(October 22, 2012 at 2:21 pm)pocaracas Wrote: yes, but who made sure they were themselves accurate?If you hold to Marcan priority:
No peer review in that process, as far as I see it.
Mark, a follower of Peter, writes the first and shortest account. Matthew, a witness, uses much of Mark verbatim and adds to it. Luke then carefully investigates the issues and writes his own account, borrowing much from Mark and/or Matthew. So, we have review by a witness and by a historian. What were you looking for in the way of peer review? This seems pretty good to me.
Quote:According to what I read, the texts seem to have been embellished at one point (Paul?) and sent out to the world, hence the (somewhat) consistency among them.... all inspired (I can't say this with a straight face, sorry!) by some ghost to the same man.So show us what you read so we can consider that argument.

