Get In The Ark Before It Is Too Late!!!

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

Since you refuse to consider alternatives you must believe the orthodox version. If that's the case then you must believe that the First Century Middle East Jews Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote some of it because they were eye witnesses to the events they wrote about. After all, they get credit for writing the books that bear their names. Those names don't seem like traditional Middle East Jewish names to me but maybe they do to you.

Let's start with the names.

Matthew

The Hebrew name "מַתִּתְיָהוּ" (Matityahu) was transliterated into Greek to "Ματταθίας" (Mattathias),[8] which was shortened to "Ματθαῖος" – (Matthaios). Deceptively, it is therefore unrelated to θεῖος (theios) meaning divine (adjective, e.g. theology) or sulfur (Koine noun, e.g. thiol group).[9] The Greek Ματθαῖος was Latinised as Matthaeus, which became Matthew in English.

Mark

Mark is a common male given name and is derived from old Latin "Mart-kos", which means "consecrated to the god Mars", and also may mean "God of war" or "to be warlike".[citation needed] Marcus was one of the three most common given names in Ancient Rome. See Roman given names.

Luke

The name Luke is derived from the Latin name Lucas or from the Greek Loukas, meaning "man from Lucania" (a region of Italy). Although the name is attested in ancient inscriptions, the best known historical use of the name is in the New Testament

John

John is a masculine given name in the English language. The name is derived from the Latin Ioannes, Iohannes, which is a form of the Greek Ἰωάννης. This Greek name Ἰωάννης is in turn a form of the Hebrew name יוֹחָנָן, Yôḥanan which means "Graced by YHWH". There are numerous forms of the name in different languages.[1]

This means that, in the 1st century, the names would have been Matityahu, Marcus, Lucas and Yôḥanan. This doesn't prove that the gospels attributed to them really are eye witness accounts. There were other gospels which were rejected as canon, including the Gnostic Gospels.

Non-canonical gospels

The trail in this discussion has gone back to earlier than the late 4th century so you'll have to leave the English out of it.

England -Early Middle Ages (600–1066)

At the start of the Middle Ages, England was a part of Britannia, a former province of the Roman Empire. The English economy had once been dominated by imperial Roman spending on a large military establishment, which in turn helped to support a complex network of towns, roads, and villas.[1] At the end of the 4th century, however, Roman forces had been largely withdrawn, and the English economy collapsed.[2] Germanic immigrants began to arrive in increasing numbers during the 5th century, initially peacefully, establishing small farms and settlements.[3]

---

The word, English, in this context is referring to an area of Britain which eventually became known as England because the article is about the history of this area. There weren't any English people living in it, though, when the 'Old Latin Bible' was written. Enlgish people didn't even exist then unless you count the pagan Angles and Saxons who didn't start moving to Britain until the 5th century.

It seems that you have a couple of Jews, a Roman, and a Greek as the Gospel writers with German sodbusters as the Bible writers.