Pick two Gospels and present the external and internal evidence for the authorship of each. Describe the purpose and intended destination of each, supporting your answer with evidence. Why is the authorship of the Gospels an important issue for Christians in today’s society?
This post explores the external and internal evidence for authorship along with the purpose and destination of Matthew and Mark followed by an explanation regarding the importance of author identification to modern readers. Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black explain that the external evidence for the Gospels primarily rests in the opinions of the early Church Fathers, whereas internal evidence rests within the evangelists’ words (132). Furthermore, the internal evidence also provides insight into the purpose and destination of the two Gospels.
Regarding the external evidence of Matthew, Lea and Black reference Eusebius’s quote from Papias who suggests that “Matthew wrote the oracle” (132). Although the debate continues over the exact meaning of Papias’s quote, D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo appropriately point out that later church fathers such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen all supported Matthean authorship (145). Likewise, Eusebius references a quote from Papias regarding the authorship of the second Gospel, which states, “Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote accurately all he remembered” (Carson and Moo, 172-173). Similar to their support of Matthean authorship, the later church fathers also support Papias’s quote regarding Mark (Carson and Moo, 173).
Regarding the internal evidence of Matthew, Lea and Black refer to the tight organizational structure and financial content (134). Since Matthew was a tax collector, it seems reasonable that he would write in an orderly manner, refer to temple tax, and humbly refer to himself as a tax collector (Lea and Black, 134). Although the internal evidence of Mark is less compelling than the external, Carson and Moo note that the uncomplicated Greek would fit the style of an individual indigenous to Jerusalem such as John Mark (175). Furthermore, John Mark’s relationship with Paul may account for the Pauline theological imprint in Mark’s gospel (Carson and Moo, 175). Finally, the Petrine overtones within Mark’s gospel also add to the external evidence of Papias (Carson and Moo, 176).
Although neither Gospel specifically provides a statement of purpose, the content of the works provide direction. Carson and Moo suggest that most assume Matthew wrote for Jewish individuals within close proximity (157). The assumption fits nicely with Lea and Black’s assertion that Matthew’s purpose was to reach the Jewish people with the teaching, “person, and work of Jesus” (139). Alternatively, Carson and Moo propose that Mark likely wrote with a Gentile Roman audience in mind based on the inferences and expressions within the second Gospel (Carson and Moo, 182-183). Accordingly, various specific purposes of Mark have emerged including eschatology, Christology, apologetics, and politics, but similar to Matthew, Mark shares Matthew’s overarching purpose of sharing the gospel of Christ with the world (Carson and Moo, 183-186).
The authorship of the Gospels is an important issue for Christians in today’s society for two primary reasons. First, proper identification of authorship supports the credibility of Scripture. The authors of the Gospels were eyewitnesses or closely connected with eyewitnesses, which undergirds the reliability of the evangelists, strengthens the faith of believers, and provides a strong apologetic to unbelievers. Second, correctly establishing the author of the Gospels facilitates a proper interpretation of the message by connecting the background of the authors with the subject matter written. Accordingly, the topic of authorship continues to be highly relevant to modern readers.
Carson, D. A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.
Lea, Thomas D., and David Alan Black. The New Testament Its Background and Message. 2nd ed. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003.
