Faith on Trial (8 page)

A man named John Mark is traditionally identified as the author of the Gospel of Mark. Again, the earliest historical source of authorship is a statement found in the writings of Papias, as preserved by Eusebius:

Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he [Peter] remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ, for he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he [Peter] remembered them. For one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything that he had heard and not to put anything fictious into the statements.
64

Irenaeus wrote that “Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself handed down to us in writing the substance of Peter’s preaching.”
65
Clement of Alexandria wrote that Peter was alive at the time this Gospel was written. Eusebius recorded that Peter “was pleased” and “authorized the book to be read in the churches.”
66
An additional writing of Clement of Alexandria, preserved only in Latin, states the following:

Mark, the follower of Peter, while Peter publicly preached the gospel at Rome before some of Caesar’s equites [knights], adduced many testimonies to Christ, in order that thereby they might be able to commit to memory what was . . . spoken by Peter . . . [and he] . . . wrote entirely what is called the Gospel according to Mark.
67

Papias, and later Irenaeus, and the Anti-Marcionite Prologue all used the word
interpreter
when referring to the work of Mark and his relationship to the apostle Peter. Papias further specifically emphasized that in this role Mark was extremely accurate and careful neither to omit information nor to include any false statement.

F. F. Bruce, in a study of the origins of the Gospels, has noted that this belief that Mark wrote his Gospel as an agent for Peter is also supported by testimony of scholars in more recent years based on the internal structure and form of this Gospel, which is similar to certain portions of the New Testament book of Acts that contain teachings identified specifically with Peter.
68

Additionally, the Greek text of the Gospel of Mark appears to preserve an “Aramaic Galilaean” idiom such as Peter would have used.
69
And C. H. Turner’s linguistic studies published in 1924 and 1925 note that Mark often uses the first-person pronouns “we” and “our” to describe events that occurred during the life of Jesus and Peter and specifically refer to Peter.
70
Other scholars believe the Gospel of Mark contains some references to events in which Mark actually participated, though that is not entirely free from doubt (see, for example, Mark 14:51–52).
71

It is thought that Mark was converted to Christianity by Peter, one of the original twelve apostles of Jesus. The Latin phrases contained in the Gospel indicate that Mark wrote this book for the use of Gentile converts,
72
an idea corroborated by contemporaneous and nearly contemporaneous writers as well as by the historical context and references in this Gospel.

Mark is believed to have initially been a “helper” for a missionary team organized by Paul and Barnabas in approximately
ad
46, as well as having had a close relationship with Peter, who described Mark as his spiritual “son” in a letter to Jewish Christians in approximately
ad
62–64 (see 1 Pet. 5:13).
73
Mark may literally have been an interpreter for Peter since it is presumed that Peter spoke primarily Aramaic, whereas evidence indicates that Mark’s primary language would have been Greek. Federal courts hold that so long as the interpreter has sufficient capacity and no motive to misrepresent the information transmitted, the interpreter is treated as the agent of the person making the original statement, no more than a conduit for the thoughts and words of the principal.
74

The term
interpreter
could also refer, however, to the use of Mark as a
hyperetai
, or helper or agent through whom Peter was speaking. Such helpers were not unusual in those times, and they were often used for recording events throughout the period reported in the New Testament. This involved the use of secretaries, or trusted helpers, to write such documents as the Gospels, Acts, and letters of Paul. Paul was a Jew and a Roman citizen who lived in Palestine during the time of Jesus and who was converted after the crucifixion (Acts 13:5; 1 Pet. 5:12; Rom. 16:22). The role of the helper was an important one; helpers were more than scribes, but they were not the authors of the scripts. Biblical scholars have noted the difference between the books of Peter, the first being written in educated Greek, indicating the use of a helper, and the second being written in a more Hebraic style. Peter refers to this helper as “Silvanus,” a “faithful brother” in a letter contained in the New Testament (1 Pet. 5:12). The authority of the persons whose thoughts or teachings were to be conveyed through the use of these helpers was never in doubt. For example, Paul occasionally verified his authorship in letters despite the use of a helper by adding his personal signature: “The greeting is in my own hand—Paul” (1 Cor. 16:21).

Authorship of the Gospel of Luke is attributed by various other writings of the New Testament to a person who was a companion of Paul. Irenaeus wrote that “Luke, the follower of Paul, set down in a book the gospel preached by his teacher.”
75
A prologue to the New Testament written in the second century also refers to Luke as being from Antioch and adds that he died in Greece.
76
The Muratorian Canon, dating from about
ad
170, stated that the Gospel of Luke was composed “in his own name on the basis of report.”
77

The style of writing in this Gospel is more scholarly than the others, and the focus on medical aspects has led many to believe Luke was a physician. That belief is supported by a statement in a letter from Paul to the church at Colosse, written in approximately
ad
60, referring to Luke as a physician (Col. 4:14).

This Gospel appears to have been written in the nature of an investigative report, at the request of or for the benefit of a particular person (it is addressed to Theophilus), as well as for the benefit of Gentile converts. The Gospel begins with these words:

Many have undertaken to compile a narrative about the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as the original eyewitnesses and servants of the word handed them down to us. It also seemed good to me, since I have carefully investigated everything from the very first, to write to you in an orderly sequence, most honorable Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things about which you have been instructed. (Luke 1:1–4)

Scholars do not know who Theophilus was. Although some firsthand knowledge is implied, Luke does not take the position in this passage that he was an actual eyewitness to every event. He uses the pronoun “we,” suggesting that he was a firsthand witness to some of the things he reports.

In his Gospel, Luke was precise. He carefully placed the time of certain events in historical context, for example, by reference to the reign of certain Roman emperors or governors of various regions. The Gospel of Luke appears to have been written after extremely diligent research, an intent indicated by his introduction.

Luke also wrote the book of Acts in the New Testament, which continues the story begun in his Gospel, commencing after the death and resurrection of Jesus. The book of Acts and other writings of the New Testament give evidence that Luke spent many years in the company of Paul in and near Jerusalem, Caesarea, and Rome, and that he knew some of the apostles, members of the family of Jesus, and members of the Herod family.
78

The first six chapters of the Gospel of Luke are contained in a papyrus held in Paris, known as P4. As discussed earlier, Thiede has dated this document close to the date of the Magdalen fragments but slightly later because, though it appears to have been prepared by a scribe in the same school, it has not been established that it came from the same codex as that of the Magdalen fragments.
79
Thiede believes that this is the earliest existing manuscript of the Gospel of Luke.

The Gospel of John expressly states that it was written by the apostle John, who was an eyewitness to the events recorded, though occasional references to John in the third person also indicate that the Gospel was written with the assistance of helpers. The Gospel ends with the authentication of the author, or of the helper on his behalf, as follows: “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true” (John 21:24).

The third-person reference is to a disciple described throughout the Gospel of John as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” By analysis of the internal evidence of the testimony, that is, the structure of the narrative, most scholars have accepted that the reference is to the apostle John. The reference to “we” in the quoted passage is believed to be to a group of friends and disciples who acted as helpers, or scribes, and edited and assured public distribution of the Gospel on his behalf.
80
This is the only one of the four Gospels that affirmatively contains a statement claiming to be written by a direct observation of an eyewitness. For example, the apostle is mentioned as being present at the Last Supper prior to the crucifixion of Jesus, being with Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane after the last supper, as an eyewitness at the foot of the cross and with Peter at the tomb of Jesus after his burial, and at a resurrection appearance of Jesus in Galilee.
81

John’s authorship of this Gospel is referred to by many of the early Christian writers. Polycarp, who had been a disciple of John and was burned alive for his beliefs, and Ignatius, who died in the arena in Rome in
ad
115, were both greatly influenced by this particular Gospel. Ignatius referred to John as one of the twelve disciples of Jesus and quoted from the Gospel.
82
The Gnostic Basilides, written in approximately
ad
130, and Justin Martyr, writing at about
ad
150, both referred to the apostle John. Tatian, a disciple of Justin Martyr, writing in approximately the same period, mentions the Gospel itself. Other works from the second century by Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian of Carthage, and the Gnostic Heracleon support the view that John was the author of this Gospel.
83
Irenaeus wrote about
ad
180 that John himself produced his Gospel.
84
A passage in a prologue written for the Gospel of John near the end of the second century also states that John wrote it himself and that the book was dictated to a helper for publication.
85
The prologue derived this information from Papias’s
Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord,
written in approximately
ad
130 and since lost.

The style of the Gospel of John indicates that it was written from the perspective of a Jew but with a view to those who must be brought into the Christian fold. He writes with obvious familiarity of Jewish customs and the portions of the Old Testament that were prescribed for reading by Jews in the synagogue and at religious festivals. He also shows a familiarity with Jewish laws of evidence, the habits of the rabbis and high priests, and methods of argument that have generally impressed scholars.
86

The Gospel of John speaks to your soul. It is the most poetic of the four and contains not only a report of events observed but also the testimony of the witness about his understanding, or opinion, as to what these events actually meant. Scholars have criticized John’s Gospel because of this style, which they have characterized as indicating a much later period of writing, and because of the interpretation John provides. This style of imagery and writing was at one time grounds for the belief that the fourth Gospel was created by someone later than the generation of Jesus, someone living around
ad
100 or later.

That thinking has been eroded, however, not only by other evidence supporting the earlier dating of the Gospel, described above, but also by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The writings of the sect of Essenes and others inhabiting the cave dwellings employ the same style of language and imagery as that used in the Gospel of John. The Dead Sea Scrolls have established an early date for the use of such imagery because, again, the latest possible date for the manuscripts found in the caves of Qumran was
ad
68.
87
They show that the Gospel of John reflects the heart and soul of Palestine before the Roman invasion.

A comparison of the use of similar phraseology in the Gospel of John and the Dead Sea Scrolls is revealing. Such phrases as “conflict between light and darkness,” the “spirit of truth,” the “light of life,” “walking in the darkness,” “children of light,” and “eternal life” in the Dead Sea Scrolls give evidence that John’s style of writing was typical of the early and mid-first century, in contrast to previous assertions of scholars.
88
Comparison to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are dated no later than
ad
68, further confirms a date for the Gospel of John prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Romans.

Additionally, further evidence that the Gospel of John was written earlier: F. F. Bruce has noticed what he calls a “remarkable” similarity between the style and imagery of the Gospel of John and an early collection of Christian hymns from the period between
ad
50 and 100. Likewise, Robinson has compared the similarities between this imagery and the speculative and mystical influence of the Old Testament that is evident in other New Testament writings that have been dated between
ad
50 and 60.
89