Bro Ohio,
Let's have a Bible battle.
You can prolly look forward to the joy of winning ... but I'll give it try ... just for fun. I gave up tracking my life by the Bible decades ago ... and lost much of what I had memorized back in the LC.
So you say they were cousins. But Mark's account differs:
Mar 6:3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
And this is extra-biblical but it provides a window into how the 2nd c. fathers, that applied the names to the gospels, thought back then:
"There are four principle winds, four pillars that hold up the sky, and four
corners of the universe; therefore, it is only right that there be four
gospels."
-- Church father Irenaeus, late 2nd century
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ohio
It is common for writers to write in the third person, why some people even talk that way today. Where have you been?  |
So you are telling me that Matthew was writing about the most important person in all history, that carried eternal consequences for the whole world and all of mankind, that he, Matthew, was an eyewitness to, but he decided to write his gospel as if he weren't an eyewitness. Sorry, that just doesn't make sense to me. What does make sense to me is that whoever wrote Matthew used Mark, and other sources, such as Q, and M, to compile it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ohio
We dont need a signatures to know who wrote the four gospels. We know them already. Even if we had fingerprint authorization on his I-phone, guys like you would still claim it to be bogus.
|
Oh that's not true. If the gospels had been signed all the scholars would accept it as fact, and me too. Instead it is a fact that the names of the gospels, or "according to" was added to them in the 2nd c.
Or were those that applied the names to the gospels miraculously inspired of God too? Where's the Bible state that?