Why do you believe?

[Jackalope]

---

You are obviously well-aware of church tradition but woefully ignorant of biblical scholarship.

Wikipedia is a good starting point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew

mathew

Not only does tradition unanimously ascribe this Gospel to the work of Matthew, but the early Church Fathers do as well.  “This Gospel does not name its author.  However, from the early Church Fathers, beginning with Papias, a pupil of [the apostle] John, onward, it has been accepted as the work of Matthew...”18  You may say, “Yes, maybe a few of the Church Fathers thought so, but...” Well, consider what H.C. Thiessen says, “The early Church unanimously ascribed this Gospel to the Apostle Matthew… Irenaeus says:
 
‘Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect.’  Irenaeus claims that he knew Polycarp in his early youth, and that Polycarp always taught the things he learned from the apostles.”19  Other Church Fathers who cited Matthew as the author of the Gospel were many.  They included Pseudo Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen.20  “The earliest statement of the Church Fathers regarding its [Matthew’s] authorship is to be found in the writings of Papias in the second century. He stated that ‘Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could.’”21  So as we can see here, external evidence (that of tradition and the early Church Fathers) holds to the ascription of “the Gospel according to Matthew” to Matthew the tax collector, the apostle of our Lord.  By now, it should be abundantly clear that Matthew wrote Matthew, and so we will press on and examine the evidence that supports the authorship of the Gospel of Mark by the one so named.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke

Although the Gospel survives in anonymous form, it is considered that the name was known to the addressee, Theophilus.[36] The author was probably a Gentile Christian.[20] Whoever the author was, he was highly educated, well traveled, well connected, and extremely widely read.

Luke

External Evidence: “About the year A.D. 400 Jerome wrote: ‘Luke, a medical man from Antioch, was not ignorant of the Greek language.  He was a follower of Paul and a companion in all his travels and he wrote the Gospel.’”39  Right from the start we see that at least this Church Father believed Luke to be the author of the Third Gospel.  Was he the only one, or did others feel the same?  At the beginning of the fourth century the church historian Eusebius wrote: “Luke, by race an Antiochian, and a physician by profession, had long been a companion of Paul, and had more than a casual acquaintance with the rest of the apostles.  In two God-breathed books, namely, the Gospel and the Acts, he left us examples of the art of soul-healing which he had learned from them.”40  The list of Church Fathers that held Luke as the author of the Third Gospel goes back as early as the second and third centuries A.D.  Origen said, “... and thirdly the Gospel according to Luke [was written].  He wrote for those who from the Gentiles [had come to believe], the Gospel was praised by Paul.”41  He wrote this in the third century.  Even earlier than this, in the second century after Christ, Tertullian is quoted as saying: “Of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instill faith in us, while the apostolic men, Luke and Mark, renew it afterward.”42  Finally we see what Irenaeus says.  He is the earliest writer mentioned here.  Irenaeus was a pupil, or disciple, of Polycarp who in turn was a disciple of the apostle John. “He writes, ‘Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him [Paul]’”43  The testimonies of the Church Fathers still bears loud testimony to the fact of Lukan authorship of the Third Gospel.
“Tradition unanimously affirms this author to be Luke. This is attested by the early heretic Marcion (who died c. A.D. 160; Luke was the only Gospel in his canon), the Muratorian Fragment (a list of the books accepted as belonging to the New Testament; it is usually held to express Roman opinion at the end of the second century), the anti-Marconite Prologue of Luke…, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and others.”44  The evidence, both internal and external, make it plain. Luke wrote Acts; the writer of Acts wrote “the Gospel of Luke”, and the testimony of the Church Fathers upholds this – the Gospel according to Luke was written by Luke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

The Gospel According to Mark does not name its author.[2] A tradition evident in the 2nd century ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist (also known as John Mark), the companion of Peter,[8] on whose memories it is supposedly based.[1][9][10][11] However, according to the majority view the author is unknown, the author's use of varied sources telling against the traditional account.[12][13]

mark
Probably one of the greatest testimonies to the reliability of this canon of Scripture and its author can be found in the affirmation of the early Church Fathers.  Papias, as quoted by Eusebius, as quoted by Merrill C. Tenney, says: “And John the Presbyter also said this – Mark being the interpreter of Peter, whatsoever he recorded, he wrote with great accuracy, but not, however, in the order in which it was spoken or done by our Lord, for he neither heard nor followed our Lord, but as was before said, he was in the company of Peter, who gave him such instruction as was necessary, but not to give a history of our Lord’s discourses: wherefore Mark has not erred in anything, by writing some things as he has recorded them, for he was carefully attentive to one thing, not to pass by anything he heard, or to state anything falsely in these accounts.”

Also, according to Clement of Alexandria, “Peter’s hearers urged Mark to leave a record of the doctrine which Peter had communicated orally, and that Peter authorized the Gospel to be read in churches.”

H.C. Thiessen also says that Papias is quoted in saying that “Mark… wrote down accurately everything that he remembered without, however, recording in order what was either said or done by Christ.”

ancient manuscripts such as the Muratorian Fragment of Rome and the Didache back up Markan authorship, but the testimonies of the early Church Fathers do also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

The Gospel According to John (Greek τὸ κατὰ Ἰωάννην εὐαγγέλιον), commonly referred to as the Gospel of John or simply John[1]
[...]
Footnote 1: ^ Notwithstanding the name, it is an anonymous gospel

John
External Evidence: Although many writers and writings such as Ignatius, Tatian, Polycarp, and Justin Martyr, or the Epistle of Barnabas and the Muratorian Fragment, all make allusions to the Gospel and letters of John (it is generally admitted that for one to recognize 1 John one must recognize the Gospel also), it is Irenaeus who gives us the best evidence concerning the Fourth Gospel.  “The external evidence for the early date and Apostolic authorship of the Fourth Gospel is as great as that for any book in the New Testament... From Irenaeus on, the evidence becomes clear and full.”47  The reason that Irenaeus’ testimony should carry so much weight for the student in this area of study is because he was a disciple of Polycarp, who was in turn a disciple of the man in question, the Apostle John. “Polycarp (ca. AD 69 – ca. AD 155) spoke of his contact with John.  Irenaeus (ca. 130 – ca. 200), the bishop of Lyons, heard Polycarp and testified that ‘John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned on His breast, had himself published a Gospel during his residence in Ephesus in Asia.’  Polycrates, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and other later Fathers support this tradition.  Eusebius was specific that Matthew and John of the apostles wrote the two Gospels which bear their specific name.”48  And further it is said that, “Irenaeus is the chief witness.”49  Clement of Alexandria also stated that John wrote what he called a “spiritual Gospel.”  “The early Church Fathers agree with this statement of authorship.”50

So no, this is not a joke.

---

That's correct that was a joke lol destroyed your debate.

Nothing you quoted contradicted my statement that the gospels are anonymous, and we do not know who wrote them. What you have quoted describes the reasoning behind church tradition and is essentially nothing more than heresay. In any case, the "evidence" falls far short of what is required in academia to establish authorship.