Yea. And I bet just because your mom says she's your mom doesn't mean she actually is either.
If the only thing I have is her word, then no, I wouldn't just accept that. Fortunately for me (and her
), she has a whole bunch of evidence to show me. And if all else fails, there's always a DNA test to see if she's telling the truth or not, but the evidence I have seen so far has convinced me she is in fact my mother. Should there ever come a time when I doubt that, I'm sure to get that DNA test.
Find me the date as best you can of the first recorded DOUBT that Matthew was not written by Matthew. I bet you can't go back more than a couple of hundred years.
And this is relevant how? Belief that something is true is not evidence that it's true.
But between first centurey Ireneus listed is as authentic.
Irenaeus was second century, LATE second century. Further he was a Christian, somehow I don't think he'd say the gospels were false.
And as far as the 5th century AD is see no church father naming it in a list of questionable apostolic books.
Of course the Church isn't going to claim that their own books are false, you can't build a religion that way.
So most trusted Dr. Johnny Come Lately, when did New Testament scholars first begin to raise doubts?
I'd say somewhere around the 18th century or so. Again, I fail to see how this is relevant. Either one has evidence that shows them to be authentic and true, or one does not. In the first case, no harm done, in the second, why claim them as true and authentic?
I hunt for the truth