Smoodock's Blog

We are often told that no one knows who the writers of the Gospel narratives are, because they don’t identify themselves. They are anonymous. Well, that isn’t the whole truth, and critical scholarship tries to pass that supposition off as superior analysis. Nevertheless, in my opinion, it is nothing more than lazy scholarship, if not bigoted. For example, we are told by the church fathers in the second century AD that, when Peter was witnessing to the church at Rome, they were so impressed with what Peter said, they asked Mark, Peter’s assistant, to write out Peter’s Gospel for them, which Mark did. Moreover, we are also told that Matthew wrote out the Gospel narrative identified by his name, and it is implied that the other disciples had input in that narrative. There is no proof that this isn’t so, and nearly everyone admits that second and third century scholarship had much more data available to them, concerning the first century AD, than we do. Yet, these records are passed over in favor of modern subjective opinion.

The authorship of the Gospels of Luke and John are not so dependent upon second and third century authority. There is enough internal evidence on the pages of the New Covenant text to logically connect the dots and reasonably decide who the authors are. For example, most scholarship admits that both Luke and Acts were written by the same author. Identify the author of one, and you know the author of both. There is an interesting change in personal pronouns in Acts 16:10. Previously the pronouns were ‘he’ and ‘him,’ referring to Paul, and ‘they’ and ‘them,’ when referring to Paul and his party. In verse-10 the plural pronouns change to ‘we’ and ‘us’ indicating that the author had joined Paul and his party at Mysia.

We know that Luke became one of Paul’s closest companions (Colossians 4:14; 2Timothy 4:11; Philemon 1:24). Moreover, we also know that Luke was called Lucius. It is the same name. Lucius was at Antioch, when Paul and Barnabas were sent out on their first missionary journey to Galatia (Acts 13:1), and there we are also told that Lucius was from Cyrene. Additionally, we are told that men from Cyprus and Cyrene originally evangelized the gentiles in Antioch (Acts 11:20), so Luke may have been on a missionary journey, himself, when he met up with Paul in Mysia. Furthermore, when Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans he was at Corinth (Romans 16:1). He mentions he is at Chenchrea, which is that city’s eastern seaport, and Lucius (Luke) is with him. It is at this time that the ‘we’ and ‘us’ passages begin again (Acts 20:5-6), as Paul makes his final journey back to Jerusalem before he is arrested. Thus, the author of Acts and Luke seem to be Luke/Lucius of Cyrene.

The author of the Gospel of John is discovered similarly. First of all, we are told the author is the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 21:20-24). We also know that he is **not** one of the Twelve as is widely assumed, because Jesus identified his betrayer as one of the Twelve (Mark 14:18-20). Shortly afterward, Peter asked the disciple whom Jesus loved to ask Jesus who the betrayer was (John 13:21-24). If the disciple whom Jesus loved was one of the Twelve, and, if Jesus said one of the Twelve was the betrayer, why would Peter ask him to find out who the betrayer was? It might have been him! Therefore, this disciple, and author of the Gospel of John, cannot be one of the Twelve. So, who is he?

If we consider only the four Gospel narratives tracing out whom the text says Jesus loved, we find out that Jesus loved the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:16-22; Mark 10:17-21; Luke 18:18-23). He also loved Lazarus, Mary and Martha (John 11:1-5). The man, Lazarus, is so named only in the Gospel of John. Could he be the rich young ruler? We know only that of all those named in the Gospel narratives these two men are singled out in the text, saying Jesus loved them (or him, if it’s one man). If we continue to Acts, we find that a rich man sold his possessions and laid them at the disciples’ feet, and his name was Joseph, but they surnamed him Barnabas (Acts 4:36). We also know of a Joseph, who was one of Jesus disciples that came to him at night, was a ruler (Matthew 27:57; Mark 15:42-46; Luke 23:50-53; John 19:38-42). Interestingly, only the writer of the Gospel of John believed he had the prerogative to say anything negative about this man, who took care of Jesus’ body and laid it in his own tomb. The Synoptics expressed nothing but praise for him. Could this Joseph be Barnabas, who sold his goods to give to the poor, something the rich young ruler couldn’t do when asked to do so by Jesus? Certainly, nothing is set in stone. Indeed, nothing of antiquity can be. Nevertheless, the dots do connect well, and point to one man in the Gospel narratives and Acts. I believe it is reasonable to say the man whom the Apostles called Barnabas was the disciple whom Jesus loved and was the writer of the fourth Gospel narrative.[1]

________________________________________________

[1] See my earlier study: Barnabas Whom Jesus Loved.