Embellishments in the Gospel of Mark.

[Jehanne]

Indeed, the author of Matthew nowhere even claims to be "Matthew"; in fact, the "Gospel according to Matthew" did not appear until the second century.

 Why should he need to make that claim it wasn't important to them that they were acknowledged. It was the word of God that was important. The Gospel of Matthew was written before the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple. Matthew's Gospel was heavy on prophecy it is an important part of the Gospel, so if the Gospel was written after the fall of Jerusalem and the foretelling of the temples destruction it would have been mentioned in Matthew's Gospel. As for the Gospel of Matthew appearing in the second century those are copies and by simple logic the original had to be written before the copies, makes utter sense doesn't it.

GC

The Gospel of Peter claims, explicitly, to have been written by the Apostle Peter.  Do you accept that as being authentic?