(October 17, 2013 at 12:44 pm)John V Wrote: The assembly of the NT has nothing to do with my argument.
OK, maybe I need to go even slower with you: How do you propose the early Christians would have known that Matthew contradicted Luke if they didn't have both a copy of Matthew and a copy of Luke? And even if they had both, they would just conclude, this other Gospel is wrong.
The timeline contradiction between Matt and Luke is only a problem for Christians today who (1) have both and (2) think both are true. This was not the case for early Christians.
Clear?
...he asked in a fit of optimism.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
