Authenticity of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

Question

If the four books of the gospel really had been altered to make Jesus devine or whatever other claims there are, don't you think they would have made these books indifferent in all of the aspects of Jesus' life? I believe that since the gospels have minor differences, this add authenticity to the writings and shows that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all had different perspectives. Two people who witness the same things often don't witness the same things - if you know what I mean. I have read in a book called "Letters from a Skeptic" that when archaeologists look at the four gospels as ancient text format (not as the Word of God), it's authenticity and reliability is far better than any other writings in those days. Read the book I've mentioned or look up the subject! And please let your answers be respectful for the sake of others.

That is very true jworks, thank you for sharing that. A Christian is not a Christian if he bases what he believes on proof. I'm very glad you said that.

Answer 1

I agree with you. Matthew was written to a Jewish audience, and that is why it quotes a lot of the Old Testament prophecies. Jews were most concerned that Jesus be the "King", and Matthew paints such a picture. Mark presents Jesus as the suffering Servant of the Lord. He focuses on Jesus' works, more than His teachings. Luke was written to Gentiles, unfamiliar with Jewish traditions, and Luke wrote it to give an accurate account to "Theophilus", and so it is the most straightforward of the gospels. It speaks of Jesus' humanity more than the other gospels. John described Jesus' deity to both Jews and Gentiles. If you take all gospels together, it paints a complete picture of Jesus.

No two people see things exactly the same, and would emphasize certain characteristics of events to better reach their audience. They do not contradict each other so much as complement each other, and taken as a whole, one can come to know Jesus.

As for the existence of Jesus, that has been documented even apart from the Bible. These writings include Flavius Josephus (AD 93), the Babylonian Talmud (AD 70-200), Pliny the Younger’s letter to Emperor Trajan (approx AD 100), the Annals of Tacitus (AD 115-117), Mara Bar Serapion (sometime after AD 73), and Suetorius’ Life of Claudius and Life of Nero (AD 120). They speak of His birth, ministry, death and Resurrection.

So, yes, I believe the gospels.

Answer 2

You are correct.
Each of the Gospel writers bring their own personal perspective to the Life of Jesus.
Matthew and John were among the original 12 Apostles.
Luke was a convert during the ministry of Paul, as was young John Mark, the writer of Mark's Gospel.

Matthew, being a Levite, brings a particularly Jewish flavor to the story. John, being the youngest of the Apostles, brings a youthful exuberance and affection to it. Each writer is unique, addressing unique issues of different societal groups.

Yet the same story line prevails throughout all four Gospels.

Answer 3

You should read the case for Christ. Try studying from the other side as well as the skeptic's side. Be an honest skeptic like Thomas when he examined Jesus said to him, "My Lord, my God."

Only the book of John is a firsthand account. Mark, Matthew and Luke were all secondhand accounts, all very reliable and true but you get something special with John very different in style from the others. There is a different context of Jesus in each, but not a different definition.

Answer 4

I don't think it's merely a matter of individual perspective as you suggest about people seeing two different things while watching the same event.
I think the dissimilarities which strike me the most are the accounts of death and resurrection. We're not talking about a minor detail here. We're talking about the main theme of Christianity and while viewed side by side they disagree on major issues... who saw him first and what was said?
Genesis is a huge problem as well. Two different accounts of the creation of human beings which are mutually exclusive.
Even if I were to accept your theory this would mean it is NOT the infallible word of God but rather a bungled attempt to deify a man who walked the earth.
Also it means the words are subjectively biased by their authors through time (written over a long period of time) which raises doubt there could be anything called the infallible word of God with human bias and influence inside the text.
Case closed for me... enjoy spirituality and the connection it brings you with other human beings. But for me, there is no God.

Answer 5

Well Mark and Luke did not witness most if not all of their gospel accounts personally so they attained their information from others. Luke did so for his friend Theophilus, and probably obtained most of his information from Paul and Mary, the mother of Jesus. Mark most likely documented his gospel based on the teachings and accounts of Peter whom he travelled with. It is also speculated that a gospel account known as the "Q" a brief account of specific parables, teachings, and events in Christ's ministries organized by the apostles and disciples after Pentecost to maintain unity amongst the seven major Christian churches of the time, this account may be where most of Mark comes from since the author of Mark is not known for certain. This account would also explain the striking similarity in words used in all four gospels regarding specific events in Jesus' ministry. Matthew and John were written based on their own personal knowledge of Jesus' ministry. Most scholars recognize the following as the approximates dates of each gospel: Matthew - 50-69AD Mark - 50-69AD Luke - 60-65AD, (wrote Acts shortly thereafter, 60-65AD) John - 85AD, (wrote Revelation about 10 years later) This is based on the historical influences of these gospels on the churches of the time and the dates when certain apostles died.

Answer 6

of the 4 writers of the gospels... 2 were Jesus' disciples 2 received Christ afterward. Matthew was an educated tax collector and had access to records because he collected the tax that Caesar Augustus had initiated. Luke was an educated Physician that had received Christ thru apostle Paul. Mark also received Christ under Paul. John one of the disciples that Jesus called the beloved. They all wrote their Gospels from a different point of view. This would indicate that they just didnt get together and make up the story. So the 4 Gospels indicate to me that Jesus Christ is the real thing not a hoax.

Answer 7

Here's a fact: the Gospels were not written by people who had ever met Jesus.

Mark was written in the year 70 c.e., 40 years after Christ's death, in ROME, in the Greek language; Jesus spoke Aramaic.

All three other gospels are derived from Mark.

Answer 8

differences in the four accounts of jesus' life
prove that their accurate? lol
"indifferent" means you dont care about something one way or the other, not the opposite of different.

Answer 9

LOL! Do yo mean to tell us you've never heard of using common sources or, more bluntly, plagiarism? Try understanding that which you read.

Answer 10

It's been 2000 years. We are lucky to have what we do have.