RE: Why does science always upstage God?
October 8, 2021 at 12:41 pm
(This post was last modified: October 8, 2021 at 12:43 pm by Soberman921.)
There is one more point I want to make about gospel authorship.
Papias, who, according to Eusebius, wrote in the early second century (maybe around 130 CE), was the earliest to name Mark and Matthew as the authors of the gospels that bear their names. Papias allegedly said Mark was Peter’s scribe/interpreter, which he learned from an associate of John the apostle. But we don’t actually have any writings from Papias – only Eusebius who wrote in 320 CE. Eusebius said that Papias’ writings were “fantastical” and “of a rather mythical character,” including “strange parables of the savior,” and described Papias as being of “very small intelligence.” Most of what Papias said is universally rejected by Biblical scholars. Also, church fathers continued to reference Mark’s Gospel for decades after Papias wrote without attributing it to Mark. So 300 years after Jesus died, we have an author quoting another author he disparages as unreliable from 200 years before that who describes a book written by a friend of a friend in a manner that doesn’t match the book we’re talking about. It is interesting that, according to Eusebius (also considered unreliable by most biblical scholars), Papias said that Mark’s sole purpose was “to leave out nothing that he heard.” If Papias is to be believed, the fact that his is the shortest gospel undermines those of Matthew, Luke and John which added many additional details.
Papias, who, according to Eusebius, wrote in the early second century (maybe around 130 CE), was the earliest to name Mark and Matthew as the authors of the gospels that bear their names. Papias allegedly said Mark was Peter’s scribe/interpreter, which he learned from an associate of John the apostle. But we don’t actually have any writings from Papias – only Eusebius who wrote in 320 CE. Eusebius said that Papias’ writings were “fantastical” and “of a rather mythical character,” including “strange parables of the savior,” and described Papias as being of “very small intelligence.” Most of what Papias said is universally rejected by Biblical scholars. Also, church fathers continued to reference Mark’s Gospel for decades after Papias wrote without attributing it to Mark. So 300 years after Jesus died, we have an author quoting another author he disparages as unreliable from 200 years before that who describes a book written by a friend of a friend in a manner that doesn’t match the book we’re talking about. It is interesting that, according to Eusebius (also considered unreliable by most biblical scholars), Papias said that Mark’s sole purpose was “to leave out nothing that he heard.” If Papias is to be believed, the fact that his is the shortest gospel undermines those of Matthew, Luke and John which added many additional details.
