Editing Jesus (section)

==== Authorship, date, and reliability ====
The canonical gospels are four accounts, each by a different author. The authors of the Gospels are pseudonymous, attributed by tradition to the [[four evangelists]], each with close ties to Jesus:{{sfn|Funk|Hoover|The Jesus Seminar|1993|p=3}} Mark by [[John Mark]], an associate of [[Saint Peter|Peter]];<ref name="May Metzger Mark" /> [[Matthew the Apostle|Matthew]] by one of Jesus's disciples;{{sfn|Funk|Hoover|The Jesus Seminar|1993|p=3}} [[Luke the Evangelist|Luke]] by a companion of [[Paul the Apostle|Paul]] mentioned in a few epistles;{{sfn|Funk|Hoover|The Jesus Seminar|1993|p=3}} and John by another of Jesus's disciples,{{sfn|Funk|Hoover|The Jesus Seminar|1993|p=3}} the "[[beloved disciple]]".{{sfn|Cross|Livingstone|2005|loc=John, St.}}

According to the [[Marcan priority]], the first to be written was the Gospel of Mark (written AD&nbsp;60–75), followed by the Gospel of Matthew (AD&nbsp;65–85), the Gospel of Luke (AD&nbsp;65–95), and the Gospel of John (AD&nbsp;75–100).<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=l2sloGWzzV8C&pg=PA58 |title=Can We Trust the Gospels?: Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John |publisher=Crossway |year=2007 |page=58 |isbn=978-1-4335-1978-9 |first=Mark D. |last=Roberts |access-date=14 August 2015 |archive-date=7 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150907174109/https://books.google.com/books?id=l2sloGWzzV8C&pg=PA58 |url-status=live}}</ref> Most scholars agree that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source for their gospels. Since Matthew and Luke also share some content not found in Mark, many scholars assume that they used another source (commonly called the "[[Q source]]") in addition to Mark.{{sfn|Licona|2010|pp=210–221}}

One important aspect of the study of the Gospels is the [[literary genre]] under which they fall. Genre "is a key convention guiding both the composition and the interpretation of writings".<ref>Burridge, R. A. (2006). Gospels. In J. W. Rogerson & Judith M. Lieu (Eds.) ''The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies''. Oxford University Press. p. 433.</ref> Whether the gospel authors set out to write novels, myths, histories, or biographies has a tremendous impact on how they ought to be interpreted. Some studies have suggested that the Gospels ought to be seen as ancient biography.<ref>Talbert, C. H. (1977). ''What is a Gospel? The Genre of the Canonical Gospels''. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Fortress Press.</ref><ref>Wills, L. M. (1997). ''The Quest of the Historical Gospel: Mark, John and the Origins of the Gospel Genre''. London: Routledge. p. 10.</ref><ref>Burridge, R. A. (2004). ''What are the Gospels? A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography''. revised updated edn. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.</ref> Although not without critics,<ref>e.g. Vines, M. E. (2002). ''The Problem of the Markan Genre: The Gospel of Mark and the Jewish Novel''. Atlanta, Georgia: Society of Biblical Literature. pp. 161–162.</ref> the position that the Gospels are a type of ancient biography is the consensus among scholars today.<ref>{{cite book |last=Stanton |first=Graham N. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=A7wNGMrAiD0C |title=Jesus and Gospel |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-521-00802-0 |page=192 |access-date=22 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200226005236/https://books.google.com/books?id=A7wNGMrAiD0C |archive-date=26 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Rogerson |first1=J. W. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eKZYMifS1fAC |title=The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies |last2=Lieu |first2=Judith M. |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-19-925425-5 |page=437 |access-date=22 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191225204746/https://books.google.com/books?id=eKZYMifS1fAC |archive-date=25 December 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref>

Concerning the accuracy of the accounts, viewpoints range from considering them [[inerrant]] descriptions of Jesus's life,{{sfn|Grudem|1994|pp=90–91}} to doubting whether they are historically reliable on various points,{{sfn|Sanders|1993|p=3}} to considering them to provide very little historical information about his life beyond the basics.{{sfn|Köstenberger|Kellum|Quarles|2009|pp=117–125}}{{sfn|Ehrman|1999|pp=22–23}} According to a broad scholarly consensus, the [[Synoptic Gospels]] (the first three—Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are the most reliable sources of information about Jesus.{{sfn|Sanders|1993|p=71}}{{sfn|Theissen|Merz|1998|pp=17–62}}<ref name="Britannica" />