Why are the Gospels Written in the Third Person?

Some have argued that the gospels should be rejected because they claim to be first hand accounts but are written in the third person. Why would the writers of the first four books of the new testament have written their accounts in the third person?

The 4 gospels consist of the books written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John concerning the life and works of Jesus of Nazareth.

Luke begins his book with this statement, “Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed.” This would seem to imply that although Luke may have been present for some of the events, he is writing from a researcher’s perspective who is compiling information gathered from multiple sources. Thus, we should expect the book of Luke to be written in the third person. However, from this passage we can also assume that other written records of the life of Jesus had already been written by the time Luke sat down to write his account. Furthermore, the book of Luke is continued in Acts, where we see the “we passages” in Acts 16:10-17, 20:5-15, 21:1-18, and 27:1-28:16. Here it seems as though Luke personally joins Paul in his journeys and no longer writes in the third person but in the first.

Mark was not an eyewitness of the life of Jesus, but rather recorded Peter’s eyewitness accounts as Peter’s disciple and interpreter. As an Apostle, Peter was an eyewitness and it has been historically recorded that Mark “made no mistake” and did not include “any false statement” as he recorded Peter’s first hand account. Around 180 AD, Irenaeus wrote “Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, …handed down to us in writing the substance of Peter’s preaching.” This would explain why Mark wrote his gospel in the third person, for he himself did not see the events recorded.

John the Apostle, son of Zebedee, is credited with authorship of the gospel that bears his name. There is discussion among Biblical scholars as to if John was indeed the author of the gospel or not. In John 1:14, it can be read “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory.” The use of “us” and “we” as pronouns in the Greek would most reasonably imply that the author had witnessed at least some of the events firsthand. However, there is the possibility that the pronouns refer to all of humanity, and not to a firsthand account. The lack of any reference to the Apostle John in the book (when he is mentioned over 20 times in the other gospels), the referring of John the Baptist as simply “John” and the consistent reference to the “disciple whom Jesus loved” are peculiarities that those denying John’s authorship must address. It is also noteworthy, as per your question, that the other biblical books credited to John in authorship (1,2,3 John and Revelation) are written in the first person.

Matthew is generally thought to be the true author of the gospel that bears his name as well. This leaves John and Matthew as eyewitnesses who likely wrote of their experiences in the third person. So why would they have written in the third person instead of the first person? There are several reasons why this is the case.
It was a fairly standard practice in ancient writing to refer to oneself in the third person. We find this, for example, in Xenophon’s Expedition of Cyrus and Caesar’s Commentaries. Given this fact, it is not particularly surprising that Matthew and John adopt the same convention; it is certainly not evidence against Matthew’s or John’s authorship of the Gospels that bear their names. But what do we make of John’s writing in first person throughout his other biblical books? The main difference between the Gospels and the other books of the New Testament is that the Gospels function primarily as biographies for Christ and His ministry. John’s four other biblical books are either intended for teaching, encouraging and correcting a particular person or group (1,2,3 John) or to report to specific churches what the Lord had revealed to him through revelation regarding the end times and the final judgment (Revelation). These were more personal letters than biographies.

The purpose of all the Gospels is clear. A written account of what happened during Jesus ministry was not needed during the lifetimes of those that had actually been there and witnessed it. This is why we do not need to write textbooks today discussing what happened on September 11, 2001. There are many reputable people who we can ask personally about the happenings of that day when thousands died during the terrorists attacks on the US. However, it should be expected that at some point, someone who was there will take the time to write down everything they deem important about that day so that their memories will not die with them. This would be the case with the Gospels regarding Jesus Christ. However, just as the person writing about 9/11 might see fit to exclude themselves from their written record to maintain a sense of objectivity for the reader (few history books are ever written in first person except when they make quotations), we might expect Matthew and John to put their focus on the objective realities of what Christ said and did, and not on their subjective thoughts or insights. Their deep respect of the subject at hand, namely Jesus, prevented them from inserting themselves as characters in a historical setting that was much bigger than themselves.

(As a side note, it might be argued that the gospel writers were biased in their writings in favor of Christ. The proper response to this would not be to argue against such a bias, but to argue as to how the bias had affected their reporting of the objective historical events. For example, 100 years from now if we had two accounts of 9/11, one from the American perspective, and one from the Chinese perspective, we might hear different biases of the same historical event. However, that does not mean that the objective claims made by these reports should be discarded. Planes did fly into the twin towers, the towers did fall, thousands were killed. Thos are the facts. Similarly, Jesus did do miracles, He did raise people from the dead, He did die on the cross, and He did raise again three days later.)

This is one possible (and I think likely) explanation. For more information on the Gospels and other New Testament books, I strongly recommend Donald Guthrie’s “New Testament Introduction.”