --- 3. Written Testimony The writings of the Church Fathers often explicitly refer to their connections with the apostles or apostolic figures: Clement of Rome (c. 35-99 CE): Clement, traditionally identified as the author of 1 Clement, was likely a contemporary of Peter and Paul and worked in the Roman Church during their ministry. Eusebius (c. 260-339 CE): Eusebius, the Church historian, compiled accounts of apostolic succession and affirmed the connections between apostles and early bishops. --- 4. Consistency with the New Testament The teachings of the Church Fathers align with the New Testament, indicating their reliance on apostolic sources: The Fathers affirmed the Gospels' authorship and their use in liturgy and teaching. Their writings show a deep familiarity with the New Testament texts and the oral traditions that preceded them. --- 5. Historical Continuity The early Church Fathers operated within a relatively short time after Jesus' ministry, strengthening their connection to eyewitness accounts: For example, John the Apostle is thought to have lived into the late 1st century, overlapping with the early ministry of Polycarp and Ignatius. The proximity in time allowed for the preservation of reliable oral traditions. --- Conclusion The early Church Fathers’ connection to the disciples of Jesus is evidenced by their direct relationships with the apostles, their role in transmitting apostolic teachings, and the historical continuity of their writings with the New Testament. This connection provided a strong foundation for the early Church’s theology, doctrine, and understanding of Jesus’ teachings.

[@Folkstone1957]

@@chipmitchell23 The attributions were all later & history shows there were many discussions with different attributions. Unless you have something new that scholars aren’t aware of, the gospels are still from anonymous writers.

[@tatoncito]

So the evidence is people making claims about other people making claims and mentioning those claims centuries after the claims?? That are not even compiled in writing but a few and brief mentions here and there?? This video gives more doubts to the question of authorship of the gospels.. doesn't offer any data ..

[@chipmitchell23]

The traditional authorship of the Gospels-attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John-has strong support rooted in the writings of the early Church Fathers, who had direct or indirect connections to the apostles or their immediate disciples. Here’s a compelling argument that combines historical testimony, logical reasoning, and the chain of transmission from the apostles to the Church Fathers. 1. Eyewitness Testimony and Apostolic Connection Matthew (The Gospel of Matthew) Church Fathers' Testimony: Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60-130 AD): Papias, a disciple of John the Apostle, stated: "Matthew compiled the sayings [of Jesus] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as he was able." (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.39.16) Irenaeus (c. 130-202 AD): Irenaeus affirmed: "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome." (Against Heresies, 3.1.1) Connection to Apostles: Matthew, as one of Jesus’ twelve apostles, provides a direct eyewitness account of Jesus’ life and teachings, making his authorship logical and historically credible. Mark (The Gospel of Mark) Church Fathers' Testimony: Papias: Papias attributes Mark’s Gospel to Peter’s testimony: "Mark, having been the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately all that he remembered." (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.39.15) Irenaeus: "Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also handed down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter." (Against Heresies, 3.1.1) Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD): Clement noted that Mark’s Gospel was written at the request of Roman Christians who wanted Peter’s teachings preserved. Connection to Apostles: Mark, though not one of the Twelve, was a close associate of Peter (1 Peter 5:13). His Gospel is widely regarded as Peter’s eyewitness testimony recorded for a broader audience. Luke (The Gospel of Luke) Church Fathers' Testimony: Irenaeus: "Luke, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him." (Against Heresies, 3.1.1) Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian (c. 155-240 AD) both affirm Luke’s role as the author of the Gospel and Acts. Connection to Apostles: Luke, a physician and companion of Paul (Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11), provides an orderly account based on thorough investigation (Luke 1:1-4). His close association with Paul and access to other eyewitnesses give his Gospel credibility. John (The Gospel of John) Church Fathers' Testimony: Irenaeus: Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple of John), stated: "John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned on His breast, himself also published a Gospel while he was residing at Ephesus in Asia." (Against Heresies, 3.1.1) Clement of Alexandria: Clement described John’s Gospel as the “spiritual Gospel,” written to complement the Synoptics and provide deeper theological insight. Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 AD): Justin references John’s Gospel indirectly through his use of Johannine themes and vocabulary. Connection to Apostles: John, one of Jesus’ closest disciples, wrote his Gospel as an eyewitness to Jesus’ ministry (John 21:24). His authorship is the most direct of all the Gospels. 2. Early Uniformity and Transmission The consistent attribution of the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John by multiple Church Fathers across different regions of the Roman Empire (e.g., Irenaeus in Gaul, Clement in Egypt, and Tertullian in North Africa) suggests an early, widespread consensus. If the Gospels were falsely attributed, the discrepancies in authorship claims would likely have been recorded. Instead, no early competing traditions exist regarding authorship. 3. The Logical Improbability of False Attribution In the 1st and 2nd centuries, the early Church faced intense persecution and needed trustworthy documents. Associating the Gospels with lesser-known figures like Mark and Luke (rather than prominent apostles like Peter or Paul) would have made little sense unless these individuals genuinely authored the texts. The Church Fathers, many of whom had close ties to the apostles or their immediate disciples, had no motive to fabricate the authorship of the Gospels. 4. The Role of Polycarp and Papias Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 69-155 AD): A disciple of John, Polycarp transmitted Johannine traditions to Irenaeus, providing a direct link between the apostle John and the next generation of Christians. Papias: As an early bishop of Hierapolis, Papias explicitly names Mark and Matthew as Gospel authors. His testimony is highly significant, as he claims to have heard these accounts directly from those who knew the apostles. 5. Consistency with Internal Evidence The Gospels themselves reflect their traditional authors: Matthew: Contains extensive Jewish references, fitting a tax collector and disciple of Jesus. Mark: Short and action-packed, consistent with Peter’s dynamic preaching style. Luke: Detailed and investigative, fitting Luke’s identity as a physician and historian. John: Theologically rich, reflecting John’s deep relationship with Jesus. Conclusion The early Church Fathers provide robust and consistent testimony for the traditional authorship of the Gospels. Their close connections to the apostles or their disciples, combined with logical reasoning and corroborating internal evidence, make a strong case that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John authored the Gospels. The transmission of these texts through a unified early Church strengthens the reliability of these attributions.

[@zat1342]

Wow. that was dumb. Congrats

[@chipmitchell23]

@zat1342 why dumb

[@brunods4560]

Mark was written as a reaction to paul. After all , he was, first and foremost, Paul's student. All else in trying to establish a higher authority that didn't exist, but had to be "created".

[@chipmitchell23]

One of the challenges with that is Paul Quotes from the Gospels twice 1cor 11 and 1 tim 5

[@brunods4560]

@chipmitchell23 Paul's epistles came from the hands of a man called Marcion. Actually, Marcion is the first to create a Canon . Mark was a reaction to it. As was Mathew and Luke. Before Irenaeus no Early Church Fathers mentions or quotes Mark. Even irenaeus only mentions Mark to acknowledge the long ending of Mark, nowadays known to be a later expansion. As late as early 3rs century, tertullian was still using a Harmony gospel. Paul was later expanded and ammendes/redacted to match/ give authority to all later texts. Clement of Rome, for example, makes no direct mentions/quotes of any gospels. Nor Paul's works. Martyr, too, was using a Harmony gospel and calls it memoirs of the apostles.

[@chipmitchell23]

@@brunods4560 7 of Paul's 13 letters are confirmed by 98% of scholars --- 1 Thess dates to 15 to 20 yrs after the resurrection 1 &2 corin 20 to 25 yrs after the resurrection -- Your thinking is in error

[@brunods4560]

@chipmitchell23 98% os scholars means nothing when 98% are Christians believers. Have you tried refute anything i said, instead? Show me a new Testament quote from Clement of Rome, then. As I said, tertullian in early 3rd century is still using a Harmony gospel, just like Martyr. He accuses Marcion of excising from Luke what was never there, and still isn't 🙄 I have decades of study on the related topics. I know quite well the confirmation bias of christian scholars. Have you never studied the history of the church then, it seems obvious... nor have you studied the bible either? Until hellenic times, there is no record of any mosaic law among Jewish communities. Yahweh was a God in a pantheon of gods. And christianities, the original ones, we're a breakaway from Jewish tradition. Original chriatianities were quote different from.the one you adopted. In fact they actually accepted women as ministers, prophets, deaconess and in bishopric. But later roman Christianity had ro abolish that away. Marxioniam was the first widespread flavour, to which ECF themselves attest to. And the first to go far and wide was Montaniam, that reached as far as Iberian Peninaula by mid to late 2nd century, and most of north africa. Actually, Tertullian himself quite roman Church and joined the Montanists, who had two women as prophets. Did you never asked why "pseudo pau"( the extended , later version) speaks against women speaking in Church? Because of these earlier christianities accepting women , and because in Rome women had a 2nd class position in society, contrasting to much more emancipated helenised communities.

[@brunods4560]

@chipmitchell23 did you never ask yourself why it is that the first ever commentary on any of the new Testament texts only happens in the early 3rd century, by tertullian in his "against marcion" diatribe? Never asked yourself why Marcionis the person who made the church spend so much ink writing against him? Never so much ink was used against one man only.