(September 20, 2012 at 11:07 am)FallentoReason Wrote:(September 20, 2012 at 10:48 am)Drich Wrote: John was a deciple of Christ wouldn't stand to reason that John had more insight than Mark a deciple of Paul? Paul and John were two different men with two different focal points when it came to their minstries. John Taught a slight different view of Christ because he saw Christ and the importanc/focous of His work here as slightly different that Peter/Mark may have.
So the juciest Gospel of them all (and very reliable in your opinion) just happens to have been written after the other 3. Hmm... Genuine account by 'John' or rumours gone wild?
How where the 'gospels' distributed after they were written? Who had access to them? Can you show that John did? Can you show that he didn't? Can you show anything one way or another or are you simply guessing again, based off your personal feelings?
You are aware that just because a document existed in that time it was not distributed throughout the churches right?
for example a letter written by Mark would have most likly been distributed and circulated throughout the established churches Peter set up. The same would be true with John, he and his deciples would have a string of churches, Matthew his people had theirs and Luke/Paul work together. Just because a litteray work existed did not mean a later one was hand copied. the church you know or anything like it did not exist till 300 or so years later. Which was the reason for some many gospel accounts in the first place.
