How can you prove that the gospel of Mark is not the "word of god"?

[Minimalist]

Oh FFS.  No wonder you're insane.

Their app gives you access to tons of translations through out time as well as current. It also helps you research original words and their meanings and their derivatives.

The help you need comes in pill form.

[Abaddon_ire]

The help you need comes in pill form.

Here's the thing. Sometimes my teen kids ask me why I waste my time on such obvious BS?

My answer is always the same. Should we all just lay down and die under the jackboot of religion? What do you think might happen if nobody stood up to this thuggery?

[Jehanne]

2) Jesus' thomas went on to India to spread the word there

What's your source for this claim?

[Minimalist]

He read it in another book of Holy Horseshit.  Dripshit is easily impressed.... unless the book is about some god other than his own!

[Jehanne]

He read it in another book of Holy Horseshit.  Dripshit is easily impressed.... unless the book is about some god other than his own!

I had an idea of the historical source, but was sure; but, I knew that Drich is just parroting the typical evangelical Christian nonsense.  But, here it is:

Death

According to Syrian Christian tradition, Saint Thomas was allegedly killed at St.Thomas Mount, in Chennai, in 72 A.D. and his body was interred in Mylapore.[36] Ephrem the Syrian states that the Apostle was martyred in India, and that his relics were taken then to Edessa. This is the earliest known record of his martyrdom.[37]

The records of Barbosa from early 16th century inform that the tomb was then maintained by a Muslim who kept a lamp burning there.[38]:237 The San Thome Basilica Mylapore, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India presently located at the tomb was first built in the 16th century by the Portuguese and rebuilt in the 19th century.[39] St. Thomas Mount has been a revered site by Hindus, Muslims and Christians since at least the 16th century.[38]:31

Ephrem the Syrian (Classical Syriac: ܡܪܝ ܐܦܪܝܡ ܣܘܪܝܝܐ‎ Mār Ap̠rêm Suryāyâ, Classical Syriac pronunciation: [mɒr aɸˈrem surˈjɒˌjɒ]; Koine Greek: Ἐφραίμ ὁ Σῦρος; Latin: Ephraem Syrus, also known as Saint Ephraem, Ephrem, or Ephraim; c. 306 – 373) was a Syriac Christian deacon and a prolific Syriac-language hymnographer and theologian of the fourth century.

[Bucky Ball]

Drich : 

"They are more than instructions. there are examples back stories and instructions. one set of instructions can be found in luke 11. the 1/2 of the chapter teaches us how to pray the second 1/2 teachs how to obtain the Holy Spirit and why God would willingly give such a gift."

Now all you have to do is find a (one) scholar that supports that bullshit. Chapter and verse. You are incompetent to say anything about them. 
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline...spels.html

I know what the Gnostic GOSPELS were. My quote came from the Gospel of THOMAS. They are NOT the same. Your reply was nothing but an attempt to deflect and disguise the fact you know nothing about early Christianity. You have not the SLIGHTEST crumb of evidence that Thomas (a POOR Jew ... or any other of the "apostles") ever traveled to India, or anywhere else. What a fucking joke you are. One does not go, over-night, from a fisherman, to a suddenly literate world-traveler.
And I just showed you that your stupid lying Jesus said one could ask for ANYTHING, and it would be granted them. LMAO. So much for your "lesson". 

You argumentation skills are FAR FAR worse than I recall. You can't even keep on topic for one sentence. Of course YOU just happen to understand all about God. and YOU just happen to know more than scholars. LOL. How delusional. There must be a job for you in the White House. 

BTW, what are you doing here ? You have EVEN ONE convert with your angry insulting drivel ? 
You actually think you are "Christ-like" ? LMAO. 
DO you have even ONE post grade school course in religion ?

[Minimalist]

They are NOT the same. Your reply was nothing but an attempt to disguise the fact you know nothing about early Christianity.

He's not too solid on middle or later jesusism, either.

[Bucky Ball]

So this has been bothering me for a while. I am 100% sure that Matthew, Luke and John's gospels were not "divinely inspired" and they are not the "word of god" because of some of the errors I found in them. However, I can't find any errors in Mark's gospel. No historical errors, no theological errors, nothing. In addition to that, I don't see how it contradicts the old testament in any way.

How can you prove that Mark's gospel is not the word of god? Is there anything in this gospel that scholars don't agree with? Is there anything in the gospel that proves that this book was not divinely inspired?

A simple Internet search shows two errors:

1. Wrong Prophet
The very first error in the Gospel of “Mark” appears in Chapter One and is as follows:
It began as the prophet Isaiah had written: God said, ‘I will send my messenger ahead of you to clear the way for you’.  (Mark 1:2)
If you read the book of Isaiah, you will find that he did not say this and in fact, the above passage was mistakenly sourced from the book of Malachi (3:1). Such an error betrays “Mark’s” ignorance with regards to the very scriptures upon which his religion had been built. This error seems to suggest that he was neither a divinely inspired Jew nor was he recording the account given by one.
2. Wrong Priest
Further evidence that the author of “Mark” was neither an associate of a Palestinian Jew nor inspired by an all-knowing God, can be demonstrated by the second scriptural error of this Gospel.
Have you never read what David did that time when he needed something to eat? He and his men were hungry, so he went into the house of God and ate the bread offered to God (the Shew-bread). This happened when Abiathar was the High Priest.  (Mark 2:25-26)
The crux of the message contained within this verse was that the Sabbath need not be observed which is in direct contradiction to “God’s word” in the Old Testament (Exodus 16:23-30). The rule of the Sabbath day as a rest day was so important to the tribal deity of the Hebrews that he commanded Moses to tell his people that anyone caught breaking this rule was to be put to death (Exodus 31:14).
The second and most damning problem with this passage is that Abiathar was not the High Priest at the time David ate the bread, as the author of this Gospel alleged, Abiathar’s father, Ahimelech was (1Samuel 21:1-6). This clumsy error by the author of Mark was later corrected by the author of “Matthew” (Matthew 12:1-8), who deleted the reference to Abiathar as High Priest, which was one of the details that betrayed “Mark’s” ignorance of the Hebrew Scriptures, although “Matthew” wasn’t much better in this regard.

Two factual errors in the Gospel of Mark

1. The day of the death of Jesus is different in Mark than that in John. Can't both be true. 
2. The voice from heaven in Mark at the Baptism does not say the same thing as in the others. 
3. In Matthew he says "Whoever is not with me is against me", in Mark it's CHANGED to "Whoever is not against us is for us" (doh ... thus missing totally the meaning of the saying). 
4. In Mark, the entire ministry (if you keep track of the "immediatelys" ... last a few months. From fall to the next spring (Passover). Less than 1 year. 
5. In the trial in Mark, Jesus says almost nothing, in John he gives LONG speeches. (Obviously they just made these up). 
6. What they saw when arriving at the tomb is different in each gospel.

They are "instructions" alright. How to LIE and make up crap to support your new cult.

[Bahana]

I remember when learning about the Bible growing up that Mark was usually the gospel referenced the least. In many cases there are 3 versions of certain stories from the synoptic gospels. The versions used more often were the padded out versions used in Matthew or Luke. Reading Mark today is a completely different experience than when I was a believer. It's more interesting to study the Bible today because I don't have to do mental gymnastics to harmonize things.

[Angrboda]

A simple Internet search shows two errors:



Two factual errors in the Gospel of Mark

1. The day of the death of Jesus is different in Mark than that in John. Can't both be true. 
2. The voice from heaven in Mark at the Baptism does not say the same thing as in the others. 
3. In Matthew he says "Whoever is not with me is against me", in Mark it's CHANGED to "Whoever is not against us is for us" (doh ... thus missing totally the meaning of the saying). 
4. In Mark, the entire ministry (if you keep track of the "immediatelys" ... last a few months. From fall to the next spring (Passover). Less than 1 year. 
5. In the trial in Mark, Jesus says almost nothing, in John he gives LONG speeches. (Obviously they just made these up). 
6. What they saw when arriving at the tomb is different in each gospel.

They are "instructions" alright. How to LIE and make up crap to support your new cult.

But you're missing the point! The point is that they're at least passably similar! Details don't matter! Nobody assesses truth based on consistency of details! </sarcasm>