- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by Proper KnobI have heard Mark was written first. And there is another mystery source which seems to have contributed to the synoptics, like an unknown fifth Gospel.
Got a source for that? From what I have a read Mark's Gospel came first.
The oldest written material in the New Testament, I am pretty sure, comes from the letters of Paul.
Originally posted by Proper Knobdude, please, how can you ask me, a man of true science and a champion of the scientific method if I have evidence, there is a plethora of evidence,
Got a source for that? From what I have a read Mark's Gospel came first.
http://christopherfisher.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/matthew-was-the-first-gospel-written/
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWho's this Johnny Random you've linked to?
dude, please, how can you ask me, a man of true science and a champion of the scientific method if I have evidence, there is a plethora of evidence,
http://christopherfisher.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/matthew-was-the-first-gospel-written/
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI see. So after claiming to be a champion of science and the scientific method you produce 'some dude' to substantiate your claim.
dunno, just some dude 😀
Actually id like to hear your thoughts on todays ruling that Scientology is a religion. Perhaps another thread.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI see. I think you and me need to have a chat about what constitutes the scientific method at some point.
Hardly, the content of his text is the evidence.
The main crux of his argument seems to be that Matthew had to be written first because otherwise the Gospel narrative wouldn't fit with his literalist interpretation of the Bible. Anyhow, fire up the Scientology thread if you like. I'm a tad busy so I'll get to it when I can.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by wolfgang59
I'm amazed at the lack of interest from Christians as to when their gospels were written!
I'm amazed at the lack of interest from Christians as to when their gospels were written!
Oh, you're simply AMAZED at the lack of interest .... in what pops into your mind this evening about what everyone should stop and concentrate on.
So you have maybe five or so Christian brothers and sisters here as representative of a few million, and boy, you're just "amazed" that a few brothers and sisters representing all Christians have an less than obsessive attitude about this matter.
I am interested in the timing of the Gospels. I just happen not to be occupied with that issue (among 500 others) at the moment.
I'm amazed at how eagerly you want to exploit some little situation to cast a broad generalization about Christians.
Originally posted by sonshipYou would be stupid to the Nth degree if you thought I was referring to
Oh, you're simply AMAZED at the lack of interest ....
So you have maybe five or so Christian brothers and sisters here as representative of a few million.. you want to exploit some little situation to cast a broad generalization about Christians.
ALL Christians (I incidentally have defended Christians against you and
the other nutters on here). I am AMAZED that the Christians ON THIS
FORUM who are normally so vociferous, so opinionated and so willing to
share their wisdom concerning cherubims, anal sex, lakes of fire,
something from nothing, definitions of 'reject" and whether 3=1 ,
do not have an opinion (or have not researched)
the founding documents of their religion.
AMAZING. 🙄
Please consider this :
Gospel of Matthew
Time of Writing. Subscriptions, appearing at the end of Matthew’s Gospel in numerous manuscripts (all being later than the tenth century C.E.), say that the account was written about the eighth year after Christ’s ascension (c. 41 C.E.). This would not be at variance with internal evidence. The fact that no reference is made to the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy respecting Jerusalem’s destruction would point to a time of composition prior to 70 C.E. (Mt 5:35; 24:16) And the expression “to this very day” (27:8; 28:15) indicates a lapse of some time between the events considered and the time of writing.
Originally Written in Hebrew. External evidence to the effect that Matthew originally wrote this Gospel in Hebrew reaches as far back as Papias of Hierapolis, of the second century C.E. Eusebius quoted Papias as stating: “Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language.” (The Ecclesiastical History, III, XXXIX, 16) Early in the third century, Origen made reference to Matthew’s account and, in discussing the four Gospels, is quoted by Eusebius as saying that the “first was written . . . according to Matthew, who was once a tax-collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, . . . in the Hebrew language.” (The Ecclesiastical History, VI, XXV, 3-6) The scholar Jerome (of the fourth and fifth centuries C.E.) wrote in his work De viris inlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men), chapter III, that Matthew “composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed. . . . Moreover, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected.”—Translation from the Latin text edited by E. C. Richardson and published in the series “Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,” Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14, pp. 8, 9.
Information Unique to Matthew’s Gospel. An examination of Matthew’s account shows that more than 40 percent of the material contained therein is not found in the other three Gospels. Unique is Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus (Mt 1:1-16), which takes an approach different from that set out by Luke (Lu 3:23-38). A comparison of the two indicates that Matthew gave the legal genealogy through Jesus’ adoptive father Joseph, while Luke apparently gave Jesus’ natural genealogy. Other incidents mentioned only in Matthew’s account are: Joseph’s reaction to Mary’s pregnancy, the appearance of an angel to Joseph in a dream (Mt 1:18-25), the visit of the astrologers, the flight to Egypt, the slaughter of the young boys in Bethlehem and its districts (chap 2), and the dream of Pilate’s wife regarding Jesus (27:19).
At least ten parables, or illustrations, found in Matthew’s account are not mentioned in the other Gospels. These include four in chapter 13, those of the weeds in the field, the hidden treasure, the “one pearl of high value,” and the dragnet. Others are the illustrations of the unmerciful slave (Mt 18:23-35), the workers in the vineyard (20:1-16), the marriage of the king’s son (22:1-14), the ten virgins (25:1-13), and the talents (25:14-30).
At times Matthew provides supplementary details. Although material from the Sermon on the Mount also appears in Luke’s account (Lu 6:17-49), Matthew’s Gospel is far more extensive in this respect. (Mt 5:1–7:29) Whereas Mark, Luke, and John mention the miraculous feeding of about 5,000 men, Matthew adds “besides women and young children.” (Mt 14:21; Mr 6:44; Lu 9:14; Joh 6:10) Matthew mentions two demon-possessed men encountered by Jesus in the country of the Gadarenes, while Mark and Luke refer to only one. (Mt 8:28; Mr 5:2; Lu 8:27) Matthew also tells of two blind men being healed on an occasion, whereas Mark and Luke mention only one. (Mt 20:29, 30; Mr 10:46, 47; Lu 18:35, 38) Of course, all the writers were correct in that at least one person was involved in each incident. But Matthew was often more explicit as to number. This perhaps is to be attributed to his former occupation as a tax collector.
Insight on the scriptures, volume 2, page 352 courtesy of Jehovahs Witnesses