Gospel

Gospel originally meant the Christian message ("the gospel"), but in the second century AD the term euangélion (Koinē Greek: εὐαγγέλιον, lit. 'good news', from which the English word originated as a calque) came to be used also for the books in which the message was reported.[1] In this sense a gospel can be defined as a loose-knit, episodic narrative of the words and deeds of Jesus Christ, culminating in his trial and death, and concluding with various reports of his post-resurrection appearances.[2]

Gospels represent a variation of Greco-Roman biography.[3][4] They are meant to convince people that Jesus was a miracle-working holy man and provide examples to emulate.[5][6][7] As such, they present the Christian message of the second half of the first century AD.[8] Biblical scholars are therefore cautious of relying on the gospels uncritically as historical documents, and although they afford a good idea of Jesus' public career, critical study has largely failed to distinguish his original ideas from those of the later Christian authors,[9][10] and the focus of research has therefore shifted to Jesus as remembered by his followers,[11][12][note 1][note 2] and understanding the Gospels themselves.[13]

The canonical gospels are the four which appear in the New Testament. They were written between AD 66 and 110.[note 3][16][17][18] The texts are anonymous, and their authorship is debated in scholarship.[19][note 4] Mark was the first to be written,[26][27] followed by Matthew and Luke, which forms a two-volume work with the Acts of the Apostles.[note 5][30] The author of John may have been aware of the synoptic gospels, and the gospel's historical context remains debated.[31][32] Scholars differ on the reliability of the traditions found in the gospels.[33][34][35][36] The synoptic gospels are the primary sources for reconstructing Christ's ministry, while John is used less since it differs from the synoptics.[37][note 6] Current research emphasizes the gospels as the works of creative authors with their own editorial and theological agendas.[38]

Many non-canonical gospels were also written after the four canonical gospels, and like them advocate for the theological views of their authors.[39][40] Important examples include the gospels of Thomas, Peter, Judas, and Mary; infancy gospels such as that of James (the first to introduce the perpetual virginity of Mary); and gospel harmonies such as the Diatessaron.

## Contents

* 1 Etymology
* 2 Canonical gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
* 2.1 Contents
* 2.2 Composition
* 2.3 Genre and historical reliability
* 2.4 Textual history and canonisation
* 3 Non-canonical (apocryphal) gospels
* 4 In Islam
* 4.1 Criticism
* 5 See also
* 6 Notes
* 7 References
* 8 Sources
* 9 External links

## Etymology

Gospel is the Old English translation of the Hellenistic Greek term εὐαγγέλιον (evangélion), meaning "good news";[41] this may be seen from analysis of ευαγγέλιον (evangélion) (εὖ (ef) "good" + ἄγγελος (ángelos) "messenger" + -ιον (ion) diminutive suffix). The Greek term was Latinized as evangelium in the Vulgate, and translated into Latin as bona annuntiatio. In Old English, it was translated as gōdspel (gōd "good" + spel "news"). The Old English term was retained as gospel in Middle English Bible translations and hence remains in use also in Modern English.

Encyclopaedia Britannica defines gospel as stemming from gōdspel "good story/news," a calque translating Latin evangelium from Greek εὐαγγέλιον "good news."[42]

## Canonical gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John

"Four Gospels" redirects here. For other uses, see Four Gospels (disambiguation).

Canonical Gospels

The first page of the Gospel of Mark in Armenian, by Sargis Pitsak, 14th century

Information
Religion| Christianity
Language| Koine Greek
Period| Apostolic Age
Chapters| 89
Verses| 3,779

### Contents

The four canonical gospels share the same basic outline of the life of Jesus: he begins his public ministry in conjunction with that of John the Baptist, calls disciples, teaches and heals and confronts the Pharisees, dies on the cross, and is raised from the dead.[43] Each has its own distinctive understanding of him and his divine role[40][44] and modern scholars recognize their differences over attempts at harmonization.[45] The patterns of parallels and differences found in the gospels are typical of ancient biographies about actual people and history, and are thus unproblematic if not read anachronistically.[46] According to the manuscript evidence and citation frequency by the early Church Fathers, Matthew and John were the most popular gospels while Luke and Mark were less popular in the early centuries of the Church.[47]

The gospels according to Matthew, Mark and Luke are termed the "synoptic gospels" (from Ancient Greek: σύνοψις, romanized: synopsis, "seeing all together") because they present very similar accounts of the life of Jesus.[48] Mark begins with the baptism of the adult Jesus and the heavenly declaration that he is the son of God; he gathers followers and begins his ministry, and tells his disciples that he must die in Jerusalem but that he will rise from the dead; in Jerusalem, he is at first acclaimed but then rejected, betrayed, and crucified, and when the women who have followed him come to his tomb, they find it empty.[49] Whilst not as overt as John's Gospel (the fourth and non-synoptic gospel) scholars have found that the synoptic gospels portray Jesus as divine in various ways.[50] Mark apparently believes that he had a normal human parentage and birth, and makes no attempt to trace his ancestry back to King David or Adam;[51][52] it originally ended at Mark 16:8 and had no post-resurrection appearances, although Mark 16:7, in which the young man discovered in the tomb instructs the women to tell "the disciples and Peter" that Jesus will see them again in Galilee, hints that the author knew of the tradition.[53]

The authors of Matthew and Luke added different infancy and resurrection narratives to the story they found in Mark.[54] Luke forms a two-volume work with its sequel, the Acts of the Apostles.[30][55] Barker suggests that Luke supplemented Matthew's nativity by adding Mary's perspective to Matthew's Joseph.[56] Recent scholarship focuses on explaining the gospels' relationship in terms of ancient compositional practices and comparisons with other ancient historical biographers.[57] Each also makes subtle theological changes to Mark, though James Barker argues this is exaggerated, with ancient rhetorical practices explaining many differences in the gospels instead.[56] The Markan miracle stories, for example, confirm Jesus' status as an emissary of God (which was Mark's understanding of the Messiah), but in Matthew they demonstrate his divinity,[58] and the "young man" who appears at Jesus' tomb in Mark becomes a radiant angel in Matthew.[59][60] Luke is not especially critical of the content of Mark but mainly corrects his source's grammatical syntax, lection, and style instead.[61][62]

John, the most overtly theological, is the first to make Christological judgements outside the context of the narrative of Jesus's life.[40] He presents a significantly different picture of Jesus's career,[48] omitting any mention of his early life, baptism, and temptation.[48] John knows and presupposes synoptic stories and thusly emphasizes other narratives rather than recounting every passage.[63] The chronology is also different, describing the passage of three years in Jesus's ministry in contrast to the single year of the synoptics, placing the cleansing of the Temple at the beginning, and the Last Supper on the day before Passover.[64] However, there are also verses such as Mark 14:49 and Matthew 23:37 viewed as hints of a longer ministry in the synoptic gospels.[65] Ancient writing practices involved such chronological displacement and changes, with even reliable biographers including Plutarch displaying them.[66] According to Delbert Burkett, the Gospel of John is the only gospel to call Jesus God, though other scholars including Larry Hurtado and Michael Barber view a possible divine Christology in the synoptics.[67][68][69] In contrast to Mark, where Jesus hides his identity as messiah, in John he openly proclaims it.[70]

### Composition

Like the rest of the New Testament, the four canonical gospels were written in Koine Greek.[71] The Gospel of Mark probably dates from around AD 70,[16] Matthew and Luke around AD 80–90,[17][72] and John AD 90–100,[18][73] which puts their composition likely within the lifetimes of various eyewitnesses, including Jesus's own family.[14][15] Despite the traditional ascriptions, all four are anonymous, as was common for bios of the time; biographies by Plutarch and Suetonius were also originally anonymous as well.[74][75] They are generally agreed not to represent eyewitness accounts, though this may partly be the result of dubious form-critical assumptions.[20] Most scholars view the author of Luke–Acts as an eyewitness to Paul.[76][77][78] However, Paul never met Jesus. Before the gospels were written, he claimed to have had a vision of Jesus after his death, and later met his brother James.[79][80] The form-critics largely viewed the gospels as compilers of transmitted traditions, but the gospels are now seen as biographers engaging in literarily creative and imaginative form of art (which did involve claiming consulting eyewitnesses).[21][22][23][24][25] Though the texts are anonymous, many scholars such as Simon J. Gathercole have defended the attributions to Luke and John, though many others have abandoned this view.[81][82][83][84]

The form critics of the 20th century viewed the gospels as compilers of tradition analogous to other collections of folktales by primitive communities steeped in eschatology, but today scholars recognize the gospels as Greco-Roman biographies by conscious authors with their own theological agendas.[85][note 7] Burkett argues the emergence of the gospels can be summarized by oral traditions passed on as unordered units, written collections of miracle stories and sayings, and proto-gospels preceding and serving as sources for the gospels, which combined proto-gospels, written collections, and oral tradition.[89] The dedicatory preface of Luke testifies to the existence of previous accounts of the life of Jesus.[90] According to Chris Keith, there is no incontrovertible evidence the gospel traditions circulated as written narratives, testimonia, or notes prior to Mark.[91]

Mark is generally agreed to be the first gospel.[26] Source criticism has largely fallen out of favor in recent gospels scholarship, though some elements remain.[25][27] Although most scholars believe Matthew and Luke independently used Mark and a hypothesized Q source, alternative hypotheses that posit the direct use of Matthew by Luke or vice versa without Q are increasing in popularity within scholarship.[28][29][30][note 8] Modern scholarship emphasizes the evangelists' authorial activity over positing hypothetical sources.[92] Honore offers a statistical classification of the number of words in the single, double, and triple traditions. [93] The synoptic gospels adapt their sources more conservatively than other ancient historians, though the parallels and variations of the Synoptic gospels are typical of ancient historical biographies.[94][95] The canonical gospels represent a Jesus tradition and were enveloped by oral storytelling and performances during the early years of Christianity, rather than being redactions or literary responses to each other.[96] Mark, Matthew, and Luke are called the "synoptic gospels" because of their close similarities of content, arrangement, and language.[97] Alan Kirk praises Matthew in particular for his "scribal memory competence" and "his high esteem for and careful handling of both Mark and Q", which makes claims the latter two works are significantly theologically or historically different dubious.[98][99] The author of John may have known the synoptics, but did not use them in the way that Matthew and Luke used Mark.[100][101] The increase in support for or the view that the author of the Gospel of John knew the synoptic gospels is correlated with the decline of the signs source hypothesis,[102] and there is currently considerable debate over the gospel's social, religious and historical context.[31][32][note 9]

All four also use the Jewish scriptures, by quoting or referencing passages, interpreting texts, or alluding to or echoing biblical themes.[104] Such use can be extensive: Mark's description of the Parousia (second coming) is made up almost entirely of quotations from scripture.[105] Matthew is full of quotations and allusions,[106] and although John uses scripture in a far less explicit manner, its influence is still pervasive.[107] According to Wesley Allen, their source was the Greek version of the scriptures, called the Septuagint and they do not seem familiar with the original Hebrew,[108] though other scholars point out that Matthew in particular has quotations closer to the Masoretic and could understand Hebrew.[109][110][note 10]

### Genre and historical reliability

Richard Burridge's comparison of the Gospels with writings from the Graeco-Roman world has led to a broad scholarly consensus that the Gospels are a subset of the genre of ancient biography (bios),[4] changing how researchers view their literary form and historical intent.[111] Burridge demonstrated this through detailed comparison that the Gospels share features, such as focus on one central person, anecdotes, and accounts of deeds and death, which made them recognizable as serious life narratives to people in the first and second centuries.[112] Ancient biographies were concerned with providing examples for readers to emulate while preserving and promoting the subject's reputation and memory; the gospels were propaganda and preaching[6] meant to convince that Jesus was a miracle-working holy man.[5][7] As such, they present the Christian message of the second half of the first century,[8] and biblical scholars are cautious of relying on the gospels uncritically as historical documents,[113][37][114][note 11][note 12] though they provide a good idea of the career of Jesus.[115][note 13] Bond states that many chreia found in the gospels are literary creations rather than reservoirs of oral tradition; while many are rooted in actual history, they have been reshaped to emphasize aspects of Jesus.[116]

Scholars since the 19th century have viewed the gospel of John as less reliable than the Synoptic gospels.[117][118] Since the third quest, however, John's gospel is seen as having more reliability than previously thought or sometimes even more reliable than the synoptics.[119][120] The John, Jesus, and History Seminar has contributed to the overthrow of the previous consensus that John was of no historical value, and many scholars now see it as a source for the Historical Jesus.[121] While there are numerous variants present in Biblical manuscripts and changes by scribes, there is a "macrolevel stability", and scholars study the relations between the gospels with the view that the texts published in the late first and second centuries did not significantly differ from 21st century reconstructions.[122][note 14] Some of these are considered significant,[124] an example being Matthew 1:18, altered to imply the pre-existence of Jesus.[125] For these reasons, modern scholars are cautious of relying on the gospels uncritically, and critical study can attempt to distinguish the original ideas of Jesus from those of later authors.[126]

Scholars generally agree that John has historical value. Mark Allan Powell has observed that scholars now recognize primitive material in the Gospel of John that can contribute authentic historical information alongside the Synoptic Gospels, thereby supporting the overall reliability of the canonical Gospel accounts.[127] John provides additional support for various facts about the Historical Jesus also found in the Synoptics, such as his association with John the Baptist, choosing of twelve disciples, conflicts with religious authorities, emphasis on love, a high self-conception, and usage of aphoristic formulations.[128] [129] John's claims that Jesus visited Bethany and Ephraim, had a follower named Nathaniel, and that Peter was from Bethsaida may also be historical.[129] The narrator is presented as a witness in 1:14, and the gospel gradually identifies its narrator as the beloved disciple, notably in chapter 19.[130][131] Commentators debate whether the beloved disciple is presented as the author or an authority behind the gospel.[132][133] Scholars tend to reject the attribution to John the Apostle, though they view the beloved disciple as the source of much of John's content.[134] The Synoptic Gospels are the primary sources for Christ's ministry.[37][note 6]

Assessments of the reliability of the Gospels involve not just the texts but also the long oral and written transmission behind them, using methods such as memory studies and form criticism, with scholars reaching different conclusions. There have been different views on the transmission of material that led to the Synoptic Gospels, with various scholars arguing that memory and/or orality reliably preserved traditions ultimately traceable to the historical Jesus.[135][136][33][34] Other scholars have been more skeptical and see more changes in the traditions prior to the written Gospels.[35][36] Jeffrey Tripp observes a scholarly trend advocating for the reliability of memory and the oral gospel traditions.[137]

James Dunn believed:

> the earliest tradents within the Christian churches [were] preservers more than innovators [...] seeking to transmit, retell, explain, interpret, elaborate, but not create de novo [...] Through the main body of the Synoptic tradition [...] we have in most cases direct access to the teaching and ministry of Jesus as it was remembered from the beginning of the transmission process [...] and so fairly direct access to the ministry and teaching of Jesus through the eyes and ears of those who went about with him.[11]

Anthony Le Donne, a leading memory researcher in Jesus studies, elaborated on Dunn's thesis, basing "his historiography squarely on Dunn's thesis that the historical Jesus is the memory of Jesus recalled by the earliest disciples."[138] According to Le Donne, as explained by his reviewer, Benjamin Simpson, memories are fractured and not exact recalls of the past. Le Donne further argues that the remembrance of events is facilitated by relating them to a common story, or "type." This means the Jesus-tradition is not a theological invention of the early Church, but rather a tradition shaped and refracted through such memory "type." Le Donne too supports a conservative view on typology compared to some other scholars, transmissions involving eyewitnesses, and ultimately a stable tradition resulting in little invention in the Gospels.[138] Le Donne expressed himself thusly vis-à-vis more skeptical scholars,

> He (Dale Allison) does not read the gospels as fiction, but even if these early stories derive from memory, memory can be frail and often misleading. While I do not share Allison's point of departure (i.e. I am more optimistic), I am compelled by the method that came from it."[139]

Dale Allison emphasizes the weakness of human memory, noting its 'many sins' and how it frequently misleads people. He expresses skepticism at other scholars' endeavors to identify authentic sayings of Jesus. Instead of isolating and authenticating individual pericopae, Allison advocates for a methodology focused on identifying patterns and finding what he calls 'recurrent attestation'. Allison argues that the general impressions left by the Gospels should be trusted, though he is more skeptical on the details; if they are broadly unreliable, then our sources almost certainly cannot have preserved any of the particulars. Opposing the preceding approaches, which treat the Gospels as historically questionable and require rigorous sifting by competent scholars for nuggets of information, Allison argues that the Gospels are generally accurate and often 'got Jesus right'. Dale Allison finds apocalypticism to be recurrently attested, among various other themes.[140] Reviewing his work, Rafael Rodriguez largely agrees with Allison's methodology and conclusions while arguing that Allison's discussion on memory is too one-sided, noting that memory "is nevertheless sufficiently stable to authentically bring the past to bear on the present" and that people are beholden to memory's successes in everyday life.[141]

Craig S. Keener, drawing on previous studies by Dunn, Alan Kirk, Kenneth E. Bailey, and Robert McIver, among many others, uses memory theory and oral tradition to argue that the Gospels are, in many ways, historically accurate.[142] His work has been endorsed by Markus Bockmuehl, James H. Charlesworth, and David Aune, among others.[142] According to Bruce Chilton and Craig A. Evans,

> [T]he Judaism of the period treated such traditions very carefully, and the New Testament writers in numerous passages applied to apostolic traditions the same technical terminology found elsewhere in Judaism [...] In this way they both identified their traditions as 'holy word' and showed their concern for a careful and ordered transmission of it."[143]

N. T. Wright also argued for a stable oral tradition:

> Communities that live in an oral culture tend to be story-telling communities [...] Such stories [...] acquire a fairly fixed form, down to precise phraseology [...] they retain that form, and phraseology, as long as they are told [...] The storyteller in such a culture has no license to invent or adapt at will. The less important the story, the more the entire community, in a process that is informal but very effective, will keep a close watch on the precise form and wording with which the story is told.[144]

Other scholars are less sanguine about oral tradition, and Valantasis, Bleyle, and Hough argue that the early traditions were fluid and subject to alteration, sometimes transmitted by those who had known Jesus personally, but more often by wandering prophets and teachers like the Paul the Apostle, who did not know him personally.[145] Ehrman explains how the tradition developed as it was transmitted:

> You are probably familiar with the old birthday party game "telephone." A group of kids sits in a circle, the first tells a brief story to the one sitting next to her, who tells it to the next, and to the next, and so on, until it comes back full circle to the one who started it. Invariably, the story has changed so much in the process of retelling that everyone gets a good laugh. Imagine this same activity taking place, not in a solitary living room with ten kids on one afternoon, but over the expanse of the Roman Empire (some 2,500 miles across), with thousands of participants—from different backgrounds, with different concerns, and in different contexts—some of whom have to translate the stories into different languages.[146]

While multiple quests have been undertaken to reconstruct the historical Jesus, since the late 1990s, concerns have been growing about the possibility of reconstructing a historical Jesus from the Gospel texts.[9] According to Dunn,

> What we actually have in the earliest retellings of what is now the Synoptic tradition...are the memories of the first disciples-not Jesus himself, but the remembered Jesus. The idea that we can get back to an objective historical reality, which we can wholly separate and disentangle from the disciples' memories...is simply unrealistic."[147][12][note 2]

These memories can contradict one another and are not always historically accurate, as the Gospels show. Chris Keith argues that the Historical Jesus was the one who could create these memories, both true or not. For instance, Mark and Luke disagree on how Jesus came back to the synagogue, with the likely more accurate Mark arguing he was rejected for being an artisan, while Luke portrays Jesus as literate and his refusal to heal in Nazareth as the cause of his dismissal. Keith does not view Luke's account as a fabrication since different eyewitnesses would have perceived and remembered differently.[148] According to Chris Keith, a historical Jesus is "ultimately unattainable, but can be hypothesized on the basis of the interpretations of the early Christians, and as part of a larger process of accounting for how and why early Christians came to view Jesus in the ways that they did." According to Keith, "these two models are methodologically and epistemologically incompatible," calling into question the methods and aim of the first model.[9] Keith argues that criticism of the criteria of authenticity does not mean scholars cannot research the Historical Jesus, but rather that scholarship should seek to understand the Gospels rather than trying to sift through them for nuggets of history.[13] Regardless of the methodological challenges historical Jesus studies have flourished in recent years; Dale Allison laments, "The publication of academic books about the historical Jesus continues apace, so much so that no one can any longer keep up; we are all overwhelmed."[149]

Robert H. Stein has written that the correct approach to Gospel traditions is to treat them as reliable until proven otherwise, because multiple lines of evidence (such as eyewitness presence, careful community transmission, and the preservation of difficult sayings) support their overall authenticity.[150]

### Textual history and canonisation

Main article: Religion:Development of the New Testament canon

The oldest known gospel text is 𝔓52, a fragment of John dating to the first half of the second century.[151] The creation of a Christian canon was probably a response to the career of the heretic Marcion of Sinope (c. 85–160), who established a canon of his own with just one gospel, the Gospel of Marcion, similar to the Gospel of Luke.[152] The Muratorian fragment, the earliest surviving list of books considered (by its own author at least) to form Christian scripture, included Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Irenaeus went further, stating that there must be four gospels and only four because there were four corners of the world and thus the Church should have four pillars.[1][153] He referred to the four collectively as the "fourfold gospel" (euangelion tetramorphon).[154]

## Non-canonical (apocryphal) gospels

The Gospel of Thomas

The many apocryphal gospels arose from the first century onward, frequently under assumed names to enhance their credibility and authority, and often from within branches of Christianity that were eventually branded heretical.[155] They can be broadly organised into the following categories:[156]

* Infancy gospels: arose in the second century, including the Gospel of James, also called the Protoevangelium, which was the first to introduce the concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (not to be confused with the unrelated Coptic Gospel of Thomas), both of which related many miraculous incidents from the life of Mary and the childhood of Jesus that are not included in the canonical gospels.
* Ministry gospels
* 'Sayings gospels' and agrapha
* Passion, resurrection and post-resurrection gospels
* Gospel harmonies: in which the four canonical gospels are combined into a single narrative, either to present a consistent text or to produce a more accessible account of Jesus' life.

The apocryphal gospels can also be seen in terms of the communities which produced them:

* The Jewish Christian gospels are the products of Christians who had not given up a Jewish identity: they regarded Jesus as the messiah of scripture, but did not agree that he was God, an idea which, although central to Christianity as it eventually developed, is contrary to Jewish belief.
* Gnostic gospels uphold the idea that the universe is the product of a hierarchy of gods, of whom the Jewish god is a rather low-ranking member. Gnosticism holds that Jesus was entirely "spirit", and that his earthly life and death were therefore only an appearance, not a reality. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and divine illumination.[157]

The major apocryphal gospels (after Bart Ehrman, "Lost Christianities" – comments on content are by Ehrman unless otherwise noted)[158] Title | Probable date | Content

|
|

Epistula Apostolorum | Mid 2nd c. | Anti-gnostic dialogue between Jesus and the disciples after the resurrection, emphasising the reality of the flesh and of Jesus' fleshly resurrection
Gospel of the Hebrews | Early 2nd c. | Events in the life of Jesus; Jewish-Christian, with possible gnostic overtones
Gospel of the Ebionites | Early 2nd c. | Jewish-Christian, embodying anti-sacrificial concerns
Gospel of the Egyptians | Early 2nd c. | "Salome" figures prominently; Jewish-Christian stressing asceticism
Gospel of Mary | 2nd c. | Dialogue of Mary Magdalene with the apostles, and her vision of Jesus' secret teachings.

It was originally written in Greek and is often interpreted as a Gnostic text. It is typically not considered a gospel by scholars since it does not focus on the life of Jesus.[159]

Gospel of the Nazareans | Early 2nd c. | Aramaic version of Matthew, possibly lacking the first two chapters; Jewish-Christian
Gospel of Nicodemus | 5th c. | Jesus' trial, crucifixion and descent into Hell
Gospel of Peter | Early 2nd c. | Fragmentary narrative of Jesus' trial, death and emergence from the tomb. It seems to be hostile toward Jews and includes docetic elements.[160] It is a narrative gospel and is notable for asserting that Herod, not Pontius Pilate, ordered the crucifixion of Jesus. It had been lost but was rediscovered in the 19th century.[160]
Gospel of Philip | 3rd c. | Mystical reflections of the disciple Philip
Gospel of the Saviour | Late 2nd c. | Fragmentary account of Jesus' last hours
Coptic Gospel of Thomas | Early 2nd c. | The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church says that the original may date from c. 150.[161] Some scholars believe that it may represent a tradition independent from the canonical gospels, but that developed over a long time and was influenced by Matthew and Luke;[161] other scholars believe it is a later text, dependent from the canonical gospels.[162][163] While it can be understood in Gnostic terms, it lacks the characteristic features of Gnostic doctrine.[161] It includes two unique parables, the parable of the empty jar and the parable of the assassin.[164] It had been lost but was discovered, in a Coptic version dating from c. 350, at Nag Hammadi in 1945–46, and three papyri, dated to c. 200, which contain fragments of a Greek text similar to but not identical with that in the Coptic language, have also been found.[161]
Infancy Gospel of Thomas | Early 2nd c. | Miraculous deeds of Jesus between the ages of five and twelve
Gospel of Truth | Mid 2nd c. | Joys of Salvation
Egerton Gospel (Template:Papyrus) | Early 2nd c. | Fragmentary, four episodes from the life of Jesus
Diatessaron | Late 2nd c. | Gospel harmony (and the first such gospel harmony) composed by Tatian; may have been intended to replace the separate gospels as an authoritative text. It was accepted for liturgical purposes for up to two centuries in Roman Syria, but was eventually suppressed.[165][166]
Gospel of James | Mid 2nd c. | Birth and early life of Mary, and birth of Jesus
Gospel of Marcion | Mid 2nd c. | Marcion of Sinope, c. 150, had a much shorter version of the gospel of Luke, differing substantially from what has now become the standard text of the gospel and far less oriented towards the Jewish scriptures. Marcion's critics said that he had edited out the portions of Luke he did not like, though Marcion argued that his was the more genuinely original text. He is said to have rejected all other gospels, including those of Matthew, Mark and especially John, which he alleged had been forged by Irenaeus.
Secret Gospel of Mark | Uncertain | Allegedly a longer version of Mark written for an elect audience
Gospel of Judas | Late 2nd c. | Purports to tell the story of the gospel from the perspective of Judas, the disciple who is usually said to have betrayed Jesus. It paints an unusual picture of the relationship between Jesus and Judas, in that it appears to interpret Judas's act not as betrayal but as obedience to Jesus's instructions. The text was recovered from a cave in Egypt by a thief and was subsequently sold on the black market until it was finally discovered by a collector, who, with the help of academics from Yale and Princeton, verified its authenticity. The document itself does not claim to have been authored by Judas (it is, rather, a gospel about Judas), and is known to date to at least 180.[167]
Gospel of Barnabas | 14th–16th c. | Contradicts the ministry of Jesus in the canonical New Testament and strongly denies Pauline doctrine, but has clear parallels with Islam, mentioning Muhammad as Messenger of God. Jesus identifies himself as a prophet, not the son of God.[168]

Paul N. Anderson has shown that the four canonical Gospels draw on independent historical traditions rooted in eyewitness memories, in contrast to later non-canonical writings, making the canonical accounts especially valuable for the historical study of Jesus.[169]

## In Islam

Main article: Religion:Gospel in Islam

In Islam, the Injil (Arabic: الإنجيل) is considered one of the four major divine scriptures revealed by God, alongside the Tawrat (Torah), Zabur (Psalms), and the Quran.[170] The term Injīl is derived from the Syriac ܐܘܢܓܠܝܘܢ (awongelion), ultimately from the Greek εὐαγγέλιον (euangelion; lit. good news or glad tidings).[171]

According to the Quran, the Injil was a divine revelation given to ʿĪsā (Jesus), whom Islam regards as a prophet and messenger, not the Son of God.[172] It is described as containing guidance and light for the Children of Israel and as confirming the scriptures that came before it.[173]

Mainstream Islamic belief holds that the original Injil has been lost or altered (taḥrīf) over time,[174] and that the four canonical Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—do not represent this original text, although they may contain elements of Jesus's authentic teachings.[175] Some classical and contemporary scholars argue that the Injil was primarily an oral revelation given to Jesus, similar to the Qur'an revealed to Muhammad, rather than a written text authored by him.[176]

While the Injil holds a position of respect in Islam, it is considered superseded by the Qur'an,[177] which Muslims believe to be the final, complete, and preserved word of God. Islamic theology emphasizes that Muslims are instructed to believe in all previous scriptures in their original form, but the Qur'an is seen as the ultimate criterion (al-Furqān) over them.[178]

### Criticism

Some modern Christian scholars and apologists have criticized the Islamic view of the Injil as historically and textually problematic, arguing that there is no manuscript evidence for a distinct, lost Gospel that matches the Qur'anic description.[179] Others contend that the charge of tahrif ('[Biblical] corruption') is a later theological development rather than a contemporaneous claim from the time of Jesus.[180]

Muslim scholars generally defend by responding that the Qur'an does not require the original Injil to survive in full form, only that its essential message was revealed to Jesus and has since been superseded by the Qur'an.[181]

Robert H. Stein has written that the correct approach to Gospel traditions is to treat them as reliable until proven otherwise, because multiple lines of evidence support their overall authenticity, even when considered in wider religious contexts.[150]

## See also

* Agrapha
* Apocalyptic literature
* The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
* Authorship of the Bible
* Dishna Papers
* Dating the Bible
* Fifth gospel (genre)
* The gospel
* Gospel (liturgy)
* L'Évangile du serpent
* Gospel harmony
* Gospel in Islam
* Gospel of Marcion
* Jesuism
* Jewish–Christian gospels

## Notes

1. ↑ (Dunn 1995): "Through the main body of the Synoptic tradition, I believe, we have in most cases direct access to the teaching and ministry of Jesus as it was remembered from the beginning of the transmission process (which often predates Easter) and so fairly direct access to the ministry and teaching of Jesus through the eyes and ears of those who went about with him."
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 In "Jesus Remembered (2003), Dunn asesses "what 'goes back to Jesus'." (Dunn 2003): "I emphasize again that I do not envisage 'getting back to Jesus' himself. All we have are the impressions which Jesus made, the remembered Jesus."
3. ↑ This puts their composition within living memory.[14][15]
4. ↑ They are generally not viewed as eyewitness accounts, though this may be partly the result of dubious form-critical assumptions. They may claim to consulting eyewitnesses.[20][21][22][23][24][25]
5. ↑ In the two-source hypothesis Matthew and Luke used Mark and a hypothetical source Q, though alternative hypotheses that posit the direct use of Matthew by Luke or vice versa without Q are rising.[28][29]
6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 (Sanders 2010): "John, however, is so different that it cannot be reconciled with the Synoptics except in very general ways [...] Scholars have unanimously chosen the Synoptic Gospels' version of Jesus' teaching [...] The Synoptic Gospels, then, are the primary sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus. They are not, however, the equivalent of an academic biography of a recent historical figure. Instead, the Synoptic Gospels are theological documents that provide information the authors regarded as necessary for the religious development of the Christian communities in which they worked."
7. ↑ Reddish argues expectations of Jesus's return slowed writing for future generations, though Bond notes apocalypticism was no barrier to the production of written texts, as seen by the number of Jewish apocalypses composed during the period.[86][25] According to Allison and Hays, the gospels present the timing of the Parousia as imminent but not fixed, being dependent on the repentance of Israel.[87][88]
8. ↑ The priority of Mark is accepted by most scholars, but there are important dissenting opinions: see the article Synoptic problem.
9. ↑ The debate over the composition of John is too complex to be treated adequately in a single paragraph; for a more nuanced view see Aune (1987), "Gospel of John".[103]
10. ↑ Ferda: "I have no doubt that the First Evangelist could read Hebrew, and here I stand with a host of other interpreters."
11. ↑ The Gospels are a-historical documents:
* (Schoeps 1968): "The Gospels cannot be equated with [...] biographies [...] [Their] primary purpose was not to present a detailed historical picture of the life of Jesus. And the non-Christian materials [...] provide us with no essential new knowledge beyond the accounts of the Gospels [...] [Thus] the situation in regard to sources is highly unsatisfactory; legendary and historical accounts are hopelessly intertwined. The historian must recognize that the materials available to us do not enable us to reconstruct Jesus as he really was. [They have] only the Jesus the early disciples saw, the Christ who has survived in the beliefs of the Christian community.
* (Sanders 2010): "John, however, is so different that it cannot be reconciled with the Synoptics except in very general ways [...] Scholars have unanimously chosen the Synoptic Gospels' version of Jesus' teaching [...] The Synoptic Gospels, then, are the primary sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus. They are not, however, the equivalent of an academic biography of a recent historical figure. Instead, the Synoptic Gospels are theological documents that provide information the authors regarded as necessary for the religious development of the Christian communities in which they worked."
* (Ehrman 1999): "... early Christians who passed along the traditions sometimes found it legitimate and necessary to change a historical fact in order to make a historical point [...] since the Gospels preserve traditions that have been modified over time in their retelling, it is impossible simply to take these stories at face value and uncritically assume that they represent historically accurate information."
12. ↑ As Luke's attempt to link the birth of Jesus to the census of Quirinius demonstrates, there is no guarantee that the gospels are historically accurate. (Reddish 2011) Indeed, most critical scholars view the nativity of Jesus as a theological, rather than historical, narrative.See: W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders, "Jesus from the Jewish point of view", in William Horbury (ed.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984; The New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible: Volume 3 Abingdon Press, 2008. pp. 42, 269–70.
13. ↑ (Sanders 1995): "The main sources for our knowledge about Jesus himself, the gospels in the New Testament, are, from the point of view of the historian, tainted by the fact that they were written by people who intended to glorify their hero [...] Despite this [...] we have a good idea of the external course of his life, especially his public career."
14. ↑ Origen complained in the 3rd century that "the differences among manuscripts have become great [...] [because copyists] either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please."[123]

## References

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Cross & Livingstone 2005, p. 697.
2. ↑ Alexander 2006, p. 16.
3. ↑ Gray, Patrick, ed (2021). The Cambridge Companion to the New Testament. Cambridge University Press. pp. 98–99. ISBN 9781108437707.
4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Lincoln 2004, p. 133.
5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Ehrman 1999, p. 52.
6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Dunn 2005, p. 174.
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Vermes 2013, p. 32.
8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Keith & Le Donne 2012, p. [page needed].
9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Keith 2016.
10. ↑ Keith & Le Donne 2012.
11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Dunn 1995, pp. 371–372.
12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 Dunn 2003.
13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Keith 2012.
14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 van Os, Bas (2011). Psychological Analyses and the Historical Jesus: New Ways to Explore Christian Origins. T&T Clark. pp. 57, 83. ISBN 978-0567269515.
15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Sanders, EP (1996). The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin. p. 5. ISBN 0140144994.
16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Perkins 1998, p. 241.
17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Reddish 2011, pp. 108, 144.
18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 Lincoln 2005, p. 18.
19. ↑ Brown 1997, p. 267.
20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Eve, Eric (2014). Behind the Gospels: Understanding the Oral Tradition. Fortress Press. pp. 135. ISBN 978-1-4514-8753-4.
21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 Reddish 2011, pp. 13, 42.
22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Byrskog, Samuel (2000). Story as History - History as Story: The Gospel Tradition in the Context of Ancient Oral History. Mohr Siebrek Ek. pp. 18–28, 69. ISBN 978-3161473050.
23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 Rodriguez, Rafael. Jesus Darkly: Remembering Jesus with the New Testament. Abingdon Press. p. 57. ISBN 978-1501839115.
24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Becker, Eve-Marie (2017). The Birth of Christian History: Memory and Time from Mark to Luke-Acts. Yale University Press. pp. 39–40, 59. ISBN 978-0300165098.
25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 Bond, Helen (2020). The First Biography of Jesus. Eerdmans. pp. 66. ISBN 978-0802874603.
26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Goodacre 2001, p. 56.
27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 Boring 2006, pp. 13–14.
28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Runesson, Anders (2021). Jesus, New Testament, Christian Origins. Eerdmans. ISBN 9780802868923.
29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 The Synoptic Problem 2022: Proceedings of the Loyola University Conference. Peeters Pub and Booksellers. 2023. ISBN 9789042950344.
30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 30.2 Levine 2009, p. 6.
31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 Bynum 2012, pp. 7, 12.
32. ↑ 32.0 32.1 Burge 2014, p. 309.
33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 Bockmuehl, Markus (2006). Seeing the Word: Refocusing New Testament Study. Baker Academic. pp. 166–178. ISBN 978-0801027611.
34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 McIver, Robert (2011). Memory, Jesus, and the Synoptic Gospels. Society of Biblical Literature. ISBN 978-1589835603.
35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Ehrman 1997.
36. ↑ 36.0 36.1 Valantasis, Bleyle & Haugh 2009.
37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 37.2 Sanders 2010.
38. ↑ Bond, Helen (2020). The First Biography of Jesus. Eerdmans. pp. 66. ISBN 978-0802874603.
39. ↑ Petersen 2010, p. 51.
40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 40.2 Culpepper 1999, p. 66.
41. ↑ Woodhead 2004, p. 4.
42. ↑ "Gospel | New Testament". Encyclopaedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/gospel-New-Testament. Retrieved 2025-10-23.
43. ↑ Thompson 2006, p. 183.
44. ↑ Ehrman, Bart (13 April 2014). "Jesus as God in the Synoptics (For members)". https://ehrmanblog.org/jesus-as-god-in-the-synoptics-for-members/.
45. ↑ Scholz 2009, p. 192.
46. ↑ Keener, Craig (2019). Christobiography: Memory, History, and the Reliability of the Gospels. Eerdmans. pp. 261. ISBN 978-0802876751.
47. ↑ Hill, Charles; Kruger, Michael (2012). "The Early Text of Matthew". The Early Text of the New Testament. Oxford University Press. p. 83. ISBN 9780199566365.
48. ↑ 48.0 48.1 48.2 Burkett 2002, p. 217.
49. ↑ Boring 2006, pp. 1–3.
50. ↑ Pawl, Timothy (2025). The Cambridge Companion to Christology. Cambridge University Press. pp. 40–41. ISBN 978-1009307970. "All in all, scholars identify a range of ways that the Synoptics and Acts depict Jesus as divine. Though Jesus is not overtly preexistent and "one" with God as in John, he does still arguably emerge as a divine being in the Synoptics and Acts through his "adoption," divine acts or "functions", inclusion within God's "identity," titles, intertextual connections with God, relationship to mediator gures, and his portrayal both as the object of worship and the subject of epiphanic experiences. While some of these narrative descriptors situate Jesus as a divinity in a more general sense, some situate him alongside the God of Israel, or potentially even as a manifestation of Israel's God."
51. ↑ Burkett 2002, p. 158.
52. ↑ Parker 1997, p. 125.
53. ↑ Telford 1999, p. 148-149.
54. ↑ Eve 2021, p. 29.
55. ↑ Fitzmyer, Joseph (1998). The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary by Joseph A. Fitzmyer. Yale University Press. pp. 55. ISBN 978-0300139822.
56. ↑ 56.0 56.1 Barker, James (2025). Writing and Rewriting the Gospels. Eerdmans. pp. 135. ISBN 978-0802874528.
57. ↑ Barker, James (2021). The Cambridge Companion to the New Testament. Cambridge University Press. pp. 355–56. ISBN 978-1108437707.
58. ↑ Aune 1987, p. 59.
59. ↑ Beaton 2005, pp. 117, 123.
60. ↑ Morris 1986, p. 114.
61. ↑ Kloppenborg, John (2022). On Using Sources in Graeco-Roman, Jewish, and Early Christian Literature. Peeters Pub & Booksellers. pp. 368. ISBN 978-9042949447.
62. ↑ Johnson 2010a, p. 48.
63. ↑ Goodacre, Mark (2025). The Fourth Synoptic Gospel: John's Knowledge of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Eerdmans. pp. 175. ISBN 978-0802875136.
64. ↑ Anderson 2011, p. 52.
65. ↑ Allison, Dale (2019). The Gospel of John in Historical Inquiry. T&T Clark. pp. 277. ISBN 978-0567681348.
66. ↑ Vytlačilová, Magdalena (2023). "Jesus, the Gospels, and the Galilean Crisis by Tucker S. Ferda (review)". Neotestamentica 57 (1): 197–202. doi:10.1353/neo.2023.a938405.
67. ↑ "Jesus in the Gospels" (in en). 16 March 2016. https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016/03/16/jesus-in-the-gospels/.
68. ↑ Barber, Michael (2023). The Historical Jesus and the Temple: Memory, Methodology and the Gospel of Matthew- Foreword by Dale C. Allison, Jr.. Cambridge University Press. p. xi. ISBN 978-1009210850.
69. ↑ Burkett 2002, p. 216.
70. ↑ Burkett 2002, p. 214.
71. ↑ Porter 2006, p. 185.
72. ↑ Charlesworth, James H. (2008). The Historical Jesus: An Essential Guide. Abingdon Press. ISBN 978-1-4267-2475-6. https://books.google.com/books?id=YTIGy5t45WgC&pg=PT64.
73. ↑ Parsenios, George (2021). The Cambridge Companion to the New Testament. Cambridge University Press. pp. 156. ISBN 978-1108437707.
74. ↑ Skinner, Christopher (2025). Mark, Volume 2 (New Word Biblical Themes). Zondervan Academic. pp. 7. ISBN 978-0310126850.
75. ↑ Vytlacilova, Magdalena. "Why Does the Genre of the Gospels Matter? The Gospels' Genre and Historical Jesus Research". The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 87 (4): 661.
76. ↑ Keener, Craig (2015). Acts: An Exegetical Commentary (Volume 1). Baker Academic. p. 402. ISBN 978-0801039898.
77. ↑ Dunn, James (2016). The Acts of the Apostles. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. p. x. ISBN 978-0802874023.
78. ↑ Fitzmyer, Joseph (1998). The Acts of the Apostles (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries). Yale University Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0300139822.
79. ↑ 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
80. ↑ Galatians 1:11-19
81. ↑ Lindars, Edwards & Court 2000, p. 41.
82. ↑ Gathercole, Simon (1 October 2018). "The Alleged Anonymity of the Canonical Gospels" (in en). The Journal of Theological Studies 69 (2): 447–476. doi:10.1093/jts/fly113. https://academic.oup.com/jts/article/69/2/447/5101372.
83. ↑ Kok, Michael (2017). The Beloved Apostle?. Cascade Books. pp. 13. ISBN 978-1532610219.
84. ↑ Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible. pp. 267–8. ISBN 0-385-24767-2. https://archive.org/details/introductiontone00brow_0/page/267.
85. ↑ Bond, Helen (2020). The First Biography of Jesus. Eerdmans. pp. 64–85. ISBN 978-0802874603.
86. ↑ Reddish 2011, p. 17.
87. ↑ Allison, Dale (2025). Interpreting Jesus. Eerdmans. pp. 60–71, 92. ISBN 978-0802879196.
88. ↑ Hays, Christopher (2016). When the Son of Man Didn't Come: A Constructive Proposal on the Dealy of the Parousia. Fortress Press. pp. 80–110. ISBN 978-1451465549.
89. ↑ Burkett 2002, pp. 124–125.
90. ↑ Martens 2004, p. 100.
91. ↑ Keith, Chris (2020). The Gospel as Manuscript: An Early History of the Jesus Tradition as Material Artifact. Oxford University Press. pp. 77. ISBN 978-0199384372.
92. ↑ Foster, Paul (2023). The Oxford Handbook of the Synoptic Gospels. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0190887452. "This discussion...focuses upon the proposals concerning the M source and the L source, as well as the Proto-Luke theory. The demise of these source-critical theories is also discussed. Apart from the decline in interest in source criticism, it is also noted that there has been a greater...recognition of the limitations in detecting the prehistory of individual synoptic traditions...Since the heyday of source criticism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, scholars have detected a more active role for the evangelists as active editors and creators of the material contained in the Gospels."
93. ↑ Honoré 1986, pp. 95–147.
94. ↑ Kloppenborg, John. "Variation in the Reproduction of the Double Tradition and an Oral Q?". Ephemerides Theologicae Lovaniensis 83 (1): 49–79.
95. ↑ Licona, Mike (2016). Why are there Differences in the Gospels? What we can Learn from Ancient Biography. Oxford University Press. pp. XIII-XIV. ISBN 978-0190264260.
96. ↑ Rodriguez, Rafael (2010). Structuring Early Christian Memory: Jesus in Tradition, Performance and Text. T&T Clark. p. 5. ISBN 978-0567264206.
97. ↑ Goodacre 2001, p. 1.
98. ↑ Kirk, Alan (2019). Q in Matthew: Ancient Media, Memory, and Early Scribal Transmission of the Jesus Tradition. T&T Clark. pp. 298–306. ISBN 978-0567686541.
99. ↑ Rodriguez, Rafael (2017). "Matthew as Performer, Tradent, Scribe". Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 15 (2–3): 203. doi:10.1163/17455197-01502003.
100. ↑ Perkins 2012, p. [page needed].
101. ↑ Mendez, Hugo (2025). The Gospel of John: A New History. Oxford University Press. pp. 3–6. ISBN 978-0197686126.
102. ↑ Frey, Jorg (2018). The Glory of the Crucified One: Theology and Christology in the Fourth Gospel. Baylor University Press. pp. 355. ISBN 978-1481309097.
103. ↑ Aune 1987, pp. 243–245.
104. ↑ Allen 2013, pp. 43–44.
105. ↑ Edwards 2002, p. 403.
106. ↑ Beaton 2005, p. 122.
107. ↑ Lieu 2005, p. 175.
108. ↑ Allen 2013, p. 45.
109. ↑ Barber, Michael Patrick (2023). The Historical Jesus and the Temple: Memory, Methodology and the Gospel of Matthew. Cambridge University Press. p. 243. ISBN 978-1-009-21085-0.
110. ↑ Ferda, Tucker (2020). "Doubling Down: Zechariah's Oracle, Judah's Blessing, and the Triumphal Entry in Matthew". The Journal of Theological Studies. New Series 71 (2): 466–512. doi:10.1093/jts/flaa088.
111. ↑ Walton, Steve (2015). "What Are the Gospels? Richard Burridge's Impact on Scholarly Understanding of the Genre of the Gospels". Currents in Biblical Research 14: 81–93. doi:10.1177/1476993X14549718. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1476993X14549718. Retrieved 2026-04-05.
112. ↑ "Review of What are the Gospels?". https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2005/2005.05.31/.
113. ↑ Schoeps 1968, p. 261–262.
114. ↑ Ehrman 1999, p. 53.
115. ↑ Sanders 1995b, p. 4-5.
116. ↑ Bond, Helen (2024). The Next Quest for the Historical Jesus. Eerdmans. pp. 121–122. ISBN 978-0802882707.
117. ↑ Tuckett 2000, p. 523.
118. ↑ Sanders 1995, pp. 57, 70–71.
119. ↑ The Jesus Handbook. William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2022. pp. 138–140. ISBN 9780802876928.
120. ↑ Blomberg, Craig (2011). The Historical Reliability of John's Gospel: Issues and Commentary. IVP Academic. ISBN 978-0830838714.
121. ↑ Massey, Brandon. "The Quest for the Historical Jesus, 2000-2023". Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 21 (1–2): 64.
122. ↑ Barker, James (2025). Writing and Rewriting the Gospels. Eerdmans. pp. 44. ISBN 978-0802874528.
123. ↑ Ehrman 2005a, pp. 7, 52.
124. ↑ Ehrman 2005a, p. 69.
125. ↑ Ehrman 1996, pp. 75–76.
126. ↑ Reddish 2011, pp. 21–22.
127. ↑ Powell, Mark Allan (2007). Anderson, Paul N.; Just, Felix; Thatcher, Tom. eds. "The De-Johannification of Jesus: The Twentieth Century and Beyond". John, Jesus, and History, Volume 1: Critical Appraisals of Critical Views. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series (Koninklijke Brill NV) 1: 121–132. https://jpcatholic.edu/NCUpdf/courses/BIBL526-Powell_DeJohannification_of_Jesus.pdf. Retrieved 2026-04-06.
128. ↑ Theissen & Merz 1998, pp. 36–37.
129. ↑ 129.0 129.1 Allison, Dale (2019). The Gospel of John in Historical Inquiry. T&T Clark. pp. 61. ISBN 978-0567681348.
130. ↑ Mendez, Hugo (2025). The Gospel of John: A New History. Oxford University Press. pp. 271. ISBN 978-0197686126.
131. ↑ Mendez, Hugo (2025). The Gospel of John: A New History. Oxford University Press. pp. 271. ISBN 978-0197686126. "The notion that John is an eyewitness record first surfaces in the Gospel's prologue...the "we" of 1:14 refers back to those plural individuals "among" whom Jesus lived...By linking the coming of Jesus in the flesh to the narrator's sight of his glory, the syntax implies that the narrator saw Jesus in the flesh...the text constructs its narrator—and thus the implied author—as an eyewitness to these signs."
132. ↑ Lincoln 2005, p. 26.
133. ↑ Thompson, Marianne (2015). John: A Commentary. Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 432. ISBN 978-0664221119. "Commentators who think the beloved disciple is here presented as the author of the Gospel include Barrett 587; Carson 1991, 685; Lindars 641; Michaels 1054-56; Ridderbos 671. Among those reckoning him as the authority somehow responsible for the Gospel are Beasley-Murray 415; Lincoln, 2005,523; O'Day 863; Schnackenburg 3:373; Talbert 263."
134. ↑ Licona, Mike (2016). Why are there Differences in the Gospels? What we can Learn from Ancient Biography. Oxford University Press. pp. 115. ISBN 978-0190264260. "Although most of today's New Testament scholars reject that tradition, they still think the Beloved Disciple...was the eyewitness source of much of the information contained in John. Many think him to be one of Jesus's minor disciples; others continue to maintain that the author was in fact John the son of Zebedee."
135. ↑ Dunn 1995.
136. ↑ Wright, NT (1998). "Early Traditions and the Origins of Christianity". Sewanee Theological Review 41 (2).
137. ↑ Tripp, Jeffrey. "The Eyewitnesses in their Own Words". Journal for the Study of the New Testament 44 (3): 411–12. doi:10.1177/0142064X211051299.
138. ↑ 138.0 138.1 Simpson, Benjamin I. (April 1, 2014). "review of The Historiographical Jesus. Memory, Typology, and the Son of David". Dallas Theological Seminary. https://voice.dts.edu/review/historiographical-jesus-le-donne/.
139. ↑ Le Donne, Anthony (2018). Jesus: A Beginner's Guide. Oneworld Publications. p. 212. ISBN 978-1786071446.
140. ↑ Allison, Dale (2010). Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History. Baker Academic. p. 2-8, 8-9, 16-18, 20, 23-26, 33-43. ISBN 978-0801048753.
141. ↑ Rodriguez, Rafael (2014). "Jesus as his Friends Remembered Him". Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 12 (3): 224–244. doi:10.1163/17455197-01203004.
142. ↑ 142.0 142.1 Keener, Craig (2019). Christobiography: Memory, History, and the Reliability of the Gospels. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0802876751.
143. ↑ Chilton, Bruce; Evans, Craig (1998). Authenticating the Words of Jesus & Authenticating the Activities of Jesus, Volume 2 Authenticating the Activities of Jesus. Brill. pp. 53–55. ISBN 978-9004113022.
144. ↑ Wright, NT. "Five Gospels But No Gospel". Authenticating the Activities of Jesus. New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents. 28. Brill. pp. 112–113. doi:10.1163/9789004421295_009.
145. ↑ Valantasis, Bleyle & Haugh 2009, pp. 7, 10, 14.
146. ↑ Ehrman 1997, p. 44.
147. ↑ Dunn 2003, p. 130-131.
148. ↑ Keith, Chris (2011). "Memory and Authenticity: Jesus Tradition and What Really Happened". Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und Kunde der Älteren Kirche 102 (2): 172, 176. doi:10.1515/zntw.2011.011.
149. ↑ Barber, Michael (2023). The Historical Jesus and the Temple: Memory, Methodology and the Gospel of Matthew- Foreword by Dale C. Allison, Jr.. Cambridge University Press. p. ix. ISBN 978-1009210850.
150. ↑ 150.0 150.1 Stein, Robert H. (1980). France, R.T.; Wenham, David. eds. "The 'Criteria' for Authenticity". Gospel Perspectives, Vol. 1, Studies of History and Tradition in the Four Gospels (JSOT Press): 225–263. https://appearedtoblogly.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/stein-robert-22the-criteria-for-authenticity22.pdf. Retrieved 2026-04-06.
151. ↑ Fant & Reddish 2008, p. 415.
152. ↑ Ehrman 2005a, p. 34: "Marcion included a Gospel in his canon, a form of what is now the Gospel of Luke"
153. ↑ Ehrman 2005a, p. 35.
154. ↑ Watson 2016, p. 15.
155. ↑ Aune 2003, pp. 199–200.
156. ↑ Ehrman & Plese 2011, p. passim.
157. ↑ Pagels 1989, p. xx.
158. ↑ Ehrman 2005b, pp. xi–xii.
159. ↑ Bernhard 2006, p. 2.
160. ↑ 160.0 160.1 Cross & Livingstone 2005, "Gospel of St. Peter".
161. ↑ 161.0 161.1 161.2 161.3 Cross & Livingstone 2005, "Gospel of Thomas".
162. ↑ Casey 2010, p. [page needed].
163. ↑ Meier 1991, p. [page needed].
164. ↑ Funk, Hoover & Jesus Seminar 1993, "The Gospel of Thomas".
165. ↑ Metzger 2003, p. 117.
166. ↑ Gamble 1985, pp. 30–35.
167. ↑ Ehrman 2006, p. passim.
168. ↑ Wiegers 1995.
169. ↑ Anderson, Paul N. (2010). "The John, Jesus, and History Project-New Glimpses of Jesus and a Bi-Optic Hypothesis". Bible Interp, University of Arizona. https://bibleinterp.arizona.edu/articles/john1357917.
170. ↑ Esposito, John L. (2016). Islam: The Straight Path. Oxford University Press. pp. 93–95. ISBN 978-0190632151.
171. ↑ "Injil". Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill.
172. ↑ Quran 5:46
173. ↑ Quran 3:3
174. ↑ Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (2015). The Study Quran. HarperOne. pp. 1163–1165. ISBN 978-0061125867.
175. ↑ Rahman, Fazlur (1979). Islam. University of Chicago Press. pp. 169–170. ISBN 978-0226702810.
176. ↑ Parrinder, Geoffrey (1995). Jesus in the Qurʹān. Oxford: Oneworld Publications. ISBN 9781851680948. OCLC 33950383.
177. ↑ Quran 5:48
178. ↑ Quran 2:285
179. ↑ Reynolds, Gabriel Said (2010). The Qur'an and Its Biblical Subtext. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415778930. OCLC 436358419.
180. ↑ Neuwirth, Angelika (2014). Scripture, Poetry, and the Making of a Community: Reading the Qur'an as a Literary Text. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199359363.
181. ↑ Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (2015). The Study Quran. HarperOne. pp. 1164. ISBN 978-0061125867.

## Sources

* Alexander, Loveday (2006). "What is a Gospel?". in Barton, Stephen C.. The Cambridge Companion to the Gospels. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521807661. https://books.google.com/books?id=lX16qfiZkOoC.
* Allen, O. Wesley (2013). Reading the Synoptic Gospels. Chalice Press. ISBN 978-0827232273. https://books.google.com/books?id=6ag2AQAAQBAJ&q="present+the+characters+in+their+narratives+as+using+scripture"&pg=PA43.
* Anderson, Paul N. (2011). The Riddles of the Fourth Gospel: An Introduction to John. Fortress Press. ISBN 978-1451415551. https://books.google.com/books?id=keBlpFgg4fAC&q="John+and+the+synoptics:+why+such+different+introductions+and+conclusions?"&pg=PR8.
* Aune, David E. (1987). The New Testament in its literary environment. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-664-25018-8. https://books.google.com/books?id=XdSto1nkx9AC&q=The+New+Testament+in+its+literary+environment.
* Aune, David E. (2003). The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament and Early Christian Literature and Rhetoric. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-664-25018-8. https://books.google.com/books?id=nhhdJ-fkywYC.
* Beaton, Richard C. (2005). "How Matthew Writes". in Bockmuehl, Markus; Hagner, Donald A.. The Written Gospel. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83285-4. https://books.google.com/books?id=pAZxCMRztQ4C&q=Chapter+6+Richard+C.+Beaton&pg=PA116.
* Bernhard, Andrew E. (2006). Other Early Christian Gospels: A Critical Edition of the Surviving Greek Manuscripts. Library of New Testament Studies. 315. London; New York: T & T Clark. ISBN 0-567-04204-9.
* Boring, M. Eugene (2006). Mark: A Commentary. Presbyterian Publishing Corp. ISBN 978-0-664-22107-2. https://books.google.com/books?id=zmP5-Jp8VzsC.
* Burge, Gary M. (2014). "Gospel of John". in Evans, Craig A.. Routledge Encyclopedia of the Historical Jesus. Routledge. ISBN 978-1317722243. https://books.google.com/books?id=StasAgAAQBAJ&q="The+gospel+of+john+has+been+both+esteemed+as+a+valid+source"&pg=PA236.
* Burkett, Delbert (2002). An introduction to the New Testament and the origins of Christianity. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-00720-7. https://books.google.com/books?id=EcsQknxV-xQC.
* Bynum, Wm. Randolph (2012). The Fourth Gospel and the Scriptures: Illuminating the Form and Meaning of Scriptural Citation in John 19:37. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-22843-6. https://books.google.com/books?id=opHZRjy-8zMC.
* Casey, Maurice (2010). Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian's Account of His Life and Teaching. T&T Clark. ISBN 978-0-567-64517-3. https://books.google.com/books?id=lXK0auknD0YC.
* Cross, Frank Leslie; Livingstone, Elizabeth A. (2005). The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0192802903. https://books.google.com/books?id=fUqcAQAAQBAJ.
* Culpepper, R. Alan (1999). "The Christology of the Johannine Writings". in Kingsbury, Jack Dean; Powell, Mark Allan Powell; Bauer, David R.. Who Do You Say that I Am?: Essays on Christology. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 9780664257521. https://books.google.com/books?id=Rn6wk-ipDVQC.
* Dunn, James D.G. (1995). "Messianic Ideas and Their Influence on the Jesus of History". in Charlesworth, James H.. The Messiah.
* Dunn, James D.G (2003). Christianity in the making Volume 1. Jesus Remembered. William B. Eerdmans.
* Dunn, James D.G. (2005). "The Tradition". in Dunn, James D.G.; McKnight, Scot. The Historical Jesus in Recent Research. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1575061009. https://books.google.com/books?id=37uJRUF6btAC&q="the+gospels+were+never+simply+biographical;+they+were+propaganda;+they+were+kerygma"&pg=PA174.
* Edwards, James R. (2002). The Gospel according to Mark. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 978-0851117782. https://books.google.com/books?id=0MjWS_4La_EC.
* Ehrman, Bart D. (1996). The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-976357-3. https://books.google.com/books?id=HGpL9x19GaEC.
* Ehrman, Bart D. (1997). The New Testament. A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. Oxford University Press.
* Ehrman, Bart D. (1999). Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199839438. https://books.google.com/books?id=c9K_6NN3llcC&q=Q.
* Ehrman, Bart D. (2005a). Misquoting Jesus. Harper Collins. https://archive.org/stream/Prof.BartEhrman-MisquotingJesus/BartD.Ehrman-MisquotingJesus_djvu.txt.
* Ehrman, Bart D. (2005b). Lost Christianities. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0195182491. https://books.google.com/books?id=URdACxKubDIC.
* Ehrman, Bart (2006). The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199831289. https://books.google.com/books?id=ScMTDAAAQBAJ.
* Ehrman, Bart; Plese, Zlatko (2011). The Apocryphal Gospels: Texts and Translations. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199831289. https://books.google.com/books?id=xqQ9LSzs8hgC.
* Eve, Eric (2021). Solving the Synoptic Puzzle: Introducing the Case for the Farrer Hypothesis. Wipf and Stock. ISBN 9781725283886. https://books.google.com/books?id=JnZKEAAAQBAJ&pg=PT29.
* Fant, Clyde E.; Reddish, Mitchell E. (2008). Lost Treasures of the Bible. Eerdmans. ISBN 9780802828811. https://books.google.com/books?id=Dj6zVQJz7zYC.
* Funk, Robert W.; Hoover, Roy W.; Jesus Seminar (1993). "The Gospel of Thomas". The five gospels. HarperSanFrancisco. pp. 471–532.
* Gamble, Harry (1985). The New Testament Canon: Its Making and Meaning. Fortress Press. ISBN 978-0-8006-0470-7.
* Goodacre, Mark (2001). The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze. A&C Black. ISBN 978-0567080561. https://books.google.com/books?id=iV05Mv-hbMAC.
* Honoré, A.M. (1986). "A statistical study of the synoptic problem". Novum Testamentum 10 (2/3): 95–147. doi:10.2307/1560364.
* Johnson, Luke Timothy (2010a). The Writings of the New Testament – An Interpretation (3rd ed.). Fortress Press. ISBN 978-1451413281.
* Keith, Chris (2012). "The Indebtedness of the criteria Approach to Form Criticism and Recent Attempts to Rehabilitate the Search for an Authentic Jesus", in Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity. T&T Clark. p. 25-48 at 39-40. ISBN 978-0567377234.
* Keith, Chris (2016). "The Narratives of the Gospels and the Historical Jesus: Current Debates, Prior Debates and the Goal of Historical Jesus Research". Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38 (4): 426–455. doi:10.1177/0142064X16637777. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0142064X16637777.
* Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity. T&T Clark. 2012. ISBN 9780567691200.
* Levine, Amy-Jill (2009). "Introduction". in Levine, Amy-Jill; Allison, Dale C. Jr.; Crossan, John Dominic. The Historical Jesus in Context. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1400827374. https://books.google.com/books?id=HIp_0N3uPPcC&q="held+by+the+majority+of+scholars+today""four-source+theory"&pg=PA6.
* Lieu, Judith (2005). "How John Writes". in Bockmuehl, Markus; Hagner, Donald A.. The Written Gospel. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83285-4. https://books.google.com/books?id=pAZxCMRztQ4C&q="John+uses+far+fewer+explicit+citations"&pg=PA175.
* Lincoln, Andrew (2004). "Reading John". in Porter, Stanley E.. Reading the Gospels Today. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0802805171. https://books.google.com/books?id=OsPYJZCToq4C&q="gospels+are+a+subset+of+the+genre+of+bios"&pg=PA133.
* Lincoln, Andrew (2005). Gospel According to St John. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1441188229. https://books.google.com/books?id=eYmxAwAAQBAJ&q="final+form""some+time+between+90+and+110+ce"&pg=PA18.
* Lindars, Barnabas; Edwards, Ruth; Court, John M. (2000). The Johannine Literature. A&C Black. ISBN 978-1-84127-081-4. https://books.google.com/books?id=qVOD0PhayhsC.
* Martens, Allan (2004). "Salvation Today: Reading Luke's Message for a Gentile Audience". in Porter, Stanley E.. Reading the Gospels Today. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-0802805171. https://books.google.com/books?id=OsPYJZCToq4C&q="reading+Luke's+message+for+a+gentile+audience"&pg=PA100.
* Meier, John P. (1991). A Marginal Jew. Volume 1: The roots of the problem and the person. Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-385-26425-9. https://books.google.com/books?id=zODYAAAAMAAJ.
* Metzger, Bruce (2003). The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. Abingdon. ISBN 978-068-705-2639.
* Morris, Leon (1986). New Testament Theology. Zondervan. ISBN 978-0-310-45571-4. https://books.google.com/books?id=6D3o6fZd67EC&q=Morris+New+Testament+Theology.
* Nolland, John (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Eerdmans.
* Pagels, Elaine (1989). The Gnostic Gospels. Random House. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52cdf95ae4b0c18dd2d0316a/t/53e074cee4b0ea4fa48a5704/1407218894673/Pagels,+Elaine+-+The+Gnostic+Gospels.pdf.
* Parker, D.C. (1997). The Living Text of the Gospels. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521599511. https://books.google.com/books?id=yYkvZR-oWVwC&q=Parker+the+living+text+of+the+gospels.
* Perkins, Pheme (1998). "The Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles: Telling the Christian Story". in Barton, John. The Cambridge companion to biblical interpretation. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-521-48593-7. https://books.google.com/books?id=PSHCRgS_SAUC.
* Perkins, Pheme (2012). Reading the New Testament: An Introduction. Paulist Press. ISBN 978-0809147861. https://books.google.com/books?id=It58APyHyPsC.
* Petersen, William L. (2010). "The Diatessaron and the Fourfold Gospel". in Horton, Charles. The Earliest Gospels. Bloomsbury. ISBN 9780567000972. https://books.google.com/books?id=0eYRBwAAQBAJ.
* Porter, Stanley E. (2006). "Language and Translation of the New Testament". in Rogerson, J.W.; Lieu, Judith M.. The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199254255. https://books.google.com/books?id=eKZYMifS1fAC&q="written+virtually+entirely+in+a+form+of+ancient+Greek"&pg=PA185.
* Reddish, Mitchell (2011). An Introduction to The Gospels. Abingdon Press. ISBN 978-1426750083. https://books.google.com/books?id=hliGUOv18cQC.
* Sanders, E. P. (1995). The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin. ISBN 9780141928227. https://books.google.com/books?id=lkbTL36ZgPIC.
* Sanders, E. P. (1995b). The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin. ISBN 978-0140144994.
* Sanders, E. P. (2010). "Jesus Christ". Encyclopædia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/303091/Jesus-Christ. Retrieved 27 November 2010.
* Schoeps, Hans-Joachim (1968). The Religions of Mankind. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. ISBN 978-0-385-04080-8. https://archive.org/details/religionsofmanki00scho/page/261/.
* Scholz, Daniel J. (2009). Jesus in the Gospels and Acts: Introducing the New Testament. Saint Mary's Press. ISBN 9780884899556. https://books.google.com/books?id=royKA4FeMB4C.
* Telford, W.R. (1999). The Theology of the Gospel of Mark. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521439770. https://books.google.com/books?id=E9saA_qL4iMC&q="Luke""alters+the+reference+to+Galilee"&pg=PA148.
* Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1998). The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide. Fortress Press. ISBN 978-1-4514-0863-8. https://books.google.com/books?id=3ZU97DQMH6UC.
* Thompson, Marianne (2006). "Gospel of John". in Barton, Stephen C.. The Cambridge Companion to the Gospels. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521807661. https://books.google.com/books?id=yTorEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA183.
* Tuckett, Christopher (2000). "Gospel, Gospels". in Freedman, David Noel; Myers, Allen C.. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-9053565032. https://books.google.com/books?id=qRtUqxkB7wkC&pg=PA523.
* Valantasis, Richard; Bleyle, Douglas K.; Haugh, Dennis C. (2009). The Gospels and Christian Life in History and Practice. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-7069-6.
* Vermes, Geza (2013). Christian Beginnings. Penguin.
* Watson, Francis (2016). The Fourfold Gospel: A Theological Reading of the New Testament Portraits of Jesus. Baker Academic. ISBN 9780801095450. https://archive.org/details/fourfoldgospelth0000wats.
* Wiegers, G. (1995). "Muhammad as the Messiah: A comparison of the polemical works of Juan Alonso with the Gospel of Barnabas". Biblitheca Orientalis: 245–291.
* Woodhead, Linda (2004). Christianity: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199687749. https://books.google.com/books?id=0dFLBAAAQBAJ.

## External links

| Wikisource has the text of the 1905 New International Encyclopedia article Gospel.

|

* A detailed discussion of the textual variants in the gospels – covering about 1200 variants on 2000 pages (archived 8 June 2008)
* Greek New Testament – the Greek text of the New Testament: specifically the Westcott-Hort text from 1881, combined with the NA26/27 variants (archived 19 June 2008).

* v
* t
* e

Books of the Bible

Principal
divisions|

| Hebrew Bible/
Old Testament
(protocanon)|

* Genesis
* Exodus
* Leviticus
* Numbers
* Deuteronomy
* Joshua
* Judges
* Ruth
* 1–2 Samuel
* 1–2 Kings
* 1–2 Chronicles
* Ezra
* Nehemiah
* Esther
* Job
* Psalms
* Proverbs
* Ecclesiastes
* Song
* Isaiah
* Jeremiah
* Lamentations
* Ezekiel
* Daniel
* Hosea
* Joel
* Amos
* Obadiah
* Jonah
* Micah
* Nahum
* Habakkuk
* Zephaniah
* Haggai
* Zechariah
* Malachi

|

Deuterocanon
and Apocrypha|

* Catholic
* Orthodox

* Tobit
* Judith
* Additions to Esther
* 1 Maccabees
* 2 Maccabees
* Wisdom
* Sirach
* Baruch / Letter of Jeremiah
* Additions to Daniel
* Susanna
* Song of the Three Children
* Bel and the Dragon

|

Orthodox only|

* 1 Esdras
* 2 Esdras
* Prayer of Manasseh
* Psalm 151
* 3 Maccabees
* 4 Maccabees
* Odes

Tewahedo Orthodox|

* Enoch
* Jubilees
* 1, 2, and 3 Meqabyan
* Paralipomena of Baruch
* Broader canon

Syriac|

* Letter of Baruch
* Psalms 152–155

New Testament|

* Matthew
* Mark
* Luke
* John
* Acts
* Romans
* 1 Corinthians
* 2 Corinthians
* Galatians
* Ephesians
* Philippians
* Colossians
* 1 Thessalonians
* 2 Thessalonians
* 1 Timothy
* 2 Timothy
* Titus
* Philemon
* Hebrews
* James
* 1 Peter
* 2 Peter
* 1 John
* 2 John
* 3 John
* Jude
* Revelation

Subdivisions|

* Chapters and verses
* Pentateuch
* Historical books
* Wisdom books
* Prophetic books
* Major prophets
* Minor prophets
* Gospels
* Synoptic
* Epistles
* Pauline
* Johannine
* Pastoral
* Catholic
* Apocalyptic literature

Development|

* Old Testament canon
* New Testament canon
* Antilegomena
* Jewish canon
* Christian canon
* Dating the Bible

Manuscripts|

* Dead Sea Scrolls
* Samaritan Pentateuch
* Septuagint
* Targum
* Diatessaron
* Muratorian fragment
* Peshitta
* Vetus Latina
* Vulgate
* Masoretic Text
* New Testament manuscript categories
* New Testament papyri
* New Testament uncials

See also|

* Biblical canon
* Authorship
* English Bible translations
* Other books referenced in the Bible
* Pseudepigrapha
* list
* New Testament apocrypha
* Studies
* Synod of Hippo
* Textual criticism

* Category
* Portal
* WikiProject
* Book

Template:History of Christianity

* v
* t
* e

Christianity

* Index
* Outline
* Glossary
* Lists of Christians
* By country

Bible|

* Books
* Canon
* Old Testament
* New Testament

Foundations|

* Church
* Creed
* Gospel
* New Covenant
* Christian tradition

History
Timeline|

| Early Christianity|

* Jesus
* Nativity
* Baptism
* Ministry
* Sermon on the Mount
* Crucifixion
* Resurrection
* Great Commission
* Apostles
* Church fathers
* Apostolic fathers

|

Great Church|

* Ante-Nicene period
* Late antiquity
* Constantine
* First seven ecumenical councils
* Nicaea I
* Chalcedon
* State church of the Roman Empire
* Biblical canon

Middle Ages|

* Monasticism
* Papal States
* East–West Schism
* Investiture Controversy
* Crusades
* Age of Discovery

Modern era|

* Protestant Reformation
* Catholic Reformation
* Thirty Years' War
* Enlightenment
* French Revolution
* Persecution:
* Communism
* Islam

Denominations
(List)|

| Western|

* Adventist
* Anabaptist
* Anglican
* Baptist
* Calvinist
* Catholic
* Charismatic
* Evangelical
* Holiness
* Lutheran
* Methodist
* Pentecostal
* Protestant

|

Eastern|

* Eastern Orthodox
* Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite)
* Church of the East (Nestorian)
* Eastern Catholic
* Eastern Protestant

Nontrinitarian|

* Jehovah's Witnesses
* Latter Day Saint movement

Theology|

* God
* Trinity
* Father
* Son
* Holy Spirit
* Christology
* Nicene Creed
* Tradition
* Original sin
* Salvation
* Worship
* Mariology
* Theotokos
* Saints
* Ecclesiology
* Four marks
* Body of Christ
* One true church
* People of God
* Canon law
* Sacraments
* Baptism
* Lord's Supper
* Marriage
* Confirmation
* Penance
* Anointing of the Sick
* Holy orders
* Mission

Philosophy|

* Natural law
* Ethics
* Science
* Evolution
* Politics

Other
Features|

| Culture|

* Liturgy
* Art
* Jesus
* Marian
* Literature
* Music
* Church buildings
* Cathedrals
* Role in civilization
* See also:
* Other religions
* Criticism
* Persecution

|

Movements|

* Asceticism
* Charismatic
* Christian democracy
* Environmentalism
* Existentialism
* Fundamentalism
* Liberation
* Left/Right
* Pacifism
* Prosperity

Cooperation|

* Christendom
* Ecumenism
* Charta Oecumenica
* World Council of Churches
* World Evangelical Alliance
* Nondenominationalism

*   * Book
* Category

* v
* t
* e

Jesus

Historicity|

* Chronology of Jesus
* Genealogy of Jesus
* Historical Jesus
* Quest for the historical Jesus
* sources
* Josephus on Jesus
* Tacitus mention
* Mara bar Serapion letter
* Historicity
* Gospels
* race and appearance

Life events|

* Nativity
* Virgin birth
* Mary
* Joseph
* Flight into Egypt
* Childhood
* Unknown years
* Baptism
* Temptation
* Apostles
* selecting
* Great Commission
* Ministry
* disciples
* Sermon on the Mount/Plain
* Beatitudes
* Prayers
* Lord's Prayer
* Parables
* Miracles
* Transfiguration
* Homelessness
* Great Commandment
* Olivet Discourse
* Anointing
* Passion
* Entry into Jerusalem
* Last Supper
* Farewell Discourse
* Agony in the garden
* Arrest
* Trial
* Crucifixion
* sayings on the cross
* Tomb
* Resurrection
* appearances
* Ascension

New Testament|

* Gospels
* Matthew
* Mark
* Luke
* John
* Gospel harmony
* Oral gospel traditions
* Five Discourses of Matthew
* Life of Jesus in the New Testament
* Historical background of the New Testament
* New Testament places associated with Jesus
* Names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament

Culture|

* Language of Jesus

Depictions|

* Bibliography
* Artworks
* statues
* Films

Christianity|

* Christ
* Christianity
* timeline
* 1st century
* Christology
* Jesus in Christianity
* pre-existence
* incarnation
* Relics associated with Jesus
* Scholastic Lutheran Christology
* Second Coming
* Session of Christ

Related|

* Brothers of Jesus
* Christ myth theory
* Contemporaries rejection of Jesus
* Cosmic Christ
* Criticism
* Date of birth
* Holy Family
* Jesus' interactions with women
* Mary Magdalene
* Jesuism
* Jesus in comparative mythology
* Jesus in Islam
* Ahmadiyya
* Jesus in Scientology
* Jesus the Splendour
* Judaism's view of Jesus
* in the Talmud
* Master Jesus
* Mental health
* Religious perspectives on Jesus

0.00

(0 votes)

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Religion:Gospel&oldid=4549941"
*[c.]: circa
*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template