Papias, for example, described Mark’s Gospel as a record of Peter’s teachings related to what Peter saw and heard from Jesus. The earliest writings of the church fathers simply confirm the eyewitness nature of the Gospel authors. The apostles identified themselves as eyewitnesses, shared the truth as eyewitnesses, and eventually wrote the Gospels as eyewitnesses.
This is consistent throughout the Book of Acts. When the apostles chose to share what they believed with the unbelievers in their midst, they did so by proclaiming the truth of the resurrection and their own status as eyewitnesses. It’s interesting the strategy used by the apostles to share the truth of Christianity was consistent with their role as eyewitnesses. This is consistent with the way these authors behaved in the Book of Acts. These cumulative statements are consistent with the notion the authors of the Gospels saw themselves as eyewitnesses who were recording history. While Luke clearly states he is not an eyewitness to the events in his gospel, he does tell us he is relying on the true eyewitnesses for his information (Luke 1:1). In addition, the authors of 1 John and 2 Peter identify themselves as eyewitnesses who directly observed Jesus, and were not inventing clever stories (1 John 1:1,3 and 2 Peter 1:16).
Language such as this presumes the author has seen something he can describe as eyewitness testimony. In the last chapter of John’s Gospel, the author tells us he is testifying and his testimony is true. The New Testament authors repeatedly referred to themselves as eyewitnesses, even if they did not make overt statements including their names. But there are several good reasons to believe the Gospels are, in fact, eyewitness accounts: Luke, for example, slips into first-person narrative for portions of his account in the Book of Acts, why don’t the other Gospel authors do something similar when writing their own “eyewitness accounts”? Why don’t these authors simply identify themselves more directly so we can understand their specific role as eyewitnesses? It’s certainly true the authors of the Gospels take a reserved and humble approach to their own identity within the narrative, and this is not uncommon in ancient literature of the time. After all, the accounts are not written as first-person narratives, and there are no direct statements in the Gospels suggesting they were written by people at the scene. Several skeptics have either emailed me or posted comments questioning whether or not the Gospels are truly eyewitness accounts. When you write a book seeking to evaluate the Gospels as eyewitness accounts, you shouldn’t be surprised to find some critics will attack the premise that the Gospels are eyewitness accounts in the first place.
0 kommentar(er)
