The Problem with the Gospels

[chatpilot]

Good post Eilonnwy but I would like to add some basic things you left out. The gospel of Mark is believed to have made its appearance in about 70 AD and is considered by most scholars to be the earliest work of the synoptic gospels. This date is believed to be correct since Mark mentions the destruction of the temple and is believed to have been written after the event occurred making that biblical citing non prophetic. Mark is believed to have received his information from an hypothetical document called the Q document which no copies of it are extant today. Matthew and Luke are believed to have utilized Mark as a source for their documents and possibly portions of the Q document (german for quell = source).

Another important fact is that the synoptic gospels were first presented as anonymous documents and the names that were attributed to them were not added on till about the mid 2nd century. One reason for this is that in order for a document to make it into the canon it had to be written by an apostle or a direct disciple of an apostle. It was common practice to attribute names of prominent people to classical works in order to give them authority. This is called pseudepigrapha as cited in wikipedia as well:

Pseudepigrapha are falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded; a work, simply, "whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past."

Not to mention that Mark being the earliest gospel ca 70 AD would place it about 35 to 40 years removed from the alleged crucifixion of Christ. Regarding the last words of Christ it is impossible that the apostles could have heard them since the bible says the following:
Matthew 26:56
56. But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled. This and some of the other issues I raise confirm that the gospels are not first hand accounts of the life and times of Jesus Christ.