(January 19, 2013 at 11:15 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:where the Bible is multi-sourced (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, etc)
Oh cut the fucking bullshit. "Mark" is the first gospel with "Luke" and "Matty" plagiarizing it and attaching different aspects to suit different audiences.
"John" is fucking bizarre nonsense that even you xtian assholes admit is not part of the synoptic tradition.
"Paul" if there ever was such a person, knows fucking nothing of any of the gospel stories and is clearly nothing but shit made up later by other writers.
Wake the fuck up someday, sonny. You'll look less stupid.
Mister Sir Minimalist, For one thing, Jesus promised his disciples that the holy spirit would ‘bring back to their minds all the things he had told them.’ (John 14:26) Therefore, it is not surprising that the Gospel writers remembered and recorded some of the same events. Granted, some of the Bible writers may have read and referred to the work of other Bible writers, but such a practice would suggest careful research, not plagiarism. (2 Peter 3:15)
