Give me reasons why the gospels MUST have been written by luke mark john and matt (no saying cuz god said so or that it said it somewhere else in the bible....for that is circular reasoning)
Give me reasons why the gospels COULD not have been written by those dudes (no stupid answers, give me evidence)
2007-03-04 17:31:29 · 6 answers · asked by its not gay if... 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The Gospels could not have been written by the Jewish companions of Jesus because they all contain geography errors -- errors that would not have been made by a 1st century Jew living in Judea or Galilee. They are the errors of someone who had never been to Palestine.
2007-03-04 17:39:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The principle problem of gospel authorship is that we don't really know who these guys are. Matthew is assumed to be the apostle Mathew principally because his list of apostles substitutes the name Levi for the Matthew in other lists. (Doesn't necessarily follow.) Some argue that it should be called the gospel of Peter because Matthew spends more time on Peter than any other gospel does.
Mark is a mystery. There isa John Mark in Acts, a very minor character, who has been suggested as the author of the gospel, but we know very little about John Mark either. And Luke isn't mentioned anywhere else. We think of him as a physician because his gospel has a strong focus on healing.
John is considered to be John, the brother of James and son of Zebedee. In this gospel, there are references to the unnnamed "disciple whom Jesus loved". People assume it's John. Because the gospel was written so late, it is said that John was among the youngest of the apostles and wrote it when he was old, but we have no other evidence, and some scholars claim the gospel was written by followers of John. There are also three short epistles and the book of Revelation, all purportedly written by a "John", but they have a different writing style from the gospel.
Arguing about whether the gospels were written by these people seems pointless if we don't have a clear idea of who these people were. All we can say for sure is that they were Christians writing for their communities about Jesus as they understood him.
2007-03-05 01:56:49 · answer #2 · answered by skepsis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
These men were with Jesus. They saw, heard, talked to Him. They gave eye wittiness accounts of various events. Some of their writings are close to being the same but that's because they were all there hearing and seeing the same thing. As far as we know, there were just the 12 disciples and Jesus at the last supper. How could accounts of the last supper been written had these people (the ones you list) not been there? Some events described in their writings were done in the presents of just some, or all, of the disciples. If it was all a hoax, why go to the trouble of 4 writers? Why not just 1 or 2? These books are true.
2007-03-05 01:46:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe these gospels were written by these folks. What would be the point in lying about that? There were other gospels written by other people, which were not included in the bible. These gospels were probably included because they supported the points that whomever assembled the bible was trying to make, not because they were written by them dudes.
2007-03-05 01:44:18 · answer #4 · answered by stedyedy 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I know you do not like the circular reasoning but ... well look at it this way. The only place that says these guys existed is in the Bible. Its not like we can go look at a roman census a verify there existance from a second sourse.
2007-03-05 12:17:55 · answer #5 · answered by Craig 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no reason why those gospels were writen by those guys. There is no "proof" either way. It just is that way.
2007-03-05 01:36:48 · answer #6 · answered by raven_geisha 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋