Which writers were not apostles in the New Testament?

A:Christian tradition is that the New Testament gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, of whom Mark and Luke are usually not seen as apostles. However, these attributions were made later in the second century, before which the gospels were anonymous. New Testament scholars have looked closelly at the gospels and say that none of them could have been written by an eyewitness to the events portrayed, meaning that all four authors were not really apostles.

So also it is with the epistles. It is accepted that Paul wrote the majority of the epistles attributed to him, but scholars say that the epistles attributed to John, Jude and Peter were all written pseudepigraphically dring the second century. The epistle attributed to James is uncertain, but could have been early enough to have been written by the apostle James or James the brother of Jesus.

Another Answer:

The Gospel of Mark who was a disciple of the Apostle Peter, and the Gospel of Luke who was a companion of the Apostle Paul.

The Bible tells us that all Scripture is inspired by God who uses individuals and their personal traits to convey His message - at times directly stating what is to be written into Words. It is important to note that no writing in the New Testament speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem as Jesus prophecized would occur and did in 70 A.D., nor does any writing note the death of James the brother of Jesus and Head of the Church of God @ Jerusalem in 62 A.D., the death of Paul about 64 A.D. or of Peter about a year later in 65 A.D. This leads many biblical scholars to date the New Testament writings between 50 A.D. to 95 A.D. and gives credence to the eye-witness accounts and the lack of myths creeping into these sacred writings.

What is 'special' of noting here is the same people who argue against the writings of the Gospels and Epistles to be mid to late 1st Century, are now beginning to agree that their logia 'Q' personality who is said to be the basis for both Matthew and Mark's work in their understanding may have existed during an earlier timeframe than once believed. So if Q actually existed then that would push the first writings of Christ's Words and deeds back even further lessening the available time for myth to creep in and adding to the validity and accuracy of the gospel accounts. You simply cannot have it both ways.