Skeptic Challenges Frank on Who Wrote the Gospels

Have you ever wondered if the Gospel writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were truly the authors of the New Testament? Well, Frank has some pretty convincing evidence that confirms their authorship. Share your thoughts on Frank's response in the comments below!

📚 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀

🤝 𝗦𝗨𝗣𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧 𝗖𝗥𝗢𝗦𝗦𝗘𝗫𝗔𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗘𝗗 (𝗧𝗔𝗫-𝗗𝗘𝗗𝗨𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗕𝗟𝗘) 🤝

👥 𝗦𝗢𝗖𝗜𝗔𝗟 𝗠𝗘𝗗𝗜𝗔 👥

🗄️ 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗖𝗘𝗦 🗄️

🎙️ 𝗦𝗨𝗕𝗦𝗖𝗥𝗜𝗕𝗘 𝗧𝗢 𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗣𝗢𝗗𝗖𝗔𝗦𝗧 🎙️

#NewTestament #Gospels #Apologetics #churchhistory

[Witness]

Brothers and sisters,

Please pray for me. For more then 10 years I have been struggling with debilitating sickness that's made my life unberable. I am in my mid 30s and would still love to be able to have strength to serve my Savior.

Jesus is my Healer. Thank you all 🙏🏻

[grahck]

I remember an encounter once when I was in college where the subject of the authorship of the Gospels came up. My professor went through each of the gospels and laid out very sound reasons why he believed in the traditional authorship. When he came to Mark, he surprised everyone when he made the claim that Mark was a partial eye witness to some of the later events in his gospel along with Peter, who was his primary source. His proof was in Mark 14:51 where it talks about a young man wrapped in a blanket following Jesus and the Jews who arrested Jesus. They grabbed for the young man, tore his blanket off, and the young man fled naked back home. My professor went on to explain that ONLY Mark contains this tidbit, which leaves him to conclude that Mark was that young man and witnessed the arrest of Jesus. I have always found that to be an interesting view, and so far I've not found anyone who makes a similar claim.

[AaronNazzy]

I’m just at the point in my life, where I will choose to blindly believe anything the Bible says about God. I’ve already gone through and researched as much as I could on it and everything I’ve seen in the Bible represents/translates into real life. No matter what I see, nothing will change my mind about what’s real and what’s not. I will always put my faith in the Lord.

[festushaggen]

It's ok to question who wrote them but bring the counter evidence if your going to say the given authors didn't write the books.

[facelessshadow]

In my journey, I’ve come to understand that God responds to faith, not to knowledge. Faith is a matter of the heart, while knowledge is the matter of the brain. God doesn’t care about how much “knowledge” we have, but how much “Faith” we have. Glory to God 🙌

[refusebdcvd]

The authorship doesn't invalidate the message.

[mikejurney]

Well, obviously those books were written by people who knew the landscape, traditions, and the common names of people used at the time. For example the pool of Saloam was destroyed with Jerusalem in AD 70. So someone writing after that wouldn't have even known about it. So the books must have been written before AD 70 by people who had eye witness experience with the people and events described.

[isheworthy]

Plus, the authors of books weren't mysteries at this point in time. Books were rare enough that when any book or manuscript gained popularity, everyone knew who wrote it. Books were known by their authors, not authors by their books as it is today. When someone referenced "Matthew's gospel, " everyone would have known exactly what they were talking about.

[thegoodtest]

Peter 1:21 New King James Version (NKJV)"For prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. "

[william]

If four different eye witness apostles had written four Gospels with their names assigned, the skeptics would say; 'So what they were all biased sources because of being Jesus original disciples', or 'how convenient that actual anonymous works were all assigned to known disciples for credibility'. So I think the mix of authorships that we've ended up with is more convincing the way it is.

[atdepth]

Bravo for that dude for speaking his mind

[Freethinkingtheist]

If I found out the four Gospels were written by Dave, Steve, Sammy and Stu, would it make any difference as to whether or not I believed them? Not a jot.

[theworldisastrangeplace]

The authorship of the Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—in the New Testament is a topic of significant scholarly debate and analysis. The traditional view, which has been held for centuries in Christian tradition, attributes these works to the apostles Matthew and John, and to Mark and Luke, who were associates of the apostles Peter and Paul, respectively. However, modern biblical scholarship often views these attributions as symbolic rather than literal.

Matthew: Traditionally attributed to the Apostle Matthew, a tax collector and one of the twelve disciples of Jesus. However, most contemporary scholars doubt this, noting the Gospel's reliance on Mark and its highly structured nature, suggesting it was written by a learned author, possibly a Jewish-Christian scribe, rather than an eyewitness.

Mark: The earliest of the Gospels, traditionally ascribed to John Mark, a companion of Peter. This association comes from Papias, an early church father. Modern scholars often agree with this attribution, but they also emphasize that the Gospel was likely shaped by the community's experiences and needs.

Luke: Attributed to Luke, a physician and companion of Paul. This view is based on the writing style and some early Christian writings. However, many modern scholars view it as the work of an unknown Christian who may have had access to some historical sources.

John: Traditionally credited to John the Apostle, but many modern scholars believe it was written by a later follower of Jesus, possibly within a "Johannine" community. The Gospel differs significantly in style and content from the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), suggesting a different authorship.

While traditional views attribute the Gospels to specific individuals closely connected to the life of Jesus, modern scholarship often regards these attributions as uncertain, suggesting that the Gospels were likely compiled and written by early Christian communities based on oral traditions, written sources, and the needs of their communities at the time. The exact identities of the authors remain a subject of ongoing academic discussion and research.

The earliest manuscripts we have of the Gospels were written in Koine Greek. The consensus among scholars is the original language used for the Gospels was Koine Greek. Not a language that Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John would have been known. These were not the most educated individuals. So, there really isn’t a way for any of the assigned authors to have written those texts. The authors for these books were not assigned at the time of composition. Authorship wasn’t until in the 2nd century and they were not canonized until the 4th century.

For reference, I have read the Bible approximately 50 times (cover to cover) in various versions including the Hebrew version. The problem with most people who ask Frank questions is they come ill prepared to make their case. They have a question and Frank is amazing at deflecting and often reframing the question to fit his answer. For example, Frank was asked "If God is all powerful why didn't he destroy evil from the beginning?" This is a fair question. Frank's response was reframed the question to be "Then if he does who should he start with you or me? Since we are all evil by nature, where does he start?" He completely reframed the question. The gentleman asking the question was asking why God didn't destroy evil . Frank gave no answer to that question, instead he reframed the question to be about today. This is a typical tactic that Frank employs in his Q&A sessions.

[Tguchi]

This is crazy. I’ve talked to this kid on my campus before and we talked about similar questions concerning all the “what ifs” surrounding deep theological issues. He’s really smart, but he is overconfident in his own understanding and his mind is pretty made up. He is open to conversations though, and truly wants to/believes he is seeking the truth, so I commend him for that

[gabepettinicchio]

In every way, we must rely on the "Spirit led" church. As claimed in Timothy, the church is "the pillar & foundation of the truth." --- Any & all historical information (Gospels & letters) in the canonized Bible, quotes & Epistles from the Early Church Father's (ECFs) who at times disagreed, but still submitted to the authority of that church ... comes from that Church that was promised by the Lord to be guided by the Spirit of Truth ... to the truth until the end of the world.

Why is it when Frank speaks of the ECFs, he only uses them to defend his particular claim, or prove his argument, but remains silent in crediting or mentioning that particular church, from which all the ECFs belonged? I would urge all who haven't read all their works to do so, and judge for yourself, which church that was & still, is with us today. Happy New Year & God Bless, all!

[AdamLeis]

The guy has good questions and is asking critically. Kudos to him. Frank's end point is apt though: "What is reasonable based on the evidence we have?" All historical questions need to ask that one. History is too often burdened with unrealistic standards for hard sciences, but no history is testable the way physics (et al.) are. Good clip

[andiswandumiso]

Hello sir Frank I would like to ask why synoptic gospel concerning the resurrection contradict John's account of the resurrection as well as the Passover accounts

[bartekabuz]

you can make up excuses all day long to reject Jesus but you cannot escape the truth

[monkkeygawd]

ALSO, PAPIAS SAID CRAZY THINGS SUCH AS:

Judas did not die by hanging, but lived on, having been cut down before choking:

"Judas walked about as an example of godlessness in this world, having been bloated so much in the flesh that he could not go through where a chariot goes easily, indeed not even his swollen head by itself. For the lids of his eyes, they say, were so puffed up that he could not see the light, and his own eyes could not be seen, not even by a physician with optics, such depth had they from the outer apparent surface. And his genitalia appeared more disgusting and greater than all formlessness, and he bore through them from his whole body flowing pus and worms, and to his shame these things alone were forced [out]. And after many tortures and torments, they say, when he had come to his end in his own place, from the place became deserted and uninhabited until now from the stench, but not even to this day can anyone go by that place unless they pinch their nostrils with their hands, so great did the outflow from his body spread out upon the earth."

This is CONTRADICTORY to the supposed eyewitness Gospels he touted, eh? Hmmmm. Maybe Paias wasnt the most reliable source 🤔

[aadschram]

“I would not have believed the gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic Church had induced me.” (St. Augustine, Contra Ep. Fund., V, 6.)