Gospel

===Composition===
[[File:Relationship between synoptic gospels-en.svg|thumb|upright=1.6|The Synoptic sources: the Gospel of Mark (the triple tradition), [[Q source|Q]] (the double tradition), and material unique to Matthew (the [[M&nbsp;source]]), Luke (the [[L&nbsp;source]]), and Mark{{sfn|Honoré|1986|pp=95–147}}]]

Like the rest of the [[New Testament]], the four gospels were written in Greek.{{sfn|Porter|2006|p=185}} The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70,{{sfn|Perkins|1998|p=241}} Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90,{{sfn|Reddish|2011|pp=108, 144}} and John AD 90–110.{{sfn|Lincoln|2005|p=18}} Despite the traditional ascriptions, most scholars hold that all four are anonymous{{refn|group=note|According to [[Simon Gathercole]], the topic of the anonymity of the Gospels has received little scholarly attention and a "dissenting few" scholars have argued that the traditional attributions to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are original.<ref name="Gathercole">{{Cite journal |last=Gathercole |first=Simon |date=2018-10-01 |title=The Alleged Anonymity of the Canonical Gospels |url=https://academic.oup.com/jts/article/69/2/447/5101372 |journal=The Journal of Theological Studies |language=en |volume=69 |issue=2 |pages=447–476 |doi=10.1093/jts/fly113 |issn=0022-5185}}</ref>}} and most scholars agree that none were written by eyewitnesses.{{sfn|Reddish|2011|pp=13, 42}} A few scholars defend the traditional ascriptions or attributions, but for a variety of reasons, the majority of scholars have abandoned this view or hold it only tenuously.{{sfn|Lindars|Edwards|Court|2000|p=41}}<ref name="Gathercole"/> 

In the immediate aftermath of Jesus' death, his followers expected him to return at any moment, certainly within their own lifetimes, and in consequence there was little motivation to write anything down for future generations, but as eyewitnesses began to die, and as the missionary needs of the church grew, there was an increasing demand and need for written versions of the founder's life and teachings.{{sfn|Reddish|2011|p=17}} The stages of this process can be summarized as follows:{{sfn|Burkett|2002|pp=124–125}}
* Oral traditions – stories and sayings passed on largely as separate self-contained units, not in any order;
* Written collections of miracle stories, parables, sayings, etc., with oral tradition continuing alongside these;
* Written proto-gospels preceding and serving as sources for the gospels – the dedicatory preface of Luke, for example, testifies to the existence of previous accounts of the life of Jesus.{{sfn|Martens|2004|p=100}}
* Gospels formed by combining proto-gospels, written collections, and still-current oral tradition.

Mark is generally agreed to be the first gospel;{{sfn|Goodacre|2001|p=56}} it uses a variety of sources, including conflict stories (Mark 2:1–3:6), [[apocalyptic literature|apocalyptic]] discourse (4:1–35), and collections of sayings, although not the sayings gospel known as the [[Gospel of Thomas]], and probably not the hypothesized [[Q&nbsp;source]] used by Matthew and Luke.{{sfn|Boring|2006|pp=13–14}} The authors of Matthew and Luke, acting independently, used Mark for their narrative of Jesus' career, supplementing it with the hypothesized collection of sayings called the Q&nbsp;source and additional material unique to each called the [[M&nbsp;source]] (Matthew) and the [[L&nbsp;source]] (Luke).{{sfn|Levine|2009|p=6}}{{refn|group=note|name="Markan priority"|The priority of Mark is accepted by most scholars, but there are important dissenting opinions: see the article [[Synoptic problem]].}} Mark, Matthew, and Luke are called the [[synoptic gospels]] because of their close similarities of content, arrangement, and language.{{sfn|Goodacre|2001|p=1}} The authors and editors of John may have known the synoptics, but did not use them in the way that Matthew and Luke used Mark.{{sfn|Perkins|2012|p={{pn|date=July 2021}}}} There is a near-consensus that this gospel had its origins as a "signs" source (or gospel) that circulated within the [[Johannine]] community (which produced John and the three epistles associated with the name) and later expanded with a Passion narrative as well as a series of discourses.{{sfn|Burge|2014|p=309}}{{refn|group=note |name="John"|The debate over the composition of John is too complex to be treated adequately in a single paragraph; for a more nuanced view see {{harvp|Aune|1987|loc="Gospel of John"}}.{{sfn|Aune|1987|pp=243–245}}}}

All four also use the Jewish scriptures, by quoting or referencing passages, interpreting texts, or alluding to or echoing biblical themes.{{sfn|Allen|2013|pp=43–44}} Such use can be extensive: Mark's description of the [[Parousia]] (second coming) is made up almost entirely of quotations from scripture.{{sfn|Edwards|2002|p=403}} Matthew is full of quotations and [[allusion]]s,{{sfn|Beaton|2005|p=122}} and although John uses scripture in a far less explicit manner, its influence is still pervasive.{{sfn|Lieu|2005|p=175}} Their source was the Greek version of the scriptures, called the [[Septuagint]]; they do not seem familiar with the original Hebrew.{{sfn|Allen|2013|p=45}}