The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
The Alleged Anonymity of the Canonical Gospels
Open accessAbstract
The apparent anonymity of the Gospels is a neglected topic in New Testament studies. The present article offers an investigation of the theme. Initially, there is a survey of the work that has been done specifically on the subject, as well as how it is treated in Gospels scholarship more broadly. The main body of the argument is in two parts. First, anonymity cannot be inferred from an absence of authorial self-reference in the body of the work, and therefore the argument that the Gospels are anonymous because they do not contain the authors’ names is invalid. Secondly, and more positively, while the titles contained in the earliest Gospel manuscripts may well in their present form be secondary, this does not exclude earlier attributions of authorship made in some other way. Practical considerations make the presence of author’s names very likely. Second-century Christian literature is replete with references to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as authors of Gospels, and there is never any sense that the Gospels were anonymous or written by others. The most likely conclusion to be drawn is that the attributions of authorship are original.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Gathercole, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Gathercole, Simon
- ORCID
- Gathercole, Simon
- Venue
- The Journal of Theological Studies
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2018-09-18
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 447-476
- ISSN
- 0022-5185 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4607
- OpenAlex
- W4247171688
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 21 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 14.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- The Journal of Theological Studies (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
- Apollo
- The Journal of Theological Studies
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Historical and Linguistic Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Classical Studies and Philology
- Keywords
- Gospels, Gospel authorship, authorial anonymity, authorial self-reference, authorial attribution, New Testament canon
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review