The three synoptic (unified-vision) gospels – Matthew, Mark, and Luke – plus (non-unified-vision) John – were originally written decades after Jesus is supposed to have lived. The earliest known renditions were anonymous and had no name ascribed to them. Later, as the Church gained power and influence – Biblically significant names were added – as you can see. None of this makes sense as all four gospels are written in different standards of Greek – with John being the best. As Palestine was occupied by the Romans (who wrote in Latin) – these texts were probably written in a Greek colony – such as Alexandra in Egypt, for example. Bear in mind that all of the disciples of Jesus were illiterate peasant-Jews from Palestine who spoke Syriac-Aramaic. To date – NO- example of the Four Gospels have been discovered written in Hebrew (no one) – odd if you think of the importance that Christian give to the presence of Jesus and the supposed trouble he is supposed to have caused the Jews (he fulfilled Jewish scripture and then denied the validity of Jewish theology). Mark is the earliest gospel with John the latest (spanning between 70-120 CE) – so the order is incorrect and should read Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John. Who were these people? Well, they were not all disciples as many people misconceive:
Matthew the Tax-Collector was a “Disciple” of Jesus
Mark was NOT a disciple but was the “Secretary” of Peter (Peter was a Disciple)
Luke was NOT a disciple but was the “Travelling Companion” of Paul (Paul was NOT a disciple)
John was the “Beloved-Disciple” of Jesus
A “disciple” is defined as “those who walked with Jesus” – as Paul never met the physical Jesus – he is NOT a disciple. Although Luke writes in great detail – he too was not a disciple as he never met Jesus. The synotic gospels all tell the same basic story about Jesus with the odd contradiction here and there – but John writes more like a Gnostic text – ignoring the virgin birth and the resurrection. Of course, there are many other gospels associated with the disciples (such as “St Thomas”) which the Catholic Church purged from the Bible for various nefarious reasons. But here is the problem – although I can explain who these names are supposed to be (or not be) – they were NOT originally associated with the four gospels themselves. The Church minions who made-up these associations obviously knew what I have conveyed above – and chose these names to make some kind of point that nobody understands anynore. Indeed, most people think these four names are all disciples and that the gospels are eye-witness accounts – but there is much the modern Church would be happy for you not see, ponder on, or consider. For instance, Matthew (27:51-53) has this say about the after-effects of the resurrection of Jesus:
’51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and [a] went into the holy city and appeared to many people.’
If this actually had happened we would have incredible eye-witness accounts penned by Jews, Romans, and followers of Jesus (reformed Jews) – but no – there are no records of any of this occurring and many in the Church find such claims to be embarrassing for their faith. I suspect a group of non-Jewish Greeks wanted to be associated with the otherwise xenophobic and racist Jewish theology (which had evolved out of Babylonian philosophy and history) and concocted a miraculous story of a “magic-man” that no one outside the movement ever met or independently verified as existing. Jesus the “magic-man” made it acceptable for non-Jews to pretend to be Jews – and the Jews hated it just as much as the gentiles loved it! Whatever the case, no one knows who originally wrote the four gospels included in the received Bible (there are many more gospels discovered in the 20th century which are now available for study).
Reference:
How Jesus Became God – Bart D Ehrman
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 