Matthew and Luke: Forgeries of Mark? A Closer Look at the Ethics of Gospel Composition

Introduction

The claim that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are forgeries of Mark has sparked much debate among scholars and enthusiasts alike. This provocative assertion raises important questions about the nature of ancient texts, the intentions behind their composition, and whether the act of "forgery" necessarily implicates bad character.

The Context of Ancient Literary Practices

Forgery in ancient times was not perceived with the same ethical connotations as it is today. Literary borrowing and adaptation were common practices, especially within religious and philosophical texts. This context is crucial in understanding why the authors of Matthew and Luke might have used Mark's Gospel as a source.

1. Commonplace Practice in Ancient Writing

The practice of adapting existing works was widespread. For instance, many works attributed to classical philosophers like Plato, Socrates, and Pythagoras include texts that were written by later authors under their names. This was not necessarily seen as deceitful but as a way to preserve and build upon respected traditions.

2. Religious Literature and Prophecy

Religious texts, particularly those involving prophecy, often involved reworking earlier scriptures to fit new contexts or revelations. The Sibylline Oracles and Orphic hymns are examples of how religious literature was frequently expanded and reinterpreted by successive generations.

Evaluating the Ethics: Intentions and Outcomes

The intentions behind the creation of Matthew and Luke can shed light on whether their authors were "bad people" or simply participants in a common literary culture.

1. The Purpose of the Gospels

The Gospels of Matthew and Luke were written to convey religious truths and to support the early Christian community. Their authors aimed to provide accounts of Jesus' life and teachings that resonated with their audiences. Luke, for example, explicitly states his intention to compile a narrative based on various sources to provide an orderly account (Luke 1:1-4).

2. The Concept of Expansion and Retelling

Stephen Goranson suggests that what we might consider forgery today could be viewed as expansion or retelling in the ancient world. Luke’s acknowledgment of multiple narratives indicates an openness about his sources, which contrasts with the modern notion of plagiarism.

Reexamining the Concept of Forgery

While some might equate forgery with deception and bad character, the case of Matthew and Luke invites a more nuanced perspective.

1. Forgery vs. Adaptation

The act of adapting Mark does not inherently imply malicious intent. It is important to differentiate between the intent to deceive and the intent to build upon existing work. Ancient authors often saw themselves as part of a tradition, contributing to an ongoing conversation rather than creating something wholly original.

2. Examples of Positive Forgery

There are instances where forgery was used for benevolent purposes. During World War II, the French resistance forged documents to save Jewish lives. These acts were illegal but morally commendable. This example shows that the ethical implications of forgery depend heavily on context and intent.

Conclusion

The debate over whether Matthew and Luke are forgeries of Mark and what that means for their authors' character is complex. Understanding the historical and cultural context of ancient literary practices is crucial. The authors of Matthew and Luke were likely not "bad people" but rather participants in a tradition of adaptation and expansion. Their works aimed to communicate religious truths and support their communities, reflecting intentions that were more about continuity and faith than deception.

As we continue to explore ancient texts, it is essential to apply a balanced perspective that considers both the practices of the time and the intentions behind the works. This approach allows for a deeper appreciation of these foundational religious documents and the cultures from which they emerged.