Misquoting Truth

Ever hear of the book Misquoting Truth by Timothy Paul Jones?
A summary of the chapters are discussed here.
http://ift.tt/1M0FQhP
This passage from the link confused me

Quote:

Ehrman believes that the authors of the Gospel’s were anonymous. Jones notes that the accuracy of the Gospels does not depend on who first wrote them. Jones admits it’s impossible to prove with certainty who wrote the Gospels, but he argues that one can make a probable case for who did. Ehrman believes that the authors wouldn’t have put their names in the titles of the books. Jones notes that that isn’t necessarily true, given that many authors did that at the time, so it’s perfectly legitimate for one to expect books to be called “the Gospel according to Matthew”. .... points out two of the Gospels specifically claim to be based on eyewitness reports: The Gospel of Luke claims to be the testimony of “those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning” and the Gospel of John states “The one who saw this has testified – his testimony is true”. The Gospel of John is based on the eyewitness testimony of the apostle John. Additionally, early church leaders (Papias of Hierapolis, Irenaeus of Lyons) believed Mark and Matthew were also based on eyewitness testimony. Mark was believed to be based on eyewitness testimony of Simon Peter, and the apostle Matthew was responsible for the Gospel that bore his name. To support the claim that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses, Jones points out that when Mark’s first Gospel began circulating in 70 A.D., that it’s almost certain that people who had seen the risen Jesus were still alive.

His defense falls flat because there are problems which debunk this found here: https://adversusapologetica.wordpres...-first-gospel/
This bugs me greatly. I mean you claim eyewitness accounts and they end up making blunders.

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1NZd8wq