The Historical Jesus

[Belacqua]

More surprising is that as a Christian you did not know that the canonical gospel myths are all anonymous or unauthored, or that the names Matthew Mark Luke and John were assigned arbitrarily over three centuries later, at the first council of Nicaea. You've also had plenty of time to Google that as well. 

If you follow the link you've given, and then scroll down to the section labelled "Misconceptions," you'll see this:

Misconceptions

Biblical canon

Main article: Development of the Christian Biblical canon

There is no record of any discussion of the biblical canon at the council.[85] The development of the biblical canon was nearly complete (with exceptions known as the Antilegomena, written texts whose authenticity or value is disputed) by the time the Muratorian fragment was written.[86] The main source of the idea that the canon was created at the Council of Nicaea seems to be Voltaire, who popularised a story that the canon was determined by placing all the competing books on an altar during the Council and then keeping the ones that did not fall off. The original source of this "fictitious anecdote" is the Synodicon Vetus,[87] a pseudo-historical account of early Church councils from 887.[88]

So the source you've provided indicates that what you've said is false. The biblical canon was almost completely developed before the time of the Council, and the names of the gospel writers had long been established. 

This is not to say that each gospel was written by the person named in the title. Only that the traditional attributions happened much earlier. 

Here is the link to the main Wikipedia article on the formation of the gospels:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_c...ian_canons

Here is an academic, non-partisan history of how the gospels were developed and used by the early Christians. I'm linking to the study guide, but if you listen to the whole course it's very helpful:

https://yalebiblestudy.org/courses/forma...udy-guide/