«Инҗил» битенең юрамалары арасында аерма

44 379 байт убрано ,  8 ел элек
тәрҗемә ителмәгән
(тәрҗемә ителмәгән)
''Иң башта Сүз (Logos) булган'' (Яхья 1:1)
{{Main|Good News (Christianity)}}
The word ''gospel'' derives from the [[Old English language|Old English]] ''gōd-spell'' <ref>http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Gospel</ref> (rarely ''godspel''), meaning "good news" or "glad tidings". It is a [[calque]] (word-for-word translation) of the [[Koine Greek|Greek]] word {{lang|grc|εὐαγγέλιον}}, ''euangelion'' (''eu-'' "good", ''-angelion'' "message"). The Greek word ''euangelion'' is also the source (via [[Latinised]] ''evangelium'') of the terms "evangelist" and "[[evangelism]]" in English. The authors of the four canonical Christian gospels are known as the [[four evangelists]].
Originally{{Clarify|post-text=(Too vague. Please say a date. Is this before or after Jesus's death?)|date=August 2012}}, the gospel was the good news of redemption through the propitiatory offering of Jesus Christ for one's sins, the central Christian message. Note: John 3:16.<ref name="ODCC self">"Gospel". Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005</ref>{{Clarify|post-text=(please explain why John 3:16 is relevant)|date=August 2012}} Before the apparition of the first gospel, the [[gospel of Mark]] which was probably written around the years 65–70,<ref>Harris Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.</ref> [[Paul the Apostle]] used the term {{lang|grc|εὐαγγέλιον}} gospel when he reminded the people of the church at [[Corinth]] "of the gospel I preached to you" ([[First Epistle to the Corinthians|1 Corinthians]] 15.1). Paul averred that they were being [[Salvation|saved]] by the gospel, and he characterized it in the simplest terms, emphasizing [[Resurrection appearances of Jesus|Christ's appearances after the Resurrection]] (15.3&nbsp;– 8):
{{quotation|...that Christ died for our sins according to the [[Old Testament|scriptures]]; And that he was buried; and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures; And that he was seen of [[Saint Peter|Cephas]]; then of the [[Twelve Apostles|Twelve]]: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once: of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some have fallen asleep. After that he was seen of [[James the Just|James]], then of all the apostles. Last of all, he was seen of me also, as one born out of due time.}}
The earliest extant use of {{lang|grc|εὐαγγέλιον}} gospel to denote a particular genre of writing dates to the 2nd century. [[Justin Martyr]] (c. 155) in [http://earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html 1 Apology] 66 wrote: "...the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels".
[[Henry Barclay Swete]]'s ''Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek'', pages [http://rosetta.reltech.org/cgi-bin/Ebind2html/TC/SweteIntro?seq=470 456]–[http://rosetta.reltech.org/cgi-bin/Ebind2html/TC/SweteIntro?seq=471 457] states:
:{{lang|grc|Εὐαγγέλιον}} in the [[Septuagint|LXX]] occurs only in the plural, and perhaps only in the classical sense of 'a reward for good tidings' ({{bibleverse|2|Sam|4:10}} [also {{bibleverse-nb|2|Sam|18:20}}, {{bibleverse-nb|2|Sam|18:22}}, {{bibleverse-nb|2|Sam|18:25–27}}, {{bibleverse|2|Kings|7:9}}]); in the [[New Testament|N.T.]] it is from the first appropriated to the Messianic good tidings ({{bibleverse||Mark|1:1}}, {{bibleverse-nb||Mark|1:14}}), probably deriving this new meaning from the use of {{lang|grc|εὐαγγελίζεσθαι}} in {{bibleverse||Isaiah|40:9}}, {{bibleverse-nb||Isa|52:7}}, {{bibleverse-nb||Isa|60:6}}, {{bibleverse-nb||Isa|61:1}}.
In the [[New Testament]], evangelism meant the proclamation of [[good news (Christianity)|God's saving activity]] in [[Jesus]] of [[Nazareth]], or the [[agape]] [[ministry of Jesus|message proclaimed]] by Jesus of Nazareth. This is the original [[New Testament]] usage (for example {{bibleverse||Mark|1:14–15}} or {{bibleverse|1|Corinthians|15:1–9}}; see also [http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?word=2098 Strong's G2098]).
The peculiar situation in the English language of an obsolete translation persisting into current usage harks back to [[John Wycliffe]] who already had gospel, and whose usage was adopted into the [[King James Version]].
The short ''o'' in the modern word gospel is due to mistaken association with the word [[god (word)|god]]. Old English gōd-spell had a long vowel and would have become good-[[wikt:spell|spell]] in modern English.
More generally, gospels compose a [[genre]] of [[early Christian]] [[literature]].<ref>Peter Stuhlmacher, ed., ''Das Evangelium und die Evangelien'', [[Tübingen]] 1983, also in English: ''The Gospel and the Gospels''</ref> Gospels that did not become canonical also circulated in [[Early Christianity]]. Some, such as the work known today as [[Gospel of Thomas]], lack the narrative framework typical of a gospel.<ref name="Oxford:unspecified">Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005, unspecified article</ref> These gospels almost certainly appeared much later than the canonical gospels, with the Gospel of Thomas being a likely exception.
==Беренче пәйдә булулары ==
Critical scholars generally agree on several early sayings, collections, and accounts preceding the "canonical" gospels. The dedicatory preface of the [[Gospel of Luke]] testifies already to the existence of several "accounts" of the life of Jesus by the time of its composition.<ref>Stanley E. Porter ''Reading the Gospels today'' p100</ref> The term Luke uses (διήγησις ''diēgēsis'') is a term used in classical Greek for any historical narrative.<ref>Charles H. Talbert ''Reading Luke: a literary and theological commentary'' 2002 p2 "(3) What exactly is Luke? The prologue (1:1–4) says it is a diegesis (account). The second-century rhetorician Theon defines diegesis as "an expository account of things which happened or might have happened". Cicero (De Inv. 1.19.27)"</ref> The term "gospel" is not used in the New Testament text for any of the [[Biblical canon|canonical]] Gospels, though in later centuries a traditional reading of [[2 Corinthians]] 8:18 "the brother whose praise is the Gospel" was to sometimes identify this with Luke, and consequently Gospel of Luke.<ref>F. F. Bruce ''Acts'' p383</ref>
==Охшаш инҗилләр==
{{main|:en:synoptic gospels}}
The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are considered [[synoptic gospels]] on the basis of many similarities between them that are not shared by the Gospel of John. "Synoptic" means here that they can be "seen" or "read together," indicating the many parallels that exist among the three. The synoptic gospels are the source of many popular stories, parables, and sermons, such as [[Nativity of Jesus|Jesus' humble birth in Bethlehem]], the [[Sermon on the Mount]], the [[Beatitudes]], the [[Last Supper]], and the [[Great Commission]]. It is widely believed that the three synoptic gospels derive from a common source or set of sources, and that they directly or indirectly borrowed from or were influenced by each other. For example, the vast majority of material in Mark is also present in either Luke or Matthew or both, suggesting that Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke. The existence of common material in Matthew and Luke not contained in Mark suggests that both Matthew and Luke had at least one other source at their disposal.
The fourth gospel, the Gospel of John, presents a very different picture of Jesus and his [[Ministry of Jesus|ministry]] from the synoptics.<ref>Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.</ref> In differentiating history from invention, some historians interpret the gospel accounts skeptically<ref name = "Sanders">[[E. P. Sanders|Sanders, E. P.]], ''The historical figure of Jesus'', Penguin, 1993.</ref> but generally regard the synoptic gospels as including significant amounts of historically reliable information about Jesus.<ref name = "Sanders"/>
==Каноник инҗилләр==
{{Main|:en:Development of the New Testament canon}}
{{Gospel Jesus}}
Of the many gospels written in antiquity, only four gospels came to be accepted as part of the [[New Testament]], or [[Biblical canon|canonical]]. An insistence upon there being a canon of four gospels, and no others, was a central theme of [[Irenaeus of Lyons]], c. 185. In his central work, ''[[On the Detection and Overthrow of the So-Called Gnosis|Adversus Haereses]]'' Irenaeus denounced various early Christian groups that used only one gospel, such as [[Marcionism]] which used only [[Gospel of Marcion|Marcion's version of Luke]], or the [[Ebionites]] which seem to have used an [[Gospel of the Ebionites|Aramaic version of Matthew]] as well as groups that embraced the texts of newer writings, such as the [[Valentinius|Valentinians]] (''A.H.'' 1.11). Irenaeus declared that the four he espoused were the four "Pillars of the Church": "it is not possible that there can be either more or fewer than four" he stated, presenting as logic the [[analogy]] of the four corners of the earth and the four winds (3.11.8). His image, taken from ''[[Ezekiel]]'' 1, or [[Revelation]] 4:6–10, of God's throne borne by four creatures with four faces—"the four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side: and the four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four also had the face of an eagle"—equivalent to the "four-formed" gospel, is the origin of the conventional symbols of the Evangelists: lion, bull, eagle, man. Irenaeus was ultimately successful in declaring that the four gospels collectively, and exclusively these four, contained the truth. He also supported reading each gospel in light of the others.
By the turn of the 5th century, the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic Church]] in the west, under [[Pope Innocent I]], recognized a [[biblical canon]] including the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which had been previously established at a number of regional Synods, namely the [[Council of Rome]] (382), the [[Synod of Hippo]] (393), and two [[Synods of Carthage]] (397 and 419).<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.catholicevangelism.org/bible-dates1.shtml| title = Protestantism: A Historical and Spiritual Wrong Way Turn| accessdate = 2006-07-11| last = Pogorzelski| first = Frederick| year = 2006| work = Bible Dates| publisher = CatholicEvangelism.com| page = 1}}</ref> This canon, which corresponds to the [[Canon of Trent|modern Catholic canon]], was used in the [[Vulgate]], an early 5th century translation of the [[Bible]] made by [[Jerome]]<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm| title = Canon of the New Testament| accessdate = 2006-07-11| year = 1908| work = Catholic Encyclopedia| publisher = NewAdvent.com}}</ref> under the commission of [[Pope Damasus I]] in 382.
# [[Gospel according to Matthew]]
# [[Gospel according to Mark]]
# [[Gospel according to Luke]]
# [[Gospel according to John]]
There was also another order, the "western order of the gospels", so called because it is typical for the manuscripts which are usually a representative of the [[Western text-type]].
# [[Gospel according to Matthew]]
# [[Gospel according to John]]
# [[Gospel according to Luke]]
# [[Gospel according to Mark]]
This order is found in the following manuscripts: [[Codex Bezae|Bezae]], [[Codex Monacensis|Monacensis]], [[Codex Washingtonianus|Washingtonianus]], [[Codex Tischendorfianus IV|Tischendorfianus IV]], [[Uncial 0234]].
Although there is no set order of the four gospels in patristic lists or discussions,<ref name=Goswell /> D. Moody Smith suggests that the standard order of Matthew-Mark-Luke-John "projects a kind of intention that can scarcely be ignored".<ref>D. Moody Smith, "John, the Synoptics, and the Canonical Approach to Exegesis", in ''Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of E. Earle Ellis'' (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 171.</ref>
In what he calls a "mild form of [[Reader-response criticism|reader criticism]]", Greg Goswell suggests a possible rationale that "the [[Great Commission|commission]] at the end of Matthew (28:20) is in part fulfilled by the subsequent gospels (and letters)" while for Luke,
<blockquote>The [[Luke 1|preface to Luke]] (1:1–4) is a possible explanation for that Gospel’s canonical placement after Matthew and Mark, for its non-pejorative reference to previous "attempts" (επεχειρησαν) at writing an account of what Jesus said and did can be understood in canonical context as referring to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark.<ref name=Goswell /></blockquote>
Goswell concludes by suggesting that the self-reference to "this book" in John 20:30, "can be taken as an implicit acknowledgment of ''other'' books, namely the three preceding Gospels".<ref name=Goswell>{{cite journal|last=Goswell|first=Greg|title=The Order of the Books of the New Testament|journal=[[Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society]]|year=2010|month=June|volume=53|issue=2|pages=228–229|url=http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/53/53-2/JETS_53-2_225-241_Goswell.pdf|accessdate=23 October 2011}}</ref>
Medieval copies of the four canonical gospels are known as [[Gospel Book]]s or also simply as Gospels (in Greek as ''Tetraevangelia''). Notable examples include the [[Lindisfarne Gospels]] (c. 700), the [[Barberini Gospels]], [[Lichfield Gospels]] and the [[Vienna Coronation Gospels]] (8th century), the [[Book of Kells]] and the [[Ada Gospels]] (c. 800) or the [[Ebbo Gospels]] (9th century).
===Барлыкка килүләре===
{{Main|:en:Synoptic problem}}
The majority view today is that Mark is the first gospel, with Matthew and Luke borrowing passages both from that gospel and from at least one other common source, lost to history, termed by scholars '[[Q document|Q]]' (from {{lang-de|Quelle}}, meaning "source"). This view is known as the "[[two-source hypothesis]]".<ref name="Goodacre">For a dissenting view, see[[Mark Goodacre]].</ref> The [[two-gospel hypothesis]], in contrast, says that Matthew was written first (by Matthew the Apostle), and then Luke the Evangelist wrote his gospel (using Matthew as his main source) before Mark the Evangelist wrote his gospel (using Peter's testimony). John was written last and shares little with the synoptic gospels.
The gospels were apparently composed in stages. Mark's traditional ending (Mark 16:9–20, see [[Mark 16]]) was most likely composed early in the 2nd century and appended to Mark in the middle of that century.<ref name = "May Metzger Mark">May, Herbert G. and Bruce M. Metzger. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977. "Mark" p. 1213–1239</ref> The birth and infancy narratives apparently developed late in the tradition.<ref name = "ActJBirth">[[Robert W. Funk|Funk, Robert W.]] and the [[Jesus Seminar]]. ''The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus''. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. "Birth & Infancy Stories" p. 497–526.</ref> Luke and Matthew may have originally appeared without their first two chapters.<ref name = "ActJBirth"/>
The consensus among biblical scholars is that all four canonical gospels were originally written in [[Greek language|Greek]], the [[lingua franca]] of the Roman Orient.
Estimates for the dates when the canonical gospel accounts were written vary significantly; and the evidence for any of the dates is scanty. Because the earliest surviving complete copies of the gospels date to the 4th century and because only fragments and quotations exist before that, scholars use [[higher criticism]] to propose likely ranges of dates for the original gospel autographs. Scholars variously assess the majority (though not the consensus <ref>Black, David A. (2001). Rethinking the Synoptic Problem. Baker Academic. ISBN 0-8010-2281-9{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref>) view as follows:
* Mark: c. 68–73,<ref name="Brown">[[Raymond E. Brown]]. An Introduction to the New Testament.</ref> c. 65–70<ref name="ReferenceB">Harris Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985</ref>
* Matthew: c. 70–100.<ref name="Brown"/> c. 80–85.<ref name="ReferenceB"/>
* Luke: c. 80–100, with most arguing for somewhere around 85,<ref name="Brown"/> c. 80–85<ref name="ReferenceB"/>
* John: c. 90–100,<ref name="ReferenceB"/> c. 90–110,<ref>C K Barrett, among others.</ref> The majority view is that it was written in stages, so there was no one date of composition.
Traditional Christian scholarship has generally preferred to assign earlier dates. Some historians interpret the end of the book of Acts as indicative, or at least suggestive, of its date; as Acts mentions neither the death of [[Paul of Tarsus|Paul]], generally accepted as the author of many of the Epistles, who was put to death by the Romans c. 65{{Citation needed|date=December 2007}}, nor any other event post AD 62, notably the Neronian persecution of AD 64/5 that had such impact on the early church.<ref name="France">[[R. T. France]], ''The Gospel of Matthew'', [[Eerdmans]], 2007. p 19.</ref> Acts is attributed to the author of the Gospel of Luke, which is believed to have been written before Acts, and therefore would shift the chronology of authorship back, putting Mark as early as the mid 50s. Here are the dates given in the modern [[NIV Study Bible]]:
* Matthew: c. 50 to 70s
* Mark: c. 50s to early 60s, or late 60s
* Luke: c. 59 to 63, or 70s to 80s
* John: c. 85 to near 100, or 50s to 70
Such early dates are not limited to conservative scholars. In ''Redating the New Testament'' [[John A. T. Robinson]], a prominent liberal theologian and bishop, makes a case for composition dates before the [[Siege of Jerusalem (70)|fall of Jerusalem]] in AD 70.
Matthew was probably written in Syria, perhaps in [[Early centers of Christianity#Antioch|Antioch]],<ref name="ReferenceB"/> an ancient Christian center. Mark has traditionally been associated with Peter's preaching in [[Early centers of Christianity#Rome|Rome]], and it is well-suited to a Roman audience.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Various cities have been proposed for the origin of Luke, but there is no consensus on the matter. Ephesus, in [[Early centers of Christianity#Western Anatolia|Western Anatolia]], is a popular scholarly choice for the place of origin for the Gospel of John.<ref name="ReferenceB"/>
Following [[Raymond E. Brown|Raymond Brown]]'s postulation of a Johannine community having been responsible for John's gospel and letters,<ref>R. Brown, ''The Gospel According to John'' The Anchor Bible. (Garden City: Doubleday, 1966)</ref> other scholars have identified localized communities behind each of the other gospels and Q. This assumes the relative isolation of early Christian communities in which distinctive traditions concerning Jesus throve. Other scholars have questioned this hypothesis and have stressed the constant communication between early Christian communities.<ref>J. Dunn, "Jesus in Oral Memory": the Initial Stages of the Jesus Tradition" ''Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers'', 39 (2000) p. 325</ref><ref>{{cite journal |pages=139–75 |doi=10.1017/S0028688503000080 |title=Altering the Default Setting: Re-envisaging the Early Transmission of the Jesus Tradition |year=2003 |last1=Dunn |first1=James D. G. |journal=New Testament Studies |volume=49 |issue=2}}</ref><ref>R. Bauckham, "For Who Were the Gospels Written?" ''The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences'' (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), pp. 13–22</ref><ref>{{cite journal |pages=476–94 |doi=10.1017/S002868850400027X |title=A Q Community in Galilee? |year=2004 |last1=Pearson |first1=Birger A. |journal=New Testament Studies |volume=50 |issue=4}}</ref>
====Сөйләм традициясе====
One of the most important concerns in accurately accounting for an oral Jesus tradition is the model of transmission used. Form criticism (''Formgeschichte'') was developed primarily by the German scholars Karl Ludwig Schmidt, Martin Dibelius, and Rudolf Bultmann.<ref>Schmidt, K. L. (1919). ''Der Rahmen der Geschichte Jesu''. Berlin: Paternoster.</ref><ref>Dibelius, M. (1919). ''Die Formgeschichte des Evangelium'' 3d Ed. Günter Bornkamm (ed). Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.</ref><ref name="Bultmann, R. 1921">Bultmann, R. (1921). ''Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition''. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.</ref> The oral model developed by the form critics drew heavily on contemporary theory of folkloric transmission of oral material, and partly as a result of this form criticism posited that the Jesus tradition was transmitted informally, added to freely, and was uncontrolled.<ref name="biblicalstudies.org.uk">http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_tradition_bailey.html</ref> However, "Today it is no exaggeration to claim that a whole spectrum of main assumptions underlying Bultmann's ''Synoptic Tradition'' must be considered suspect."<ref>Kelber, W. H. (1997). ''The Oral and Written Gospel: The Hermeneutics of Speaking and Writing in the Synoptic Tradition, Mark, Paul, and Q.'' Bloomington: Indiana University Press. p. 8.</ref>
A number of other models have been proposed which posit greater control over the tradition, to varying degrees. For example, largely in response to form critical scholarship, Professor [[Birger Gerhardsson]] examined oral transmission in early rabbinic circles, and proposed that a more controlled and formal model of orality would more accurately reflect the transmission of the Jesus tradition in early Christian circles, and therefore that the oral traditions present in the gospels have been fairly reliably and faithfully transmitted.<ref>Gerhadsson, B. (1998). ''Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity with Tradition aand Transmission in Early Christianity'' Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.</ref> However, other scholars contend that early rabbinic transmissions were not all that concerned with historicity and were not "controlled" until 70 CE.<ref>L Michael L White ''Scripting Jesus: The Gospels in Rewrite'' HarperCollins pg. 102.</ref> Professor Kenneth Bailey, after spending a great deal of time in remote and illiterate villages in the Middle East, used his experience with orality in such places to formulate a similar model of controlled transmission within the early Christian communities, but posited an informal mechanism of control.<ref name="biblicalstudies.org.uk"/>
Controlled models of the Jesus tradition, and with them an evaluation of the gospels as possessing greater historical reliability, have been accepted by some scholars in recent years.<ref>Wansbrough, H. (Ed). ''Jesus and the Oral Gospel Tradition'' London: Sheffield Academic Press{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref><ref>.Dunn, J. D. G. (2003). ''Jesus Remembered'' Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref><ref name = "ActJIntro">[[Robert W. Funk|Funk, Robert W.]] and the [[Jesus Seminar]]. ''The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus''. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. Introduction, p. 1–40</ref> However Thomas R. Yoder Neufeld adds that the early followers of Jesus were not interested in simply preserving the past but were also interested in fitting the narratives to suit urgent information, audience interest and creativity in communication and believed that they were in direct communication with Jesus though the Holy Spirit, thus making it still difficult for historians to assess the historical reliability of the oral tradition.<ref>Thomas R. Yoder Neufeld. ''Recovering Jesus: the witness of the New Testament'' p. 34, 52. Brazos Press, 2007.</ref> With regards to Bailey's studies, Maurice Casey writes that they cannot be applied to 1st century Jews as they were about a different culture at a different time.<ref>Maurice Casey, ''Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian's Account of His Life and Teaching'', p. 48. Continuum International Publishing Group. 2010.</ref>
===Тарихи яктан ышанычлылыгы===
{{Main|:en:Historical reliability of the Gospels}}
The historicity of the gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Historians subject the gospels to critical analysis, attempting to differentiate authentic, reliable information from what they judge to be inventions, exaggerations, and alterations. However, all four of the Gospels meet the five criteria for historical reliability.<ref name = "Sanders">Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993.</ref>
Some biblical scholars consider the synoptic gospels to contain much reliable historical information about the [[historicity of Jesus|historical Jesus]] as a Galilean teacher <ref>"The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds.&nbsp;... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted."—[[Robert E. Van Voorst|Van Voorst, Robert E.]] ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 16.</ref><ref>"The denial of Jesus' historicity has never convinced any large number of people, in or out of technical circles, nor did it in the first part of the century." Walter P. Weaver, ''The Historical Jesus in the Twentieth Century, 1900–1950'', (Continuum International, 1999), page 71.</ref> and of the religious movement he founded, but not everything contained in the gospels is considered to be historically reliable.<ref>The Myth about Jesus, Allvar Ellegard 1992,</ref><ref>Craig Evans, "Life-of-Jesus Research and the Eclipse of Mythology", Theological Studies 54 (1993) p. 5,</ref><ref>Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels pg 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).</ref><ref>“The Historical Figure of Jesus", Sanders, E.P., Penguin Books: London, 1995, p., 3.</ref><ref>Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Vol. II): Meditations on the Gospel According to St. Matthew – Dr Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, Introduction</ref><ref>Grant, Robert M., "A Historical Introduction to the New Testament" (Harper and Row, 1963) http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1230</ref><ref>http://www.church.org.uk/resources/csdetail.asp?csdate=01/04/2007</ref>
The [[baptism of Jesus]], his preaching, and the [[crucifixion of Jesus]] are deemed to be historically authentic.{{Citation needed|date=April 2011}} Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the [[nativity of Jesus]], as well as certain details about the crucifixion and the resurrection.<ref>Who is Jesus? Answers to your questions about the historical Jesus, by John Dominic Crossan, Richard G. Watts (Westminster John Knox Press 1999), page 108</ref><ref>James G. D. Dunn, ''Jesus Remembered'', (Eerdmans, 2003) page 779–781.</ref><ref>Rev. John Edmunds, 1855 ''The seven sayings of Christ on the cross'' Thomas Hatchford Publishers, London, page 26</ref><ref name="Staggs">Stagg, Evelyn and Frank. ''Woman in the World of Jesus''. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978 ISBN 0664241956{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref><ref name = "ActJTomb">[[Robert W. Funk|Funk, Robert W.]] and the [[Jesus Seminar]]. ''The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus''. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. "Empty Tomb, Appearances & Ascension" p. 449–495.</ref><ref>[[Bruce M. Metzger]]'s ''Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament'': {{Bibleref2|Luke|24:51}} is missing in some important early witnesses, {{Bibleref2|Acts|1}} varies between the [[Alexandrian text-type|Alexandrian]] and [[Western text-type|Western versions]].</ref> The fourth gospel, [[Gospel of John|John]], includes a number of historically reliable details, but it differs greatly from the first three gospels, and historians largely discount it. The canonical gospels, overall, are considered to have more historically authentic content than the various non-canonical gospels.{{Citation needed|reason=reliable source needed for the two previous sentence|date=October 2011}}
Some Christian scholars maintain that the gospels are [[inerrancy|inerrant]] descriptions of the life of Jesus.<ref>Wayne Grudem, ''Systematic Theology'' (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994); pages 90–91</ref> On the other extreme, some scholars have concluded that the gospels provide no historical information about Jesus's life since the first gospel account (Mark) may have appeared as much as forty years after Jesus's death.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Howard M. Teeple |year=1970 |month=March |title=The Oral Tradition That Never Existed |jstor=3263638 |journal=Journal of Biblical Literature |volume=89 |issue=1 |pages=56–68 |doi=10.2307/3263638 }}</ref>
The four gospels present [[Internal consistency of the Bible#Gospels|different narratives]], reflecting different intents on the parts of their authors.<ref name = "mvkcgb">Ehrman. Misquoting Jesus.</ref>
All four gospels portray Jesus as leading a group of disciples, performing miracles, preaching in [[Jerusalem in Christianity|Jerusalem]], being crucified, and [[Resurrection appearances of Jesus|rising from the dead]].
The synoptic gospels represent Jesus as an [[exorcist]] and healer who preached in parables about the coming [[Kingdom of God]]. He preached first in Galilee and later in Jerusalem, where [[Jesus and the money changers|he cleansed the temple]]. He states that he offers no sign as proof (Mark) or only the sign of Jonah (Matthew and Luke).<ref name = "5G">[[Robert W. Funk|Funk, Robert W.]], Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. ''The five gospels''. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993.</ref> In Mark, apparently written with a Roman audience in mind, Jesus is a heroic man of action, given to powerful emotions, including agony.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> In Matthew, apparently written for a [[Jewish Christianity|Jewish audience]], Jesus is repeatedly called out as the fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> In Luke, apparently written for gentiles, Jesus is especially concerned with the poor.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Luke emphasizes the importance of prayer and the action of the [[Holy Spirit]] in Jesus' life and in the Christian community.<ref name = "tggkjn">Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005, article ''Luke, Gospel of St''</ref> Jesus appears as a stoic supernatural being, unmoved even by his own crucifixion.<ref name = "mvkcgb"/> Like Matthew, Luke insists that salvation offered by Christ is for all, and not the Jews only.<ref name = "tggkjn"/><ref>St. Matthew, "The Thompson Chain-Reference Study Bible New King James Version", (B.B. Kirkbride Bible Co. Inc., 1997) p. 1258 verse 12:21, p.1274, verse 21:43.</ref>
The Gospel of John represents Jesus as an incarnation of the eternal Word (Logos), who spoke no parables, talked extensively about himself, and did not explicitly refer to a [[Second Coming]].<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Jesus preaches in Jerusalem, launching his ministry with the cleansing of the temple. He performs several miracles as signs, most of them not found in the synoptics. The Gospel of John ends:(21:25) "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
One important aspect of the study of the gospels is the genre under which they fall. Genre "is a key convention guiding both the composition and the interpretation of writings.<ref>Burridge, R. A. (2006). Gospels. In J. W. Rogerson & Judith M. Lieu (Eds) ''The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies''. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 433</ref> " Whether the gospel authors set out to write novels, myths, histories, or biographies has a tremendous impact on how they ought to be interpreted. If, for example, Rudolf Bultmann was correct, and the gospel authors had no interest in history or in a historical Jesus,<ref name="Bultmann, R. 1921"/> then the gospels must be read and interpreted in this light. However, some recent studies suggest that the genre of the gospels ought to be situated within the realm of ancient biography.<ref>Stanton, G. N. (1974). ''Jesus of Nazareth in New Testament Preaching'' Society of New Testament Studies Monograph Series 27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref><ref>Talbert, C. H. (1977). ''What is a Gospel? The Genre of the Canonical Gospels''. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref><ref>Aune, D. E. (1987). ''The New Testament in Its Literary Environment''. Philadelphia: Westminster.{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref><ref>Frickenschmidt, D. (1997). ''Evangelium als Biographie: Die vier Evanelien im Rahmen antiker Erzählkunst''. Tübingen: Francke Verlag.</ref><ref>Burridge, R. A. (2004). ''What are the Gospels? A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography''. rev. updated edn. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.</ref> Although not without critics,<ref>e.g. Vines, M. E. (2002). ''The Problem of the Markan Genre: The Gospel of Mark and the Jewish Novel''. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature{{page needed|date=November 2011}}</ref> the position that the gospels are a type of ancient biography is the consensus among scholars today.<ref>Burridge, R. A. (2006). Gospels. In J. W. Rogerson & Judith M. Lieu (Eds) ''The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies''. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 437</ref>
==Каноник булмаган инҗилләр==
{{Main|:en:New Testament apocrypha}}
In addition to the four canonical gospels, early Christians wrote other gospels that were not accepted into the canon, some of which are discussed below.
===Яһүди-христиан инҗилләр===
{{Main|:en:Jewish-Christian Gospels|:en:Gospel of the Nazarenes|:en:Gospel of the Ebionites|:en:Gospel of the Hebrews}}
[[Epiphanius of Salamis|Epiphanius]], [[Jerome]] and other early church fathers preserve in their writings citations from one or more [[Jewish-Christian gospels]], versions of Matthew used by [[Ebionites]] and [[Nazarene (sect)|Nazarene]]s. Most modern critical scholars consider that the extant citations suggest at least two and probably three distinct Jewish-Christian versions of Matthew, and that the source language of these is probably Greek.<ref>[[Philipp Vielhauer]] in [[Schneemelcher]]'s ''New Testament Apocrypha'' Vol.1 (1971) English revised edition R. Wilson, of ''Neutestamentliche Apokryphen'' 1964 Hennecke & Schneemelcher</ref> A minority of scholars, including [[Edward Nicholson (librarian)|Edward Nicholson]] (1879) and [[James R. Edwards]] (2009) have suggested that the surviving citations are all from one gospel, which is, as Jerome himself records that the Nazarenes claimed, the original, and Hebrew, Gospel of Matthew.<ref>[[Edward Nicholson (librarian)|Edward Nicholson]] (1879), The Gospel according to the Hebrews: its fragments translated and annotated, first published 1879, [[James R. Edwards|Edwards, James R.]] ''The Hebrew Gospel and the Development of the Synoptic Tradition''. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. p. 402 ISBN 0-8028-6234-9</ref>
According to Eusebius, [[Origen]] said the first gospel was written by Matthew (''Church History'' 6.25.4). Jerome reports that the Nazarenes believed that this gospel was composed in Hebrew near Jerusalem for Hebrew Christians and Jerome claimed to have translated parts of it into Greek, but if so any the Greek translation has not survived. Jerome reports that the Nazarenes' Hebrew original was kept at the Library of Caesarea and that the Nazarene Community transcribed a copy for him which he used in his work (''On Illustrious Men'' 3:7) Jerome refers to this gospel sometimes as the ''Gospel according to the Hebrews'' (3.7) and sometimes as the ''Gospel of the Apostles'' (''Against Pelagius'' 3.2).
===Фома инҗиле===
{{Main|:en:Gospel of Thomas}}
The gospel attributed to Thomas is mostly [[Wisdom literature|wisdom]] without narrating Jesus's life. A few scholars argue that its first edition was written c. 50–60, but that the surviving edition was written in the first half of the 2nd century.<ref name = "5GStages"/> This would mean that its first edition was contemporary with the earliest letters of [[Paul the Apostle]]. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church says that the original may date from c. 150.<ref name=ODCC:GofT>"Thomas, Gospel of". Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005</ref> It may represent a tradition independent from the canonical gospels, but that developed over a long time and was influenced by Matthew and Luke.<ref name=ODCC:GofT/> While it can be understood in [[Gnostic]] terms, it lacks the characteristic features of Gnostic doctrine.<ref name=ODCC:GofT/> The Jesus Seminar identified two of its unique parables, the parable of the empty jug and the parable of the assassin.<ref name = "5GThomas">[[Robert W. Funk|Funk, Robert W.]], Roy W. Hoover, and the [[Jesus Seminar]]. ''The five gospels''. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "The Gospel of Thomas", p 471–532.</ref> It had been lost but was discovered, in a Coptic version dating from c. 350, at [[Nag Hammadi]] in 1945–46, and three papyri, dated to c. 200, which contain fragments of a Greek text similar to but not identical with that in the Coptic language, have also been found.<ref name=ODCC:GofT/>
===Петр инҗиле===
{{Main|:en:Gospel of Peter}}
The gospel of Peter was likely written in the first half of the 2nd century.<ref name="ReferenceA" /><ref>{{cite book
| last = Ehrman
| first = Bart
| authorlink = Bart Ehrman
| title = The Lost Christianities
| publisher = Oxford University Press
| location = New York
| year = 2003
| page = xi
| isbn = 978-0-19-514183-2}}</ref> It seems to be largely legendary, hostile toward Jews, and including [[docetic]] elements.<ref name="ReferenceA">"Peter, Gospel of St.". Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005</ref> It had been lost but was rediscovered in the 19th century.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>
===Иуда инҗиле===
{{Main|:en:Gospel of Judas}}
The [[Gospel of Judas]] is another controversial and ancient text that purports to tell the story of the gospel from the perspective of Judas, the disciple who is usually said to have betrayed Jesus. It paints an unusual picture of the relationship between Jesus and Judas, in that appears to interpret Judas's act not as betrayal, but rather as an act of obedience to the instructions of Jesus. The text was recovered from a cave in Egypt by a thief and thereafter sold on the black market until it was finally discovered by a collector who, with the help of academics from Yale and Princeton, was able to verify its authenticity. The document itself does not claim to have been authored by Judas (it is, rather, a gospel about Judas), and dates no earlier than the 2nd century.
===Гайсәнең әйтемнәре җыелмасы===
{{Main|:en:Q document}}
According to scholars proposing the existence of a hypothetical sayings-source, a ''Redensquelle'', "Q" (following the terminology of [[Johannes Weiss]]) at some time there existed a document comprised mostly sayings of Jesus with little narrative. It is presumed the source for many of Jesus' sayings in Matthew and Luke, and accordingly must have preceded these gospels. It is believed that the earliest form of the sayings were written c. 50–60.<ref name = "5GStages">[[Robert W. Funk|Funk, Robert W.]], Roy W. Hoover, and the [[Jesus Seminar]]. ''The five gospels''. HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "Stages in the Development of Early Christian Tradition" p. 128</ref> However [[Mark Goodacre]] and other scholars have questioned the existence of a Q document.<ref>{{Cite book|first=James|last=McConkey Robinson|title=The Sayings Gospel Q in Greek and English|year=2001|ISBN=0-8006-3494-2|page=23|quote="Q." (with a period making it clear that it was meant as an abbreviation, representing Quelle, "source") was first used in 1880, but "Q" came to be used simply as a symbol first in the 1890s, beginning with Johannes Weiss...}}</ref>
===Балачак инҗилләре===
{{Main|:en:Infancy gospel}}
A genre of "[[Infancy gospel]]s" (Greek: ''protoevangelion'') arose in the 2nd century, such as the ''[[Gospel of James]]'', which introduces the concept of the [[Perpetual Virginity]] of Mary, and the ''[[Infancy Gospel of Thomas]]'' (not to be confused with the absolutely different sayings ''Gospel of Thomas''), both of which related many miraculous incidents from the life of Mary and the childhood of Jesus that are not included in the canonical gospels.
{{Main|:en:gospel harmony}}
Another genre is that of [[gospel harmony|gospel harmonies]], in which the four canonical gospels were selectively recast as a single narrative to present a consistent text. Very few fragments of harmonies have survived. The ''[[Diatessaron]]'' was such a harmonization, compiled by [[Tatian]] around 175. It was popular for at least two centuries in [[Syria]], but eventually it fell into disuse.
===Марсионның Лука инҗиле===
{{Main|:en:Gospel of Marcion}}
[[Marcion of Sinope]], c. 150, had a version of the gospel of Luke which differed substantially from that which has now become the standard text. Marcion's version was far less Jewish than the now canonical text, and his critics alleged that he had edited out the portions he didn't like from the canonical version, though Marcion argued that his text was the more genuinely original one. Marcion also rejected all the other gospels, including Matthew, Mark and especially John, which he alleged had been forged by [[Irenaeus]].
==Исламның карашлары==
{{Weasel|date=November 2012}}
The original gospel of Jesus is named the Injil ({{lang-ar|إنجيل}} ''{{transl|ar|DIN|ʾInǧīl}}'') in the Qur'an. The word ''Injil'' occurs twelve times in the [[Qur'an]] and refers to the book of revelation given to the prophet [[Jesus in Islam|Jesus]]. God taught Jesus both the law and gospel.<ref>{{Cite quran|3|48|s=ns}}: "And God will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel"</ref> Muslim scholars{{who|date=November 2012}} generally agree that ''Injil'' refers to the true gospel, bestowed upon Jesus by God. The word ''Injil'' is used in the [[Qur'an]], the [[Hadith]] and early Muslim documents{{fact|date=November 2012}} to refer specifically to the revelations made by God to Jesus. With the argument that a gospel should have a single source text as in [[Qur'an]], Muslims deduce that none of the gospel versions can be the ''Injil'' mentioned. Many Muslim scholars{{who|date=November 2012}} believe that the ''Injil'' has undergone [[tahrif|alteration]], resulting in plural gospels, and thus, probably the words and the meaning of the words have been distorted, in favour of the benefit of persons or churches involved.
==Шулай ук карагыз==
*[[List of gospels]]
*[[Acts of the Apostles (genre)]]
*[[Agrapha]] are the collection of religious sayings attributed to Jesus Christ that are not found in the canonical gospels.
*[[Apocalyptic literature]]
*[[The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ]]
*[[Bodmer Papyri]]
*''[[Godspell]]'' is a musical based on the gospels of Jesus Christ. The word "Gódspell" is [[Old English|Anglo Saxon]] (c. 1000 AD) for Gospel.<ref>[http://www.google.com/books?id=JT9aAAAAMAAJ&dq=Godspell&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=1900&as_brr=0&pg=PA2#v=onepage&q=Godspell&f=false Joseph Bosworth, The Gothic and Anglo Saxon Gospells, John Russell Smith, 1874]</ref>
*[[Gospel (liturgy)]]
25 004