How did Luke and Mark write the Gospel if they weren't apostles how would they know the exact words of the

Question

Lord, I get they were orally told to them but how did they remeber it all completly (almost word by word)?

if they didn't witness it? sorry for my grammar problems.

Answer 1

I hope you dont get caught up on the little things, what really matters is. Jesus Christ was here and He is the way, truth. If you realize how amazing and awesome God is


you will realize if He created this crazy planet He could create a book that is true.

Answer 2

The Gospels are actually stories told by different witnesses that met Jesus. Example, only John was present at the crucifixion scene how come does the rest of the Gospels have the crucifixion part too?

They are all told by witnesses who are present at the crucifixion scene. Take a look at Gospel of Luke, how would Luke knows about the visitation (chapter 2 or 3)? It must have been told by somebody elses. But from my own knowledge, the Gospel of Luke most common witness is Mother Mary.

I doubt they remember word by word what Jesus told them. Because Gospels are written much later, but not at the time when they are with Jesus. I suppose they wrote the important point which they want people to take note of.

Answer 3

Mark was one of the disciples! Luke lived while there were still many eye witnesses to the things Jesus had done. And yes they did remember things very well back then. I know there isn't much stock in memorizing or oral traditions today but it was very reliable in that time.

P.S. Chippy: It was NOT like the telephone game. Like I said, Mark was a disciple and Luke did alot of research including talking with other eye witnesses! If anything got distorted someone would have been there saying "that's not true".

Answer 4

Mark had access to the Gospel of Matthew and his record contains only 7 percent that is not contained in the other Gospels, it would be a mistake to believe that Mark simply condensed Matthew’s Gospel and added a few special details

Mark evidently wrote primarily for the Romans


Since Mark evidently wrote primarily for the Romans, he most likely did his writing in Rome. Both earliest tradition and the contents of the book allow for the conclusion that it was composed in Rome during either the first or the second imprisonment of the apostle Paul, and hence during the years 60-65 C.E. In those years Mark was in Rome at least once, and likely twice. All the leading authorities of the second and third centuries confirm that Mark was the writer. The Gospel was already in circulation among Christians by the middle of the second century. Its appearance in all the early catalogs of the Christian Greek Scriptures confirms the authenticity of Mark’s Gospel.


That Mark’s account is accurate is to be seen from the full harmony of his Gospel not only with the other Gospels but also with all the Holy Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. Moreover, Jesus is shown again and again as one having authority not only in his spoken word but over the forces of nature, over Satan and the demons, over sickness and disease, yes, over death itself. So Mark opens his narrative with the impressive introduction: “The beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ.” His coming and ministry meant “good news,” and hence the study of Mark’s Gospel must be beneficial to all readers. The events described by Mark cover the period from spring 29 C.E. to spring 33 C.E.


(luke)


From Luke’s writings it is apparent that he had a far better education than such “ordinary” men as Peter and John; which is what we would expect of a physician. (Acts 4:13, NW) His vocabulary is twice as large as that of Matthew and Mark. His accounts are better worded, more varied, contain better Greek and come closer to the classical Greek than those of any other Christian Greek Scripture writer.

What eloquent testimony to Scriptural authenticity Luke here gives! The facts are vouchsafed by eyewitnesses; he himself has traced all things from the beginning with accuracy and then arranged them logically, thus furnishing a sound basis for faith. Incidentally Luke here indicates the superiority of the written over the oral record.

Answer 5

In a number of places in the Bible it says of itself that God "moved people" and /or "inspired people" to write what they did:

2 Peter 1:20-21
20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
(from New International Version)


2 Tim 3:15-17
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
(from New International Version)

Answer 6

John Mark, the author of the gospel of Mark, was a disciple of Jesus. He was even present at the last supper and followed Jesus to the Garden were he was arrested. He includes himself in his own gospel by telling about how the crowd stripped him and sent him running naked into the night. He was not one of the 12 leader. But Jesus had 72 others who traveled with himself.

His knowledge of Jesus and his saying was extensive enough tht Barnabas and Paul took him on their first missionary journey for the expressed purpose of someone who knew and could recite the sayings of Jesus so there would be no question about them.

Luke, in the intro to his gospel (read the first 5 verses) states he took the time to research these things - talking to the people involved - before he wrote about them in his gispel. When you read Luke, he excludes details mentioned in the other gospels. While Matthew tells of two blind men healed, Luke tells of only one - but calls him by name. Apparently he was only able to find and question one of the men, so that is the only one he tells about. It is those kind of omissions and details (the man's name) that make Luke's gospel believable.

God took the time to preserve four gospel. One (Matthew) is by a member of the inner circle - the leadership - that shows us what they thought and what motivated them. One (Mark) is by a follower, who shows us how Jesus was preceived by the people and the crowds. One (Luke) is by a scholar, who give us his words from interviewing the people involved. The last (John) gives us the historical prespective of one looking back over decades of serving Christ and seeing the effect of his words.

By giving us four different accounts of the life of Christ from different perspectives and different times, God assured that everything we needed to know about Jesus was provided.

(And if Luke and Mark somehow "perverted" the teachings of Jesus, which do they agree with the words recorded by Matthew, who was part of the inner circle? That in itself shows that they are reliable.)

Answer 7

Luke supposidly got his information from Our Lady(worlds first interview?).He also supposidly painted the first picture of Our Lady.

Answer 8

have u ever played the telephone game? how accurate is it to pass down a large sentance down a large line? now try to say an entire chapter of the bible and pass it along orally.


if u think u can without errors your full of it.

Answer 9

They were witnessed to through revelation .

Answer 10

Hearsay, in a court of law it would not be permissible.