Empiree:
So, Who Wrote Mark and What Were His Sources?

Not even the Bible claims that Mark was an eye witness to Jesus’ ministry. Modern, non Christian biblical scholars believe that the gospel of Mark was written in Syria by an unknown Christian no earlier than AD 70, using various sources including a passion narrative (probably written), collections of miracles stories (oral or written), apocalyptic traditions (probably written), and disputations and didactic sayings (some possibly written). These stories were in circulation year after year, told in different languages and in different countries from that of Jesus.

That’s it. The source for the gospel of Mark is other peoples’ stories and writings. In other words, all of Mark’s sources were at best, second hand, more likely fifth or sixth hand. What happens to stories that circulate orally for years? Obviously, they come to be changed in the retelling. Thus, the source for much of the synoptic gospels is no more than hearsay.

Apologists dismiss the charge of “hearsay” by pointing to the strength of the “oral tradition”. The simple childhood game of “Telephone” is sufficient to illustrate the point that stories told mouth to mouth for 35 years or more can’t possibly retain their original content.

The Gospel of Mark is the first of the Gospels to proffer quotes allegedly from Jesus. We question how authentic these quotes could possibly be, given the convoluted path from Jesus’ lips to “Marks” wax tablets and the years that passed since the words were allegedly spoken. We have written a treatise on the impossibilities of Jesus’ actual words being accurately recorded 40+ years after they were spoken.

Who Wrote Matthew and What Were The Sources?

By the end of the 2nd century the tradition of Matthew the tax-collector had become widely accepted, and the line “The Gospel According to Matthew” began to be added to manuscripts. For many reasons scholars today believe otherwise—fifty five percent of the gospel is copied from Mark, and it seems unlikely that an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry would need to rely on others for information about it. They believe instead that it was written between about 80–90 AD by a highly educated Jew, intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, standing on the boundary between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values.

A widespread theory holds that the author drew on three primary sources, each representing a distinct community: a hypothetical collection, or several collections, of sayings (called “Q“, and shared with Luke); the Gospel of Mark; and material unique to Matthew (called “M”, some of which may have originated with Matthew himself).

He wrote for a Jewish audience: like “Q” and “M”, he stresses the continuing relevance of the Jewish law; unlike Mark he never bothers to explain Jewish customs; and unlike Luke, who traces Jesus’s ancestry back to Adam, father of the human race, he traces it only to Abraham, father of the Jews. The fact that his linage differs significantly from that of Luke is a real problem for those who claim that the Holy Spirit’s hand guided the writers of the gospels.

The content of “M” suggests that the community for which this gospel was written, was stricter than the others in its attitude to keeping the Jewish law, holding that they must exceed the scribes and the Pharisees in “righteousness” (adherence to Jewish law); and of the three only “M” refers to a “church” (ecclesia), an organised group with rules for keeping order. Biblical scholars generally hold that Matthew was composed between the years c. 70 and 100.


Who Wrote Luke and What Were the Sources?

Most modern critical scholarship concludes that Luke used the Gospel of Mark for his chronology and a hypothetical sayings source Q document for many of Jesus’ teachings. Luke may also have drawn from independent written records. Traditional Christian scholarship has dated the composition of the gospel to the early 60s, while higher criticism dates it to the later decades of the 1st century. While the traditional view that Paul’s companion Luke authored the gospel is still often put forward, a number of possible contradictions between Acts and Paul’s letters lead many scholars to dispute this account.


Who Wrote John and What Were the Sources?

John differs significantly from the synoptic gospels in theme, content, time duration, order of events, and style. Only ca. 8% of it is parallel to these other gospels, and even then, no such word-for-word parallelism occurs as we find among the synoptic gospels. The Gospel of John reflects a Christian tradition that is different from that of the other gospels. It was rejected as heretical by many individuals and groups within the early Christian movement. It was used extensively by the Gnostic Christians. But it was ultimately accepted into the official canon, over many objections. It is now the favorite gospel of many conservative Christians, and the gospel least referred to by many liberal Christians.

They have a totally different agenda in mind for their audience than did the authors of the synoptic gospels. The authors of the synoptic gospels were writing to their fellow Jews and trying to convince them that they could accept Jesus as the Messiah and still remain Jewish. Matthew even indicates that the men should still be circumcised .

John’s teachings , as summed up in John 3:16 are just the opposite of those of the writers of Mark, Matthew and Luke. Whereas John welcomes anyone into the fold, Mark, Matthew and Luke write for and to Jews only. They see Jesus as the Jewish Messiah who has come to return Israel to its former glory.

The gospel identifies its author as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” The text does not actually name this disciple, but by the beginning of the 2nd century a tradition began to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus’s innermost circle). Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it and trace it instead to a “Johannine community” which traced its traditions to John; the gospel itself shows signs of having been composed in three “layers”, reaching its final form about 90-100 AD.


Bottom Line

The canonical gospels upon which the Christian faith is built, the ones which present the words of Jesus are writings by unknown authors writing to buttress the particular points they wished to make. The quotations allegedly from Jesus were most likely, made up by the authors to support their positions.

The titles in our English Bibles are later additions; they are not original to the Gospels themselves.
The Gospel narratives are always written in the third person.
The tradition that they were written by two disciples (Matthew and John) and by two companions of the apostles (Mark and Luke) is first attested in the 2nd century!
What we can say for certain about the authors is that they were all highly educated, literate, Greek-speaking Christians of (at least) the second generation, contrast this with the apostles of Jesus, who were uneducated, lower class, illiterate, Aramaic-speaking peasants.
Even IF the gospels had been written by the “eye-witness” apostles, Matthew and John, it is unlikely that they reported everything accurately. Remember that their “testimony” comes thirty years (Matthew) and sixty years (John) after the fact. This would-be “eyewitness” testimony is, at a minimum, 30 years after the events it purports to describe and the authors were in or nearing their dotage. In any event, recent research has found that eyewitness testimony is not reliable. Read an excerpt from an article entitled “34 Years Later, Supreme Court Will Revisit Eyewitness IDs” By Adam Liptak Published: August 22, 2011, NY Times.

Qul jaa'al haqqi wa dhaharal baadila, innal baadila kaana xahuuqaa. Man yuridillaha bihi khairan, yufaqqihhu fiddiini. JaZaakallahu khairan ya akhee.

Most times i think d most senseless human beings are Muslims. How can someone raise up a stupid question as did Jesus read the bible?
Ok toor was mohammad a paeedophile?
Did he sleep with aisha at age 9 and do her thighing method at age 6?
Is it true dat gold circle was given d contract to supply coondom to ur paradise so as to prevent STDs while sleeping with ur 72 virgins?
How did mohammad know dat it was not lucifer that delivered d quran AKA national anthem sung before any bomb explodes?
What exactly was written on d page of quran eaten by goats?
Is it true dat mohammad last activity was french kissing aisha?
Is it true dat at last mohammad died in between two breasts?

Jesus must have read the Hebrew Bible na

Ehe oya questions continue
Is it true dat mohammad said dat if urine touch ur body u will go to hell and dat is why Muslims urinate like women?
Who sleeps in tbe nose of Muslims in d night??
Why is it easy to marry and divorce in islam?
Why is it dat irrespective of d number of times Muslims wash their mouth d odour from it is unbearable?
What happens to praying with a stinking clothe while u take time to wash ur legs and every hole in ur body?
Wat will happen to u if while trying to postrate in prayer u release ur gaseous cyanidisic effluent AKA mess right in front of another mallam?
Let the uselesss questions continue

Rilwayne001:


Are we talking about a will I'm talking about the gospel of jesus, and so far we are told dat he was preaching the gospel all around you call the book of matthew,mark,luke and john the Gospels.and Jesus didnt read any of them. Now what Gospel was Jesus preaching? is it the gospel of paul? or the contradicting gospels of mark mattew luke and john

how can Jesus read a book that was written after his death and written about him?

Nope. unless you are saying that the gospel jesus preached is inconsistent and contradicting.

you humbly quoted from mark... so if you want to know, i suggest you read the whole of mark to know the gospel he preached and if it was contradictory to the bible

Quran has been in writing during his time, though wasnt compiled together during his time.

oh.... Quran was not written by Allah again?
Quran was now compiled?? pls tell me more

This thread never gets old


Updated....

Hehe. ^^ egbon, thanks for updating this thread. I've some inputs to make, but time isn't just by my side these days.

Rilwayne001:
Hehe. ^^ egbon, thanks for updating this thread. I've some inputs to make, but time isn't just by my side these days.

This thread is really eye opener. Had them grasping on straw. I had to search for it last night after article surfaced on naijagists website which compared Bible and Quran. The writer deduced that Quran was making reference to truth of the bible, the same thing malvis and co are doing. So he claimed bible is perfect and unchanged. I had to search for my post in the thread but i later lost interest in that article. Luckily enough some muslim challenged the author.

Mintayo:
Ignorance!
I am surprised someone can actually ask this questions! But I guess with Islam, anything is possible!

It's obvious that you've studied a larger fraction of the bible or probably the entire bible sef and you couldn't find a single error with the bible and in the bible. Yet, you've only studied just a fraction in the Quran or not sef and you were able to see countless errors in it.

Wake up bro.... Religion trained you badly with all sorts of biases.

Empiree:
Now you are professional literalist. Are you telling me that God threw down Holy Books from heavens to His prophets and messangers and these men looked up to the heavens to catch it?

You are funny man. Sahih International used "choice of words". Check others like Yusuf Ali, he used the phrase "Book". Shakir used "scripture". Khan also used "Book". If you think God sent down paper Books from heavens, then you would believe Cow jumped from the moon too. You are so amazing bro

Paul and Jesus

Let me know what you think if you read this book. The above link is to the intro and first few pages.

rilwayne001, this thread

Empiree:
rilwayne001, this thread

I tell you.

I'm just coming out of almost 2 months ban

Rilwayne001:


I tell you.

I'm just coming out of almost 2 months ban

2 months loun loun... you must have offended someone