Podcast Summary:

Catholic Bible Study — Lectio: The Case for Jesus | "Were the Gospels Anonymous?"
Host/Speaker: Dr. Brant Pitre (Augustine Institute)
Date: February 14, 2026

Episode Overview

In this inaugural session of the "Lectio: The Case for Jesus" Bible study, Dr. Brant Pitre explores a foundational apologetic question: "Who wrote the Gospels?" He addresses modern skepticism regarding Gospel authorship, particularly the widely taught theory that the Gospels were originally anonymous and only later attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Dr. Pitre draws from scriptural, historical, and textual-critical perspectives to challenge these claims, aiming to equip listeners with both faith and reason in response.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Need for Historical Foundations in Faith (00:03–05:08)

• Dr. Pitre emphasizes not just believing in Jesus, but knowing why one believes (00:58).
• The study aims to address pivotal questions: Who wrote the Gospels? Why do Christians accept four Gospels, not others? Did Jesus claim to be God? What evidence exists for the resurrection?
• Memorable Moment:
  "Have you ever pondered that?... Why do you believe in Jesus and not in Muhammad or Buddha, right? Or some other religious leader? What would you say?" — Dr. Brant Pitre (02:05)

2. The Rise of Gospel Skepticism: Theories of Anonymity and the Telephone Game (05:09–14:28)

• Theory 1: The Gospels were originally anonymous, circulating without titles for up to a century before names were added for authority (06:10).
• Theory 2: The “Telephone Game” analogy — Gospel stories morphed and became unreliable through oral transmission, just like in the children’s game (08:45).
• Bart Ehrman's influential textbook is cited as a primary example of the telephone game analogy being taught:

  “Nearly all of the storytellers... had no independent knowledge of what really happened to Jesus. Now... imagine this same activity taking place not in a solitary living room... but over the expanse of the Roman Empire, some 2,500 miles across with thousands of participants.”
  — Bart Ehrman, quoted by Dr. Pitre (09:20)

• Dr. Pitre notes these theories generate deep skepticism toward Gospel reliability, which is now pervasive in popular culture and even Catholic high schools (12:10).

3. Evaluating the Evidence: Manuscripts and Titles (14:29–22:10)

• During doctoral studies, Dr. Pitre learns textual criticism and begins to investigate the manuscript evidence.
• Crucial Finding: There are no anonymous copies of the four Gospels. All early manuscripts, including papyri and codices, have titles naming their traditional authors (16:10).
• Analogy:
  “Imagine if I told you that originally the Gospel of Matthew was published without the Sermon on the Mount... Your first question should be: ‘What copies of Matthew is the Sermon missing from?’ If I say ‘none,’ you’d be skeptical. Same with anonymity.” — Dr. Pitre (17:00)
• Forgeries or pseudonymous works should yield inconsistent attributions or true anonymity—yet all Gospels are consistently titled from earliest evidence.

4. Implausibility of the Anonymous Gospels Theory (22:11–26:29)

• If Gospels were actually anonymous, why would later scribes everywhere ascribe the same names unanimously without disagreement?
• Contrasted with the Letter to the Hebrews, which is genuinely anonymous—its manuscripts and early traditions show a wide variety of attributions (23:20).
• Notable Quote:
  "Why is there no trace of this original anonymity in any of these titles?... There's what looks like a diversity of opinion because the book is actually anonymous. But that's precisely what we don't have with any one of the four Gospels." — Dr. Pitre (24:10)
• If later Christians wanted to fake authorship for authority, why choose relatively minor or non-apostolic figures like Mark and Luke, instead of prominent apostles (e.g., Peter)? (25:46)

5. Internal Evidence for Gospel Authorship: Who Were Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? (26:30–47:18)

• History and Textual Analysis: Historians use internal (from within the text) and external (from outside, e.g., other references) evidence to determine authorship.

• Matthew:
  All manuscripts: “The Gospel according to Matthew.” Internal evidence: Matthew identified as a tax collector and one of the twelve apostles in Matthew 9:9 and Matthew 10:2–4 (29:32).

  • This challenges the claim that Jesus’s disciples were “illiterate fishermen.” Tax collectors like Matthew were educated and scribally literate (31:30).

• Mark:
  Manuscripts: “The Gospel according to Mark.” Mark (John Mark) was a companion of Peter and Paul (32:15). 1 Peter 5:13 refers to Mark as Peter’s “son” (spiritual).

  • As Peter’s companion, Mark could serve as a scribe, recording Peter’s testimony.

• Luke:
  Manuscripts: “The Gospel according to Luke.” Luke, a physician and Gentile, companion of Paul, and author of Acts (35:24). Colossians 4:14 describes him as “the beloved physician.”

• John:
  Manuscripts: “The Gospel according to John.” The Gospel's closing (John 21:20, 24–25) claims authorship by “the disciple whom Jesus loved”—traditionally, the apostle John (41:50).

6. Addressing Counterarguments on Literacy and Authorship (47:19–51:28)

• Objection: John or Peter are called "agramatos" (illiterate) in Acts 4.
  • Dr. Pitre: Illiteracy didn’t prevent someone from authoring a book by using a secretary (an accepted practice), just as dictation or transcription is common today (48:32).
  • “If for some reason you aren't able to write either because you're illiterate or because you're pressed for time, you can hire a secretary.” — Dr. Pitre (48:48)

7. Conclusion and Teaser for Next Session (51:29–52:12)

• The theory that the Gospels were anonymous is, when examined historically (not just theologically), unsupported and implausible.
• “The widespread idea that the Gospels were originally anonymous... is, from the perspective of history—not faith—just a bad theory.” — Dr. Pitre (51:56)
• The next session will explore “lost Gospels” and why the Church excludes them in favor of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Why do you believe in Jesus? ... What are the reasons for your faith?” — Dr. Brant Pitre (02:05)
• On the telephone game analogy:
  “If Ehrman’s right here... what does that do to the credibility of the Gospels? ... it completely destroys their credibility.” — Dr. Brant Pitre (10:37)
• “There are precisely zero anonymous copies of the Gospel.” — Dr. Brant Pitre (16:18)
• “Why would you attribute [the Gospels] to secondary figures like Mark or Luke? Well, maybe it’s because Mark and Luke actually wrote them.” — Dr. Brant Pitre (25:54)
• On Matthew’s plausibility as author:
  “If you’re traveling around with Jesus... and you want someone to write some of this down... Fisherman, fisherman... tax collector—what would tax collectors have to do? They’d have to be scribally literate... Who is exhibit A among the apostles in terms of prime candidate for actually writing down some of the sayings and deeds of Jesus? It’s Matthew." — Dr. Brant Pitre (31:30)
• On textual criticism and history:
  “History is supposed to work with evidence…” — Dr. Brant Pitre (17:11)
• “You don’t have to be a Catholic... you just have to look at the historical evidence. [The anonymous Gospels theory] is a bad theory.” — Dr. Brant Pitre (51:56)
• “I hope to have shown you here that the widespread idea that the Gospels were originally anonymous ... is, from the perspective of history, not faith... a bad theory.” — Dr. Brant Pitre (51:45)

Timestamps of Key Segments

• 00:03–05:08 — Introduction & Aims of Study
• 05:09–14:28 — Anonymous Gospels & Telephone Game Theories Explained
• 14:29–22:10 — Manuscript Evidence: Are Any Gospels Anonymous?
• 22:11–26:29 — Problems with the Anonymous Theory; Hebrews as Contrast
• 26:30–47:18 — Internal Evidence: Who Were Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?
• 47:19–51:28 — Addressing Objections to Authorship
• 51:29–52:12 — Conclusion & Next Session Preview

Tone and Language

Dr. Pitre maintains an accessible, conversational tone, peppered with humor, relatable anecdotes, and careful distinctions between historical scholarship and matters of faith. He invites listeners to think critically and to value historical evidence while affirming traditional faith claims.

Summary Takeaway

Dr. Brant Pitre argues—using early manuscript evidence, ancient historical reasoning, and internal scriptural clues—that the four canonical Gospels are not anonymous fiction, but rather attributable to their traditional apostolic or apostolically-connected authors. Modern skepticism around Gospel authorship and reliability, exemplified by the "anonymous Gospels" and "telephone game" theories, lacks substantive historical support when considered in light of the physical and literary record. The next session will investigate external evidence and the so-called 'lost Gospels.'