(July 20, 2012 at 4:11 am)Marnie Wrote:Do you have backing for such a claim?(July 20, 2012 at 3:52 am)Undeceived Wrote: If the Gospel accounts are indeed true, and there was an explosion of converts, there existed no immediate need to write a report. Preaching in synagogues was the best way to spread word. Once churches began forming in Gentile nations without a constant eyewitness around for guidance, people needed a text to refer to. Enter the Gospel of Mark--written factually and in a manner that Gentile Romans would understand. Mark explains Jewish customs (7:2–4; 15:42), translates Aramaic words (3:17; 5:41; 7:11,34; 15:22,34) and has a special interest in persecution and martyrdom (8:34–38; 13:9–13)—subjects of special concern to Roman believers.
Following Mark’s Gospel, Matthew sets out to prove to young Jewish readers that Jesus is their Messiah. He has more quotations from or allusions to the OT than any other NT author. He traces Jesus’ descent from Abraham, does not explain Jewish customs, and uses Jewish terminology like “kingdom of heaven” and “Father in heaven,” where “heaven” reveals the Jewish reverential reluctance to use the name of God. He wants Jews born after Christ’s ministry to not only hear the report but what the life of Jesus means.
Luke’s Gospel is directed specifically to Theophilus (1:3). The use of “most excellent” with the name indicates an individual, and supports the idea that he was a Roman official or at least of high position and wealth. He was possibly Luke’s patron, responsible for seeing that the writings were copied and distributed. Such a dedication to the publisher was common at the time. Luke may not have considered putting pen to ink at all until Theophilus’ offer to fund the operation. The Gospel is, in particular, written to strengthen the faith of believers and to answer the attacks of unbelievers. It was presented to displace some ill-founded reports about Jesus (see 1:1-4). Luke wanted to commend the preaching of the gospel to the whole world.
John’s dedication to showing who Jesus is through lengthy discourses and “I am” claims suggest a heresy going on at the time. Gnosticism arose about then, questioning the divinity of Christ and who Jesus said he was. John plainly states, “but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” With more doubters came a firmer response.
Each of these Gospel writers had a clear purpose in mind, and it was not simply “to write it down.” They saw ignorance. They saw denial. And they answered with what they knew to be the truth. Matthew and John had the added bonus of being eyewitnesses, meaning they did not have to rely on “memorization of oral stories.”
Matthew and John were not eyewitnesses! Their names are not even Matthew and John!
Take a look at this page: http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswe...08-07.html
John claims to be an eyewitness in his Gospel (see bottom). He shows his identity as John by referring to himself is "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Early writers Irenaeus and Tertullian confirm John's authorship. John also provides touches such as the house at Bethany being filled with the fragrance of the broken perfume jar (12:3)--reflecting the recollections of an eyewitness.
Church tradition makes Matthew the writer of the Gospel of Matthew. We already know that the man Matthew the Evangelist was one of the Twelve Apostles. Papias of Hierapolis confirms Matthew as being the author.
Quote:Given the lifespan back then, the persecution of Christians, and the fall of Jerusalem it would be next to impossible for anyone to have been alive near the end of the first century who was an original disciple and an eyewitness to Jesus.According to Saint Sophronius of Jerusalem, John died of natural causes "in great old age in Ephesus" at the beginning of the second century. He had been exiled to Patmos, where he escaped persecution and wrote Revelation. The Gospel of John was written in Ephesus, where he reportedly lived the remainder of his life.
Unless, of course, you think everyone who wrote history was in cahoots and made this all up.
