Who Wrote The Gospels?

[headinhands]

"Matthew contains 606 of Markâ??s 661 verses. Luke contains 320 of Markâ??s 661 verses. Of the 55 verses of Mark which Matthew does not reproduce, Luke reproduces 31; therefore there are only 24 verses in all of Mark not reproduced somewhere in Matthew or Luke."

A good diagram here

Religions do contain wisdom. The teaching of Jesus were found in other religions such as the golden rule of 'do unto others' etc. You only have to study how the religions you don't believe in developed to understand how and why the one you believe in did because they follow the same pattern.

Glad this was picked up on. People are always telling me that the gospels must be right because they are first hand accounts by 4 of the 12 disciples.

I'm terrible at remembering names, but which of of the 12 were Mark and Luke?

head I believe all religions evolved from original Truth. The similarities between religions does not bother me.

What is that original truth caps?

God.

So how did this work then? Even as far back as early OT god was pretty anti other gods. Why not just say 'hey, you've got the wrong god' or accept that even though they used a different name it was still him they meant and that they didn't actually need to be slaughtered en masse including babies.

If you can see that some people just got a bit confused and muddled up then why couldn't god have been as reasonable about it too?

How did they have this original truth of god?

head The answers to your questions, above, is in the whole of the Bible. No summary of mine would even get close to doing it justice. I'm still developing understanding myself.

You have read the Bible yourself, you say, so you know the basics, speaking, prayer, worship, experiences of God, priesthood and of course Christ.

I've never heard that the gospels were written by the people they are named after.
Is that not a bit of a straw man?
I thought the differences were in terms of audience - one is more for a Jewish audience, the other for a Roman (Greek?)

And the religions that predate the OT?

Going back to what I said about wisdom. I don't have a problem with them all containing wisdom, it's similar to finding similar food storage and preparation techniques across early civilisations. They also invariably contain other common elements, barbaric punishments animal sacrifice to appease a moody diety and so on. Which suggests the religion evolved, and still is, as humans do, we see it with Christianity today where most Christians on MN accept evolution and support gay marriage etc.

Is that not a bit of a straw man? no it's not. We're had this out a load of times here on MN. There are lots of people here who think it.

The last post on the other thread was this:

capsium Thu 10-Apr-14 08:20:58
I do believe the Gospels were written by the disciples and don't know why you think it is obvious or unlikely that they didn't write them.

the real I was led to believe they were written by the disciples when I was a Christian. There was a Christian on another thread who said that they were and felt it was evidence for their belief. You don't think it important to check what you assume is true? If they're written for different audiences why is one almost entirely copied from another? One audience gets two?

This is a really interesting documentary about the gospels that didn't make it into the NT. www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0074t48

capsium I hope you didn't mind me quoting you there. I'm not getting at you especially. I'm not capsiumaphobic. I've had that one out with lots of other people. :)

head I know about Gnostic Texts too. And yet I still believe what I believe.What you have said has not swayed my belief.

What religions do you think predate the OT? and why?

Back You quoting me, does not offend me, I said it! Misquoting me or twisting my words might require some clarification from me. However it would understandable, if what I have said did not communicate, what I intended to communicate, to you. We all are individuals and can interpret language and ideas differently.

Sorry, read tft but didn't know I needed to read prequels as well!
I should rephrase, I don't think anyone who has studied Christianity would think the disciples wrote the gospels. They would have died by then anyway.
I don't think any educated ministers, for example, believe that. It is not an essential for faith.

Well nothing is essential for faith is it but Christians here have cited the gospels as some sort of evidence. I don't think it's right to

No it's not essential for faith. My understanding is that nothing is required for faith other than the desire to believe. Which is all fine and dandy only some Christians maintain there is reason for a faith in Christianity and it's those reasons that I was addressing.

I thought Hinduism was the oldest? And is believed to be the oldest based on the language the writings are in? There are other much earlier religions but those predate writing like the Druids and so on.

TheRealYellowWiggle normally each thread IS standalone, but I just had to clear that up. :) That means we agree then on that part.

We dont have evidence for everything. We dont need evidence for everything do we?

In your heart of hearts, you know that the bible is true. And this frightens you very much. And makes you very angry. You find it deeply disturbing.

You are also angry at someone in your life who committed suicide over it all.

You think that the world is full of christians committing suicide, but it is not.

[I realise that you will not want to post personal details on here, fair enough].

Obviously I am not going to agree with you that there were events that didnt happen.

Isn't that just pure conformation bias?

The NT contradictions

I didn't express my comment re faith very well. I mean that the gospels being written by disciples is not an essential part of christianity, and is in fact not believed by most educated christians. They do not lose their importance to christians due to who wrote them.

They do not lose their importance to christians due to who wrote them.

Wouldn't you expect them to lose their importance if a believer discovered they weren't written by people who met Jesus. Like I said previously I was led to believe they were written by his disciples soon after the transfiguration. I didn't find out they were penned much much later, (or about the other gospels that got left on the editors floor) until after I'd left Christianity. I wish someone had told me although i don't know how much of an impact it would have had.

This isn't going to be sorted out on MN ... The debates over who wrote the gospels and when have been going on in academia for years.

^^This. I'd also recommend "The Gospels & Jesus" by Graham Stanton if anyone is looking for a book that explores the issues in a more neutral, academic way. It covers the various theories about the Synoptics, looks at each of the four "official" Gospels in turn, & has a chapter on the other Gospels (the ones that weren't finally accepted as part of the Bible).

We dont need evidence for everything do we?

No, not for everything. I don't need evidence for what you had for lunch. It doesn't make much diffs. But I would like some evidence if you make a big claim, like having access to an all powerful deity.