(January 31, 2016 at 7:38 am)Aractus Wrote:(January 31, 2016 at 6:23 am)robvalue Wrote: If I had to guess, I'd actually come down on the side of the authors intending them to be non-literal stories, or fictional propaganda. Even if they didn't, integrity and accuracy were clearly of no concern to them as the gospels tell an increasingly ridiculous tale when viewed chronologically. Especially with Matthew going off at the deep end and adding a bunch of nonsense of his own.
Well it's a good thing we don't listen to unqualified hacks like yourself then. How do you know the author of Matthew "added" anything he didn't find in pre-written material?
How did they "invent" the sermon on the mount when James had already made about 20 direct references to it in an epistle of his?
