I just confessed my Atheism to friends and family!

[Aractus]

Actually we have a very high degree of confidence that the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts was written by Luke the Evangelist - a companion of Paul. And the Gospel of John is firmly believed to have been written by the John the Apostle because of his constant use of the phrase "the disciple whom Jesus loved" when describing himself.

Many people think that, but no one knows with any degree of certainty about any of those books. Might want to use better sources than Wikipedia...

Atc, there are things we know for "certain" there are things we are "confident on" and there are thing that we "believe" without compelling evidence. Certainty on authorship would apply to most of the epistles, for instance. Even some of Paul's epistles have their authorship debated by scholars.

The book of Acts ends with Paul the Apostle under house arrest (61-62 AD). The author is clearly a close companion of Paul. Paul is martyred c. AD 63 - 67 (at the latest). Jerusalem is taken by siege in AD 70. Neither of these events occur in Acts.

Thus the best available evidence tells you that both the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts were written around 60-62 AD.

Matthew, Mark and Luke all contain prophecies that Jerusalem will be taken by siege, the prophecy is clear and accurate, and yet they contain different accounts, different versions of the prophecy.

Now, let's look at the possibilities. 1. Matt/Mark/Luke do contain prophecy that comes to pass in AD 70. 2. Matt/Mark/Luke were written before AD70, but the text was modified to include the prophecies, 3. Matt/Mark/Luke written AFTER AD 70.

Let's consider the alternatives.

If the books were written before AD 70 and modified, then why would there be different versions of the prophecy?

Luke 19:37-44: As he was drawing near—already on the way down the Mount of Olives—the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” And some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.” He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.”
And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

Luke 21:5-9: And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?” And he said, “See that you are not led astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time is at hand!’ Do not go after them. And when you hear of wars and tumults, do not be terrified, for these things must first take place, but the end will not be at once.”

Luke 21:20-24: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Okay, now explain to me this account in Matthew that *SHOCK* is a completely different account!!!

Matt 23:37-24:2: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

And it's in Mark too:

Mark 13:1-2: And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

This presents a huge problem for those of you who argue that the original texts were modified beyond belief - if this is true, consider this. 97% of Mark is contained in Matthew. Yet if the texts were indeed "added to" surely that means that no more than just 3% could have been added to Mark, otherwise there should be way more material in it that isn't contained in Matthew. Consider the fact that Mark's account - like the rest of his Gospel - is shorter than Matthew's. If things like this are "later additions" why do they follow so precisely the underlying textual structure of both documents so well?

And why doesn't Luke contain this version? After all, if it really was written after AD 70, there would be absolutely no reason not to include a prophecy you know has come to pass. Instead Luke has Jesus delivering the prophecy a total of THREE separate times!

So which is it? Gospels written AFTER 70AD (despite the internal and eternal textual evidence), Gospels written before 70AD but METICULOUSLY modified, Gospels written before the siege of Jerusalem containing clear and accurate prophecies of its coming destruction?

Yes everyone knows this totally accurate and believable story. I'm sorry I messed up an important fact in this highly technical fairy tale. It doesn't matter if it was a fish, a whale, or a minnow- it doesn't make it any more believable... Or true.

It matters because you misquoted the Bible. Complain about what's in the Bible, not what you "think" is in the Bible, thanks.

Did you just say "basic facts"?? You truly are delusional!! Nothing that we discussed above is anything close to 'facts'. But thanks for trying to make an argumentative post..

The fact that you ignore the strong evidence for the authorship of the Luke and John gospels proves to me you are not interested in objective evidence, and simply believe you can tell others, arbitrarily, what is and isn't a fact based on your beliefs.

All I said was that Luke and John have strong evidence for their authorship - and they do, I said nothing about Matthew and Mark. Play it however you like, but 1. you have no right to asset that I'm delusional and 2. fuck you for assuming I use Wikipedia, I hate Wikipedia.