Price does well to start off his exegesis of some 54 early Christian texts, both canonical and non, with a discussion of Christian bishop and Gnostic "heretic" Marcion (c.110-160 ), as it is universally accepted that Marcion was the first producer of a "New Testament" canon.D." we read in the commentaries this translation of the Bible contains, "there was, in any case, no account by which one might have recognised a collection of evangelic writings". Tricot writes (1960) in the commentary to his translation of the New Testament: "Very early on, from the beginning of the Second century A.D., it became a habit to say "Gospel' meaning the books that Saint Justin around 150 A. had also called "The Memoirs of the Apostles'." Unfortunately, assertions of this kind are sufficiently common for the public to have ideas on the date of the Gospels which are mistaken.Eventually, the "sacred authors" wrote the four Gospels. We must keep in mind that in the ancient world, authorship was designated in several ways: First, the author was clearly the individual who actually wrote the text with his own pen.Each author, guided by the Holy Spirit, selected from the events and teachings of our Lord which perhaps they had witnessed or which had been handed on either orally or in written form. Second, the individual who dictated the text to a secretary or scribe was still considered the author. Throughout this Gospel, the numerous details indicate the author was an eyewitness. Whether the actual saint wrote word-for word, whether a student did some later editing, or whether a student actually wrote what had been taught by the saint, we must remember the texts — whole and entire — are inspired by the Holy Spirit.In a similar way, if each member of a family had to write a family history, each member would tell basically the same story, but each member would also highlight certain details he considered important and would keep in mind who would be reading the family history. Whether the final version of the Gospels we have is the word-for-word work of the saints [they are named for] is hard to say. The Gospel of Mark is commonly dated about the year 65-70 in conjunction with the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem. Matthew is identified with the tax collector called as an Apostle (Mt 9:9-13). Nevertheless, some scholars doubt the saint's direct authorship because we only have the Greek version, not the Aramaic, and no citations are made from the Aramaic version in Church literature. Paul (Col ), has consistently been recognized in Christian tradition as the author of the third Gospel, beginning with St. Interestingly, with the recent scholarship on the Dead Sea Scrolls, new evidence points to the authorship of the traditional authors. Reginald Fuller, an Episcopalian and Professor Emeritus at Virginia Theological Seminary, with Dr.
If the author of the Gospel of John were an eyewitness, presumably the author would have known that Jesus and his compatriots were permitted to enter the synagogues.
Using virtually entirely different sources, including foreign-language sources as well, Price comes to the same logical conclusion. Because this fascinating area of study is evidently more widespread and these facts more well known than mainstream academia lets on.
When these facts are clearly understood, it becomes abundantly evident that, rather than representing a free-flowing transmission of mystical and divine origin, the New Testament is a highly contrived text worked over numerous times for the specific purpose of establishing iron-clad dogma and doctrine.
The supposition that the author was one and the same with the beloved disciple is often advanced as a means of insuring that the evangelist did witness Jesus' ministry.
Two other passages are advanced as evidence of the same - and . does not claim that the author was the one who witnessed the scene but only that the scene is related on the sound basis of eyewitness.