There is plenty of good historical work being done on the authorship books of the New Testament. A lot of it being done just up I40 from here at the Chapel Hill campus of UNC and at Duke University. What I have read and heard leads me to believe is that Andrew Sullivan's approach is pretty valid.

When I was a devout atheist, as several of you seem to be, I still very much respected Jesus the philosopher. It was obvious to me that there was wisdom in in the words, but as some of you I did not see a lot of those words as practical. But they are practical in one sense.

He was training evangelists. The story of Peter cutting of the Roman soldier's ear is a perfect example. Jesus, admonished Peter, according to the story, restored the ear and went on to accept his martyrdom. This was the blueprint for the overthrow of the Roman Empire. Or certainly for the overthrow of the regime that worshiped Roman gods.

It would be disaster if everyone lived as the "birds in the field" but evangelists do so to this day. They live off the largess of their audience and other supporters.

Remember that Jesus was talking to his disciples and those who would follow them and the words become crystal clear.