Series: Who Wrote the Gospels?, Pt. 2 - The Theory of the Anonymous Gospels, Problem #1 - No Anonymous Manuscripts Exist
1. All four Gospels were originally published without any titles or headings identifying the authors
2. All four Gospels supposedly circulated without any titles for almost a century before anyone attributed them to Matthew, Mark, Luke or John
3. It was only much later - some time after the disciples of Jesus were dead and buried - that the titles were finally added to the manuscripts.
4. According to this theory, because the Gospels were originally anonymous, it is reasonable to conclude the none of them was actually written by an eyewitness
In this post, we will consider the first of three reasons that Pitre rejects the theory of the anonymous gospels.
Pitre writes:
"The first and perhaps biggest problem for the theory of the anonymous Gospels is this: no anonymous copies of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John have ever been found. They do not exist. As far as we know, they never have.
Instead, as New Testament scholar Simon Gathercole has demonstrated, the ancient manuscripts are unanimous in attributing these books to the apostles and their companions."1
Pitre then provides a chart of the titles in the earliest manuscripts of each of the Gospels. They are as follows:
Gospel Title Earliest Greek Manuscript Date
Gospel according to Matthew Papyrus 4 2nd century
Gospel according to Matthew Papyrus 62 2nd century
According to Matthew Codex Sinaiticus 4th century
According to Matthew Codex Vaticanus 4th century
[Go]spel according to Mat[th]e[w] Codex Washingtonianus 4th-5th century
Gospel according to Matthew Codex Alexandrinus 5th century
Gospel according to Matthew Codex Ephraemi 5th century
Gospel according to Matthew [End] Codex Bezae 5th century
According to Mark Codex Sinaiticus 4th century
According to Mark Codex Vaticanus 4th century
Gospel according to Mark Codex Washingtonianus 4th-5th century
[Gosp]el according to Mark Codex Alexandrinus 5th century
Gospel according to Mar[k][End] Codex Ephraemi 5th century
Gospel according to Mark Codex Bezae 5th century
Gospel according to Luke Papyrus 75 2nd-3rd century
According to Luke Codex Sinaiticus 4th century
According to Luke Codex Vaticanus 4th century
Gospel according to Luke Codex Washingtonianus 4th-5th century
Gospel according to Luke Codex Alexandrinus 5th century
Gospel according to Luke Codex Bezae 5th century
Gospel according to [J]ohn Papyrus 66 late 2nd century
Gospel according to John Papyrus 75 2nd-3rd century
According to John Codex Sinaitus 4th century
According to John Codex Vaticanus 4th century
According to John [End] Codex Washingtonanus 4th-5th century
Gospel according to John [End] Codex Alexandrnus 5th century
Gospel according to John Codex Bezae 5th century2
He continues:
"Notice three things about this evidence.
First, there is a striking absence of any anonymous Gospel manuscripts. That is because they don't exist. Not even one. The reason this is so significant is that one of the most basic rules in study of New Testament manuscripts (a practice know as textual criticism) is that you go back to the earliest and best Greek copies to see what they actually say. Not what you wish they said, but what they actually say. When it comes to the titles of the Gospels, not only the earliest and best manuscripts, but all of the ancient manuscripts-without exception, in every language-attribute the four Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Second, notice that there is some variation in the form of the titles (for example, some of the later manuscripts omit the word 'Gospel'). However, as New Testament scholar Michael Bird notes, there is 'absolute uniformity' in the authors to whom each of the books is attributed. One reason this is so important is because some scholars will claim that the Greek manuscripts support the idea that the titles of the Gospels were added later. For example, Bart Ehrman writes:
'Because our surviving Greek manuscripts provide such a wide variety of (different) titles for the Gospels, textual scholars have long realized that their familiar names (e.g., 'The Gospel according to Matthew') do not go back to a single 'original' title, but were added later by scribes.'
Look back at the chart showing the titles of the earliest Greek manuscripts. Where is the 'wide variety' of titles that he is talking about? The only significant difference is that some later copies, the word 'Gospel' is missing, probably because the title was abbreviated. In fact, it is precisely the familiar names of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that are found in every single manuscript we possess! According to the basic rules of textual criticism, then, if anything is original in the titles, it is the names of the authors. They are at least original as any other part of the Gospels for which we have unanimous manuscript evidence.
Third-and this is important-notice also that the titles are present in the most ancient copies of each Gospel we possess, including the earliest fragments, known as papyri (from the papyrus leaves of which they are made). For example, the earliest Greek manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew contains the title 'The Gospel according to Matthew' (Greek euangelion kata Matthaion) (Papyrus 4). Likewise, the oldest Greek copy of the beginning of the Gospel of Mark starts with the title 'The Gospel according to Mark' (Greek euangelion kata Markon). This famous manuscript-which is known as Codex Sinaiticus because it was discovered on Mount Sinai-is widely regarded as one of the most reliable ancient copies of the New Testament ever found. Along similar lines, the oldest known copy of the Gospel of Luke begins with the words 'The Gospel according to Luke' (Greek evangelion kata Loukan) (Papyrus 75). Finally, the earliest manuscript of the Gospel of John that exists is only a tiny fragment of the Gospel. Fortunately, however, the first page is preserved, and it reads: 'The Gospel according to John' (Greek euangelion kata Ionnen) (Papyrus 66)."3
Pitre ends by offering the following helpful summary:
"In short, the earliest and best copies of the four Gospels are unanimously attributed to Matthew, Mark Luke and John. There is absolutely no manuscript evidence-and thus no actual historical evidence-to support the claim that 'originally' the Gospels had no titles. In light of this complete lack of anonymous copies, New Testament scholar Martin Hengel writes:
'Let those who deny the great age and therefore the basic originality of the Gospel superscriptions in order to preserve their 'good' critical conscience give a better explanation of the completely unanimous and relatively early attestation of these titles, their origin and the names of the authors associated with them. Such an explanation has yet to be given, and it never will be."4
In the next post in this series, we will look at why Dr. Pitre believes the theory of the anonymous gospels is "incredible."
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Footnotes:
1. Brant Pitre, The Case for Jesus, p. 15.
2. Ibid., p. 16.
3. Ibid., p. 17-18.
4. Ibid.
Related Posts
Series: Who Wrote the Gospels?, Pt. 1 - The Theory of the Anonymous Gospels
Article: Who Wrote the Gospels? by Timothy Paul Jones
Book Preview: Can We Trust the Gospels? by Peter J. Williams
Comments