Previous Reason - Table of Contents - Next Reason
100 Reasons to Believe New Testament History
13. Scrutiny Regarding Authorship in Post Apostolic Times
Many liberals contend that authorship was not a significant factor in determining whether or not a particular book could be considered authoritive Scripture. According to the liberals, as long as a book contained the right doctrine, a way could be found to attribute it to an apostle.
In order to believe such a charge, however, we must suppose that the New Testament's multiple warnings about lying, deception and fraud were written and propagated by dishonest people, in an attempt to deceive people into honest living! Who can swallow such suppositions and still object to miracles?
That authorship was considered important criteria is clearly seen in Tertullian's remarks, as noted by Jeffery L. Sheler, (U.S. News and World Report religion writer), "Is the Bible True?" , Harper Collins Publishers Inc., 1989, pp. 20-21:
"… there is no evidence from the first two Christian centuries that the gospel ever were circulated without the names of the authors attached. Martin Hengel, in a careful study of practices associated with the distribution of literature in the ancient world, has observed that unambiguous titles were considered important in properly identifying widely circulated written works [see: "Studies in the Gospel of Mark", 1985, pp. 64-84]. This expectation Hengel notes, is apparent in Tertullian's criticism of Marcion for having circulated his own heavily edited version of Luke's gospel without the author's name. "A work ought not to be recognised which holds not its head erect" Tertullian wrote, or which "gives no promise of credibility from the fullness of its title and the just profession of its author." [Tertullian, "Against Marcion" 4:2].