Anonymous Team authorship.

[JarekS]

Let me start with the famous example of Bart Ehrmann. Bart signs his books. Regardless of whether they are bedtime stories published in Harper One or specialized works and textbooks published by OUP, CUP. He is the author of all these items.
In the case of the gospels, we are dealing with anonymous works written by an anonymous publisher under the supervision of a team of ghost writers and editors. If we look at Venn diagrams for the synoptic gospels, the distribution of content and content dependencies, and the failure of any simple 2SH, 2GH reconstructions, this can only mean one thing. The synoptic gospels are the work of one publisher, where several ghost writers used common sources, and several editors combined them into subsequent products. I know this is a shocking conclusion, but so far none of the presented models work, so I am making a proposal that certainly explains the synoptic problem. A dozen or so years ago, Klinghardt suggested giving priority to *Ev written by another ghost-writer, but somehow he did not convince the biblical scholar community. It is not my job to judge it because I am just a reader who does not know Greek. *Ev is primarily the work of Luke and contains a mixture of writing and ideas from various authors. *Ev is the first gospel used on a large scale in the activities of a large missionary structure.

So what remains? Works by Boismard, Burkett, Rolland - multi-level structures of content packages with assumptions of many hypothetical sources and relationships between them. Yes, you can prove anything this way, but there is a lot of value in this analysis. Well, it shows content dependencies in detail. The equivalent of many hypothetical sources and the complicated process of combining them is a few guys in a scriptorium releasing new products under the supervision of a publisher.
Pauline Corpus. G. Zuntz came to the conclusion that Paul's epistles are not known from their original circulation, but only from a published collection of 10 letters in which 2 or 3 were false and 7 or 8 original. All letters show traces of very intensive editing. The collection was supposed to have been created around 100 CE. This is well argued and interestingly shown in a hand-drawn drawing by Zuntz from the 1940s. No one has ever had access to the letters except through this collection.
For me, Paul's Letters is another team work in which one ghost writer wrote significantly more than the other two. Attempts to date the letters based on their content are doomed to failure. The content of the letter does not provide a solution as to whether we are dealing with an authentic or invented tradition. Everything can be invented and written.
Shepherd of Hermas. A very important early Christian writing on the popularity of the Gospel of Matthew. At least two, if not three, authors of the text, plus, of course, an editor and a publisher. By a strange coincidence, in Romans 16 Hermas is greeted. Has the Publisher decided to attach this work to Paul's circle?

[Peter Kirby]

Welcome to the forum! Fascinating first post, thank you. You're in the right place for this kind of discussion.

[JarekS]

Thank You Peter for having me.